Can an Intel Core 2 Quad processor (4 cores) overclocked to 3.2

>>52898825
i want to punch her and fuck her at the same time

It will run, why wouldn't it ?

>>52898837
>why wouldn't it ?

Because I bought the Q6600 in 2008, that's why. It just seems like my computer is lasting a lot longer than it should. I can't find any way to determine if the R9 290 is too much card for my rig.

>>52898825
Bottlenecking isn't a general term. Yes, it will bottleneck it hard in CPU-intensive games and areas within games. Others will be completely GPU-bound and run fine.

This guy uploads videos of him running games with a Phenom II X4 at 3.2GHz, which is basically identical to your C2Q in terms of performance, along with a GTX 970, so it should give you an idea of where you're going to be bottlenecked:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoQP9lwHTsEkY2WqCLFTJdQ/videos

Although AMD's drivers have a higher CPU overhead, so you can probably expect slightly worse results.

>>52898834
>her

>Can an Intel Core 2 Quad processor (4 cores) overclocked to 3.2 GHz that has 8 gigs of DDR2
Yes
>run a Club 3D R9 290 graphics card without bottle-necking it
No

>>52898834
>her

>>52898825
Not on WinXp 32bit.

>>52898957
Win7 64bit

>>52898941
What about the C2Q would bottleneck the R9 290? The clock speed? The cache?

>>52898905
Thank you

>>52898984
IPC. Things like clock speed and cache are irrelevant really. It just isn't as fast as a modern CPU, clock for clock. It's still fine for most things, just not many of the latest demanding games.

File: 5295.jpg (38KB, 600x611px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 600x611px

>>52898922

>>52899139
If you had my rig, what graphics card would you buy?
>I can't afford to build a new computer right now and my Dad is going to buy me a graphics card for my birthday.

>>52899193
Buy the best graphics card you can afford. It doesn't really matter if it's bottlenecked, it's still offering the best performance you could possibly have with the CPU you've got, and can be easily transferred to another machine later when you upgrade.

>>52899211
k. thanks.

>>52898825
No

>>52898922
Need proof of trap, there's no adam's apple.

>q6600 for r9 290.

turn everything max out (like aa) so it won't bottleneck

>>52899347
Welcome to /g/, newfriend.

I have a Q9550 at stock with 800mhz DDR2 and a R9 280.

It gets bottlenecked really hard honestly. Especially in games like BF4.

>>52900231
You should overclock it. You could potentially get another 50% performance out of that chip, which would go a long way to smoothing things out.

>>52899193
Do you have a power supply that can support an OC'd processor and a high end card at the same time?

>>52898825
Nope

>>52900231
I got Q8400

Benchmarks: (did three times)

h264 encode of a movie clip, should be a few minutes

Stock 2.6Ghz 2.00 Minutes
OC 3.2Ghz 1.41 Minutes

Op it will 1. Because it's 4 threads max and 2. It's pcie 1.1. The bandwidth hit is real. Good news is this doesn't really matter that much, all new games will run pretty well. If you have a newer c2q then you can use Ddr3 and over clock the fsb higher than 400. Your chip is good to 3.6 ghz with the stock cooler but the north bridge might get hot. This is still a viable gaming platform though

>>52902013
>c2q
>still a viable gaming platform
no

>>52902957
Great response anon. You've really disproved my well written and knowledgeable reply with that one liner.

>Rose will never be back

>>52899399
>Narrow chin
>small facial bone structure

I don't see how that can be a guy. Never seen a male facial bone structure so narrow and delicate. The big bulky face is always a giveaway for traps.

File: Zalman.jpg (69KB, 510x430px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 510x430px

>>52902013
I have a EVGA nForce 780i SLI FTW board.
>http://www.cnet.com/products/evga-nforce-780i-sli-ftw-motherboard-atx-lga775-socket-nforce-780i-sli/specs/

I believe that I have PCI-E 2.0. However, my board limits me to DDR2 and caps it at 8gig. I have a Zalman cooler (pic related) and it works very well, but I can't get my overclock above 3.2 for some reason.

>>52905507
>nForce
I'm so sorry.

>>52905669
Why? It has worked very well for me for nearly 8 years now and I haven't had any problems. It's a quad core, it has 8 gigs of ram and with my GeForce GTX 660 EVGA SC Signature 2 Edition, I can play most games on high settings. Sure, there are a few games that came out last year that I can't play on high settings, but that's only because I built this thing in 2008.

In terms of 'bang for your buck', I doubt you could do much better.

>>52905758
nForce chipsets were notoriously bad for OC and high RAM speeds and had many instabilities in general.

>>52905771
I overclocked my C2Q from 2.4GHz to 3.2GHz. From read I've read in the forums, that's pretty much the standard overclock for this CPU barring a few rare exceptions.

>>52905771
>nForce chipsets were notoriously bad for OC
>notorious
Citation, if you would please good sir.

>>52905820
Consider yourself lucky then.

>>52905771
This was true for the 5xx and 6xx chipsets, but they got their shit together and fixed these overclocking issues for the 7xx chipset. But by then it was too late, the damage to their rep was done.

