Overclock.net banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Watercooling Enthusiast
Joined
·
4,810 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm currently running an i7 920 c0 @4.01ghz along with my 3 480s and am wondering how much of a performance boost I will see if I replace the 920 with the 990x that is due out in Q4. I would oc it to about 4.8-4.9 ghz and my 480s will be running 900 core all around. I know price vs performance doesn't scale, but having a c0 model kills me. I know I'm not getting the full potential from my 480s.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,330 Posts
lol if you wanna spend that much money on something that will be worth 75 bucks in 6 years go for it.

If you can get a higher clock, the bottleneck should go down.
 

·
Watercooling Enthusiast
Joined
·
4,810 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
The highest clock I can get is 4.5ghz with my current wc setup, but I don't like 85c load or pushing 1.6v thru it. 4 is around as high as I can get with reasonable voltage. The 990x should only be around $900 and getting another processor would allow me to build a whole other rig since I already have all of the other spare parts
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,660 Posts
How much should performance increase? 10-20 FPS for all games. Just a guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,504 Posts
If there is a bottleneck it will go away but im guessing there wont be that huge of an increase in performance
 

·
PC Evangelist
Joined
·
47,378 Posts
Only higher clocks will increase performance. As far as 4 vs 6 core in games there will be 0 performance increase. Better off getting a new Core i7 920/930/950 or used proven overclcoker then spending 1k.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
925 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by DorkSterr View Post
How much should performance increase? 10-20 FPS for all games. Just a guess.
So $50-100 per frame per sec.


and I thought SSD where over priced.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,202 Posts
What are you upgrading for? If you are doing constant video editing/encoding/rendering it would be worth it but if you're just gaming I can't see the performance increase being worth 900 bucks.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,824 Posts
I would maybe suggest upgrading to a D0 920. I can run 4.4 on mine at 1.328 stable HT on. I've havent dared to go any higher although I dont doubt it could.

Many others that I have seen are able to get to 4.4 on D0 from 1.3-1.4V (one guy I saw here said he was stable at 4.4 with only 1.08V, talk about a golden chip!)

Now with WC and a decent d0 chip, you can probably hit 4.7-5.0.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,038 Posts
Well, going from 4.0 to 4.8 is a 20% clock increase, so aside from those very rare games that could benefit from the extra cores, the theoretical max increase in frames would be 20% (unless there's architectural changes in this chip as well, which I just don't know offhand). Which you would only see in situations where you are currently 100% CPU bottlenecked (i.e. every single frame in the game/test is being limited by CPU rather than GPU). Any other situation would be <20%.

So I'd guess it'd be something like this:
3dMark06 = +18%
Vantage Perf = +12%
Vantage Extreme = +3%
A maxed-out game like Crysis or Metro: +3-10%
 

·
Watercooling Enthusiast
Joined
·
4,810 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
The upgrade wouldnt just be for games, but also benchmarks and video editing. It will also allow me to finish a 2nd rig with my old tri sli 285 setup where I'll use my 920
 

·
I.T. Specialist III
Joined
·
4,670 Posts
Youre going to waste alot of money for a very small upgrade.
You should consider putting an 4 thread/4 core i5 on water and shoot for 5.0Ghz if you really want to ball.

EDIT:

Well.... if gaming performance is the #1 priority.
 

·
Watercooling Enthusiast
Joined
·
4,810 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Quote:

Originally Posted by amstech View Post
Youre going to waste alot of money for a very small upgrade.
You should consider putting an 4 thread/4 core i5 on water and shoot for 5.0Ghz if you really want to ball.

EDIT:

Well.... if gaming performance is the #1 priority.
Wouldn't turning off hyperthreading on my 920 pretty much make it an i5 750?

That side/ downgrade would cost the same as a 990x bc I need a new mobo, cpu, and mobo/ mosfet waterblocks
 

·
Watercooling Enthusiast
Joined
·
4,810 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Quote:

Originally Posted by brettjv View Post
Well, going from 4.0 to 4.8 is a 20% clock increase, so aside from those very rare games that could benefit from the extra cores, the theoretical max increase in frames would be 20% (unless there's architectural changes in this chip as well, which I just don't know offhand). Which you would only see in situations where you are currently 100% CPU bottlenecked (i.e. every single frame in the game/test is being limited by CPU rather than GPU). Any other situation would be <20%.

I was figuring around 10-15%. I do play a lot of civ v so I will see huge performance gains there in turn calculation length
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,038 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by fat_italian_stallion View Post
I was figuring around 10-15%. I do play a lot of civ v so I will see huge performance gains there in turn calculation length
Well if you have a chip now that can do 4.4, then bench at 4.0 and 4.4 and check the difference in perf. At best you'll double that perf gain at 4.8, at worst it'll be the same as that perf gain


Again, the extra cores, at least in today's games, are pretty unlikely to make a significant difference in perf.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
536 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by The Master Chief View Post
lol if you wanna spend that much money on something that will be worth 75 bucks in 6 years go for it.

If you can get a higher clock, the bottleneck should go down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lampen View Post
What are you upgrading for? If you are doing constant video editing/encoding/rendering it would be worth it but if you're just gaming I can't see the performance increase being worth 900 bucks.
the fact that the op has 3 480s should be enough to indicate that money isn't a concern. to the op, i went from a 920 c0 to a 950 and have been able to overclock much more easily.

and besides the $$$, no, you probably wont see much increase in performance in games vs a 4core.
 

·
Watercooling Enthusiast
Joined
·
4,810 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Quote:

Originally Posted by chuckycheeze View Post
the fact that the op has 3 480s should be enough to indicate that money isn't a concern. to the op, i went from a 920 c0 to a 950 and have been able to overclock much more easily.

and besides the $$$, no, you probably wont see much increase in performance in games vs a 4core.
as you noticed I don't care about the performance vs dollar comparison. I know performance doesn't scale with price perfectly. price vs performance is always on an exponential scale just like every other thing in life. I figured a minimal increase in games, but in benchmarks, video editing, and civ 5 I know i will see a difference a more than noticeable difference. Supposedly at stock clocks a 980x can take 2 seconds off of the time a 920 takes to calculate computer turns in Civ 5. I was just curious how much better the 990x will be compared to a 920 c0. I considered a 950 since they are cheap now on newegg, same price i bought my 920 for a while ago, but it would be nice to have 6 cores for a little better future proofing (2 years i expect without the "need" to upgrade my rig except for more ram)
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top