Where's the bottleneck? Public system review for upgrade options.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam DeathWalker

Its not the cpu its the (well nvida calls them north and south bridge not sure what intel is calling them) X58 that makes the difference. Not sure what Intel used prior to the X58 but its the X58 that blows away everything else, with its QPI and that other fast buss.

---

This is where I was trying to lead this: people aren't comparing apples to apples and are just throwing out anecdotal hyperbole.

OK - I've thrown together a list of options.

1. i7 cpu/mobo/8gb memory, no video upgrade ($550?)
2. AMD 6 core/mobo/8gb memory, new video card ($600)
3. New video card, new CPU chiller - overclock the shit out of it (Cheap)

I'm tempted to try #3 first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zzyzxx71

OK - I've thrown together a list of options.

1. i7 cpu/mobo/8gb memory, no video upgrade ($550?)
2. AMD 6 core/mobo/8gb memory, new video card ($600)
3. New video card, new CPU chiller - overclock the shit out of it (Cheap)

I'm tempted to try #3 first.

---

This is why I cannot recommend Option 2 with AMD's current state unless you can use the 6 core usefully in some other way.

Ouch - I knew there was a performance hit, I didn't know there was that much of a delta.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam DeathWalker

Its not the cpu its the (well nvida calls them north and south bridge not sure what intel is calling them) X58 that makes the difference. Not sure what Intel used prior to the X58 but its the X58 that blows away everything else, with its QPI and that other fast buss.

---

Yup, the bridges help too. And guess what? The q6600 cannot utilize those new bridges. Hence the term "architecture", the i5/i7 have better/newer architecture, both within the CPU and what they run on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ughmahedhurtz

I'll make a suggestion: point out empirical numbers that show the cost-effectiveness of upgrading his Q6600 to an i-series versus upgrading his 9800 video card to a GT470.

---

Uh nope, I just realised I'm arguing with someone who thinks a q6600 is still a viable processor even though the i5/i7 are out. I'll agree to disagree.

Here is my opinion and experience:

I upgraded from a q6600 to an i7. I noticed far better performance in everything. If you don't believe me, that's kewl.

I did some more testing, turns out prior to Cata with5 clients running my cores would hover in the 70-80% range all the time.

After cata they're pegged at 100% all the time - I think it's the extra video rendering overhead that comes with cata.

When I raid with my guild (1 client) I turn up the grafx to Ultra and don't have an issue. It's definitely a processor issue.

Next paycheck, new board/cpu/memory will be on the way - I doubt I'll have to do anything with my video configuration.

Thanks for all the input.

To put some closure to this, I upgraded the cpu/mobo/memory yesterday. I went to a i7 2600k, 8gb 1333mhz memory on a new asus mobo - Will be upgrading to 16gb next check.

Same video cards, same hard drives.

Single client framerates fluctuate between 150-200 in Orgrimmar with 1 client running. With all 5 it caps out, 60fps on the primary window with video effects 2 steps up from the minimum, and 30fps with video effects 1 step up from minimum.

CPU utilization hovers around 20-30% at all times - it absolutely positively was the CPU. Thanks for all the input.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zzyzxx71

To put some closure to this, I upgraded the cpu/mobo/memory yesterday. I went to a i7 2600k, 8gb 1333mhz memory on a new asus mobo - Will be upgrading to 16gb next check.

---

Are you using triple channel? I went with 6gb so I could do triple channel - 3x 2gb sticks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d0z3rr

Are you using triple channel? I went with 6gb so I could do triple channel - 3x 2gb sticks.

---

2600K does not use triple channel.