>>52905771
It wasn't their chipset, it was their bios. Nvidia released an update for the 680i and after people flashed it, they started producing remarkable overclocks. This is making me Nostalgia pretty hard.

>>52905959
>>52906031
I had a 780i motherboard and this really wasn't the case. The thing couldn't OC for shit.

memory controller shit is always slower with core2 unfortunately

then again who cares

File: thanks mom.jpg (81KB, 926x809px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 926x809px

>>52898825

>C2Q
>8mb cache

File: IMG_20160124_154211175.jpg (471KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

471KB, 1920x1080px

>>52905771
nForce chipsets were the bomb in the Core 2 days. What are you smoking?

>>52899347
not a trap. she's from scotland and use to do make youtube vids and doing reviews for readyup before /v/irgins found her.

>>52907466
We can never have nice things for long. :^(

>>52907005
ma nigga

>>52898874
it's not.
Your computer is fine.
A core 2 quad should be similar to an i3 4160.

>>52907005
>nForce chipsets were the bomb in the Core 2 days.

nForce chipsets fucked over all of their users who wanted to upgrade to Win7 or Vista a few years after they came out.

>>52907762
Especially overclocked to 3.2GHz. I love that he's still got one that's running and viable after 8 years.

8 YEARS! lol, that's awesome.

>>52907787
No it did not.

>>52906921
>dat filename

>>52907762
>A core 2 quad should be similar to an i3 4160.
On paper maybe but then you have to take into account old and slow bus speeds, legacy memory controllers, DDR2 RAM on a significant amount of C2Q systems and the fact that we are talking about two C2D CPU's put together.

I've got the exact same setup. I don't even overclock the CPU and it'll run any game just fine. I can run CSGO at around 120-250 frames depending on the map on max settings.

>>52908197
Obvious troll. Pics of your rig with timestamp or you're lying.

File: Untitled.png (176KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 1920x1200px

>>52908222
Running DDR3, but its pretty much identical

File: mindblown.jpg (144KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 400x400px

>>52908197
>250 frames

>>52908292
Q9400 =/= Q6600. Not the same setup.

>>52908329
I just saw that he posted core 2 quad, but to be honest, even with a q6600 he should be able to game with a 290.

>>52908197
>>52908222
>>52908293
I have Phenom II @3.4 and I can play GO with 200< fps also runs GTA V at 40 in city center and up to 70fps in rural areas.

Can a Pentium 4 @ 2.8ghz run a 280x?

>>52898825
You would be fine, also you can get a 771 Xeon from ebay for dirt cheap, 12MB cache yo...

>>52907762
No it doesn't. The i3 performs roughly 50% better from the top of my head and completely annihilates it in single threaded benchmarks, which is what counts most in games.

File: Solo Slasher.jpg (112KB, 1376x876px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1376x876px

>>52908375
Of course he will. The question isn't whether or not he will be able to game with it, the question is whether or not buying a 290 would be a waste of money because his rig can't use the 290's full potential.

The answer to that question is yes. His Q6600, despite being overclocked to 3.2 GHz, will bottleneck a 290 because of it's 8mb cache. Effectively, it's only 4mb, unlike Intel smart cache, the full 8mb is not available across all 4 cores. It was for this reason the Q6600 was excluded from this benchmark comparison:
>http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-wolfdale-yorkfield-comparison,3487.html

He would be better off getting a R7 370 4G, which would be half of the cost of the 290 and he'd be able to use all of that card, not half of it, and save himself ~$140 -$180.

>>52908658
I was going to argue with you, but then I notice that you play Eve Online by yourself.

>backs away slowly.

>>52908658
/thread

File: Screenshot_2016-02-11-13-02-09.png (550KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

550KB, 1440x2560px

>>52907823
With an overclock it's about 500 points slower than the i3 on geekbench. Which really isn't much.

>>52908151
They also came with ddr3 as well you know.
He's just missing out on pcie 3.0, usb 3, sata 6gbps

>>52908640
That's in single thread performance.
The i3 also does have newer instruction sets, but unless he upgrades to an fx 8350/i5 4460 then it's not worth it in my opinion, if he can overclock to 3.2

File: 1399316213471.jpg (2MB, 4060x2855px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4060x2855px

Buy one of those Socket 771 Xeons for like 20 dollars on ebay and pin mod it to fit inside of a 775 board, that's what I did.

>>52912553
Why? What would Op gain from doing that?

>>52898834
I want to punch her vagina with my dick.

>>52913134
>vagina

>>52912806
65nm->45nm
1066fsb->1333fsb
8MB L2->12MB L2
SSE4.1
less heat, maybe more oc

>>52905771
This, they were mostly trash, just like VIA chipsets.

>>52913156
see
>>52907466

No amount of wishing from /g/fags will make her have a dick.

>>52913134
>her

>>52913329
Or he could buy a q8xxx for around 20bux without worrying about any mod issues.

>>52913379
waste yourself.

>already a waste.

File: 1385581318033.png (2MB, 1200x1131px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1200x1131px

>>52904263
They have surgery for that you know...