By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - PC Spec Question

SolidSnack on 06 September 2016
Chazore said:
m0ney said:

I'm in da club with Zotac 960 AMP

Zotac users unite!



Around the Network
Ganoncrotch on 06 September 2016
arthurchan35 said:
You want a short answer? Lag. Like really laggy probably.

I'm not sure how he would ever experience Lag while playing The Witcher, a single player game. Very strange. I'm also confident in saying that an i5 should not add any amount to network issues of even the most online of online games, it has been some time since network ports have even listed their cpu requirements since they are so incredibly low.



Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

Azzanation on 07 September 2016
Pemalite said:
Azzanation said:
Think of it as a CPU is a pencil which draws the outline, and the GPU like a paint brush. The CPU you mentioned will have trouble keeping up with the GPU. Meaning that you cant draw as fast as you can colour which leads to alot of wasted power.

Not entirely accurate. You assume that all games are built the same and use the same paint brush, they don't.

In a CPU bound game the old Sandy Bridge chip might hold him back (Not many of these games actually exist though, a few edge cases like Civilization exist where there is massive gains to be had.)
If the game is GPU bound on even a Titan GPU, then the CPU won't make much of a difference.

Fact of the matter is, Sandy Bridge is one of those chips that will stand the a test-of-time, my Sandy Bridge chip is able to out-bench even some of Intel's latest and greatest 6 core chips, overclocked of course.



SolidSnack said:

I have a i5-2400 and I was thinking of upgrading my GPU to a Gtx 1060 6gb. I was looking at the minimum spec of Withcer 3 and it calls for an i5-2500k. 

Since I dont meet the CPU minimum, I was wondering what the shortcomings of that might be (with the 1060 installed)?

Thanks

The i5 2400 and 2500k are only differentiated by clockspeed.
The i5 2400 runs at 3.1ghz and will Turbo to 3.4ghz.
The i5 2500k runs at 3.3ghz and will Turbo to 3.7ghz.

On no planet does 200-300mhz make a tangible difference when we are talking these clock rates.

In every game that lists a Core i5 2500K you can expect the same experience.

Slimebeast said:
A Core i5-2400 is faster than a FX-6300 right? And I run the game very good.

SolidSnack, out of curiousoty, what GPU do you have now?

Yes, it will out-bench the FX-6300 by a good 20-25% in most single threaded situations, the 6300 can close the gap to around a 10% difference in Favor of the i5 2400 once all 6 cores are under heavy use on the 6300.

With that said, Anandtech pegs Skylake at a 25% gain over Sandy Bridge overall.
So that Core i5 2400 would be roughly equivalent to a 2.4ghz~ Quad Core Core i5 6300/6200. (Just so you can have some kind of future reference.)

SolidSnack said:

Its nice to hear my CPU is still ok for 1080p gaming

the 1060 is very close and equal at times to the gtx 980, according to DF and some other sites

and it only requires a 400w PSU, part of the reason I like this card is I don't have to upgrade anything else

In my opinion you still have a few years left of life in that old CPU.

The 1060 also doesn't need a 400w PSU, it will use 150w at most for itself.
It's mostly to account for your entire system and for PSU aging. (PSU's maximum wattage tends to decrease due to sheer age.)

It's a great card for your rig.

Well I wasn’t going to get into how games are made. I am talking on a hardware front and how a CPU and GPU complement each other. I agree every game is made differently to benefit different setups. However bottlenecking hardware for example - Buying a Monster GPU if the CPU is way behind the 8 ball is not a wise decision.

So I use the Paint Brush and Pencil method. I don’t see the point in spending $$$$ on a GPU if it’s running on a mediocre CPU, and vice a versa. Ill drop down my GPU options if my CPU isn’t up to scratch (Save money). Having a good blend of both CPU and GPU to complement each other will benefit a lot in the long term.



Pemalite on 07 September 2016
Azzanation said:

Well I wasn’t going to get into how games are made. I am talking on a hardware front and how a CPU and GPU complement each other. I agree every game is made differently to benefit different setups. However bottlenecking hardware for example - Buying a Monster GPU if the CPU is way behind the 8 ball is not a wise decision.

