What is my bottleneck?

[Frosty18]

I am starting to notice some lag in games now and am willing to spend some money to upgrade the old PC. The catch -- I am not willing to spend more than $600 total. Basically, CPU/Ram/Mobo or GPU. Obviously not enough money to upgrade both.

Current Setup:
E6300 @ 2.94ghz -- Best processor I have ever owned. Sucker has ran at 3ghz on air since 2005 non stop.
Gigabyte DS3
Corsair XMS 4GB DDR2
GTX280
2x 74GB raptors in Raid 0
OCZ 700W PSU

I only care about gaming performance, the computer is plenty fast for what little multitasking I perform. I typically play games in 1920X1080.

What would you buy? It seems odd that the GPU would still be the bottleneck -- this computer has already gone through 3 GPUs. 1950XT --> 2950 pro --> GTX280.

[dgb303]

I'd put the money on the E6300.

[Frosty18]

One vote for new CPU.

Anyone else? the 1055T seemed like a decent deal. I'd do the 965 BE, but it seems silly not to spend $20 more for the 1055.

[Shell]

I'd say CPU, but if you upgraded it, it'd mean new CPU/RAM/mobo.

[wingman99]

I would just purchase a cheap Core™ 2 Quad Q9550

What games do you play?

[Evilsizer]

i say oc the cpu some more first... though at that res the biggest problem is going to be the GPU assuming your cpu is at a clock speed not to hold it back. since even at a GPU bound res like 1920x1080 the cpu can still hold it back but ocing it might not give the gains your expecting. while the game you play at that res does matter. i havent seen any card till the new high end ati/nv cards do decent FPS for a single GPU set at that res.

[Frosty18]

Sadly I am getting lag playing Titan Quest. That's mainly what I play now, but before that I was playing a lot of Mortal Online.

The CPU won't go much beyond 2.94ghz. I can get it to run at 3200 perfectly stable, but the comptuer won't do a hard boot at that speed. Meaning I can turn on the comp, OC it to 3200, then use it.. But if I turn it off, the next time I try to turn it on I can't get it to boot without flashing the CMOS.

So at that res it's likely still the CPU? How does a 6300 compare to the newer C2Ds clock for clock? Is my 3ghz C2D that much slower than an i5 at 3ghz?

[Evilsizer]

Sadly I am getting lag playing Titan Quest. That's mainly what I play now, but before that I was playing a lot of Mortal Online.

The CPU won't go much beyond 2.94ghz. I can get it to run at 3200 perfectly stable, but the comptuer won't do a hard boot at that speed. Meaning I can turn on the comp, OC it to 3200, then use it.. But if I turn it off, the next time I try to turn it on I can't get it to boot without flashing the CMOS.

So at that res it's likely still the CPU? How does a 6300 compare to the newer C2Ds clock for clock? Is my 3ghz C2D that much slower than an i5 at 3ghz?

well comparing core 2 to core 2 they will be equal unless your trying to compare a 65nm to a 45nm. in which case 45nm cpu is about 10-15% faster per clock then a 65nm cpu. though your E6300 is a newer one, being its clocked at 2.8ghz stock on a 45nm process. the first E6300 was a 65nm cpu at 1.86ghz.

which GB board do you have the P35-DS3 or P45-DS3 or some other one? you may need a bios update or some tweaking in the bios to get it bootable at 3.2ghz. i dont see why you would have that issue at all. i dont have that kind of issue with a my Abit IP35-Pro/E7200@3.8ghz.

really the i3/i5's on LGA1156, the dual core'd ones that is. they are nothing more then die shrunk Core 2 cpus. they really are since intel has the IMC on the GPU die not the cpu die. they does make a difference imo since the IMC has to use the DMI buss for memory to talk to the cpu vs a direct link to the CPU.

I would see if you can work out the kinks on your board first. if you cant either replace the board (depends on the model) or just get a new cpu. i would suggest looking for a E7200 or E8400 cpu... then agian if your motherboard only has PCIE 1.0 then it might be worth looking at a I5 750 setup or if you thought about it a AMD setup. i know intel section but AMD has to be said if you want to spend a bit less and not lose any gaming performance.

[Frosty18]

I have the p965 ds3. My E6300 is the old school 65nm. That's why it is so impressive that it can run at 3.2ghz on air :) I just don't think I can expect to get more than 3.2ghz out of a 1.86ghz chip.

So CPU would give me a noticeable improvement? I just want to make sure I don't waste $600 :)

[Evilsizer]

I have the p965 ds3. My E6300 is the old school 65nm. That's why it is so impressive that it can run at 3.2ghz on air :) I just don't think I can expect to get more than 3.2ghz out of a 1.86ghz chip.

So CPU would give me a noticeable improvement? I just want to make sure I don't waste $600 :)

well if you have a legit email and it does appear you have over 100posts. hit up the classifieds. you will be able to find some good deals there and alot of people in the past were able to get the E6300, yes yours higher then 3.2ghz. i had the E6400 on a few different boards and was able to top it out around 3.8ghz for just benching. was stable at 3.4ghz with no problems, might have been good for 3.6ghz but needed better cooling.

cheapest route for you right now is a motherboard replacement to a P45 with your current cpu. next you may want to find/get a better heatsink/fan (depending on what you have now) since that will make a difference as well. after that ram would be something else to look at depending on the ram you have, you didnt list the model. its a bit hard to figure out what ram you have from just 4gb and DDR2..

if you just want to update the whole thing for $600 minus a GPU thats doable. however i still doubt your going to see any FPS increase with that GPU at that res. one thing you may want to look into is to see benchmarks of that game you play and see if it responds more to CPU speed or a better GPU. since some games such as CSS or counter strike source gets its FPS increase from a faster CPU. for instance i had use a celeron L 420(single core) oc'd to 3.2ghz with a ATI 4850, i would see mid 80's max and would see 40's on the low. with the same clock speed going back to the E6400 i would get into the mid 150's with the FPS cap raised. though i game at a much lower resolution 1440x900 but i use 4xAA 8xAF in CSS. i then switched up to the i7 920@3.4ghz either because more cores or more efficient per clock. With the same res/AA/AF and same GPU. With the FPS cap raised i can see 300's and low 150's. not all games will respond like that but i hope it gives you some idea. Of what to look at when you look at those benchmarks.

[wingman99]

I Did some research and Titan Quest is a single core game with a patch for two cores, do you have the patch?

Also I have been reading that the dual core patch causes hitches playing the game, also the game has allot of bugs.

From what i've been reading that game does not need a Great video card or CPU so what you have should be just fine.:)

If you want to find out if your video card resolution is holding you back just lower the resolution and play the game and see if it improves.

Also Try running the forceSingleProcessorMode as TRUE.



Recommended System Requirements:

•Windows XP
•3.0 Ghz Intel Pentium IV or equivalent
•1 GB RAM
•5.0 GB or more free hard drive space
•128 MB NVIDIA GeForce 6800 series or ATI Radeon X800 series or equivalent
•DirectX® 9.0c compatible or Soundblaster X-Fi series sound card
•8x or faster CD-ROM/DVD drive
•Keyboard, Mouse

[Frosty18]

Great tips Wingman. I will do some resolution experimenting and see how it turns out. My GPU is not overclocked either, so I might be able to do something there.