So I use the Paint Brush and Pencil method. I don’t see the point in spending $$$$ on a GPU if it’s running on a mediocre CPU, and vice a versa. Ill drop down my GPU options if my CPU isn’t up to scratch (Save money). Having a good blend of both CPU and GPU to complement each other will benefit a lot in the long term.


You reach a point where your CPU is "good enough".
He isn't chasing 4k 60fps here. - It's still faster than the majority of AMD systems and they game perfectly fine.

A Geforce 1060 is a good pairing up with a Sandy Bridge chip.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Jdog535 on 07 September 2016

I honestly have loved reading all of this, because I am currently in a class that is teaching us to make computers, because I had never had a chance to do this. So this is giving me a lot of insight into making one of my own.



Around the Network
JRPGfan on 07 September 2016
SolidSnack said:

I have a i5-2400 and I was thinking of upgrading my GPU to a Gtx 1060 6gb. I was looking at the minimum spec of Withcer 3 and it calls for an i5-2500k. 

Turn down or off features that tax the CPU more than the gpu.

Shadows is usually something that ll tax your cpu, in most games.

That alone should be enough to to make your i5-2400 play it as well or better than a i5-2500k with shadows on.



JRPGfan on 07 September 2016
Slimebeast said:
A Core i5-2400 is faster than a FX-6300 right? And I run the game very good.

First bench I saw of cpu scaleing with this game had a 2500k around 90 fps, and a FX-6300 around 80 fps.

Useing a 980 medium graphics, will all the extras on.

I think a i5-2400 might be a tiny bit faster than a FX-6300 in this game.

Probably not more than 5 fps differnce between the two.



Pemalite on 07 September 2016
JRPGfan said:
Slimebeast said:
A Core i5-2400 is faster than a FX-6300 right? And I run the game very good.

First bench I saw of cpu scaleing with this game had a 2500k around 90 fps, and a FX-6300 around 80 fps.

Useing a 980 medium graphics, will all the extras on.

I think a i5-2400 might be a tiny bit faster than a FX-6300 in this game.

Probably not more than 5 fps differnce between the two.


Depends on the game.
The AMD FX-6300 is able to "close the performance gap" when all 6 threads are in use... And yet still be slightly slower... Examples being Civilization 5, the main difference with that game isn't really the framerate though, it's how long it would take to calculate every turn.

The Sandy Bridge i5 2400 is far superior in games which are lightly threaded, pretty much every Blizzard game falls into this category, StarCraft 2, Diablo 3, World of WarCraft, doesn't matter. The i5 2400 will win by a significant margin and that's due to Intel's advantage in per-core performance.
Most MMO's, MOBA's are also lightly threaded.

Then you get Frostbite powered games which despite being able to use every CPU core you can throw at it... It's still not extremely CPU dependent so the difference would be neglible, even on older Nahelem or high-clocked Core 2 Quad Chips. - Your biggest gains would come from the GPU. - Examples being Battlefield 3, 4, Hardline, Battlefield 1, Dragon Age: Inquisition, Mirrors Edge etc'.


Fact of the matter is, his Core i5 2400 is still capable of running every game on the market just fine and will likely do so for the next few years.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

JRPGfan on 07 September 2016

I know it depends on the game..... but in "this" game (the witcher 3), the differnce between a i5-2400 and a FX-6300 is very small.
Id guess its 5 fps or less.

Its less than 10 fps between the i5-2500k & FX-6300 in the Witcher 3.
The i5-2400 does have 200mhz less, so Im assumeing it would be a closer run between them.



SolidSnack on 14 September 2016

UPDATE:

Well, shit. Not going to happen. Got the card from Newegg last week, installed it and it wouldn't boot. Called Newegg and they said to return it and they would test it, but they also notified me they have a NO REFUND policy with gfx cards.

So I sent it back. While waiting to receive a replacement, I interneted my problem and discovered multiple accounts of people who have the same motherboard as I (which is a stock Carmel2 LGA1155) and not being able to boot up their new GTX 1060.

I got the replacement card today, and of course, it wouldn't boot. Fortunately, Newegg was really nice and agreed to refund my purchase.

Im bummed :(