Oh My bad. But the 570 is essentially a 480.

flaming_moe

Oh My bad. But the 570 is essentially a 480.

Actaully I was thinking incorrectly about the processing fabrication, which is 40 nm for both. The die size is actually smaller like you said from 529nm to 520nm.

Aeneas32

HILLGUY

Aeneas32
If there are known problems with the speed realization with Q6600 or other CPUs, then EVGA should be making that known in their advertising.
And if the CPU is so important in graphics speed, then maybe spending a premium on a GTX 5-series GPU is a waste of money.

I'm not sure it's their job to ?? You would have gotten the same result with ANY brand of Nvidia Card ?? Even any high end Ati card would most likely do the same thing.  It's like trying to power a big V8 engine with a fuel pump from a little 4 cylinder car .. The engine spends more time waiting for the fuel than it does burning it so she spits and sputters ..... " The fuel in this case being any 3D application"
Welcome to the wonderful world of upgrading your computer
Edit : And I don't think there are any with onboard graphics  , but I could be wrong there

To be precise, it sounds from the statements here that it is EVGA which is marketing the V8 Fuel Pump when the customer possesses a 4-cyclinder car.
The V8 Fuel Pump seller has a responsibility to state that the V8 Fuel Pump is not recommended for a 4 cyclinder car.
And Q6600 nowadays is considered a high midrange chip.
Its aggregate un-overclocked clock rate is 2400x4 = 9600 GHz .
That is still faster than most chips on the street.

you don't add up the frequency... if that was true then my cpu would be 24000mhz 4ghzx6 cores... you have a 2.4ghz chip with 4 cores. and thats pretty slow for today... even my brothers dual core could probably run your 570 better and he's running at 4.05ghz.
 
your chip is slower than all of the i7 and i5 chips and maybe as powerful as some of the i3 chips.

Aeneas32

HILLGUY

Aeneas32
If there are known problems with the speed realization with Q6600 or other CPUs, then EVGA should be making that known in their advertising.
And if the CPU is so important in graphics speed, then maybe spending a premium on a GTX 5-series GPU is a waste of money.

I'm not sure it's their job to ?? You would have gotten the same result with ANY brand of Nvidia Card ?? Even any high end Ati card would most likely do the same thing.  It's like trying to power a big V8 engine with a fuel pump from a little 4 cylinder car .. The engine spends more time waiting for the fuel than it does burning it so she spits and sputters ..... " The fuel in this case being any 3D application"
Welcome to the wonderful world of upgrading your computer
Edit : And I don't think there are any with onboard graphics  , but I could be wrong there

To be precise, it sounds from the statements here that it is EVGA which is marketing the V8 Fuel Pump when the customer possesses a 4-cyclinder car.
The V8 Fuel Pump seller has a responsibility to state that the V8 Fuel Pump is not recommended for a 4 cyclinder car.
And Q6600 nowadays is considered a high midrange chip.
Its aggregate un-overclocked clock rate is 2400x4 = 9600 GHz .
That is still faster than most chips on the street.

The Q6600 is NOT a high midrange chip...The pipelines alone aren't enough to facilitate most work applications.
 
Your understanding of a quad core is also very flawed...That's simply not how it worked, especially on the 6600's (This is coming from someone who used the cores in our office for @a year. (Qx9650 was my personal choice)...
 
My suggestion would be to upgrade to the 2500k or the 2600k and you'll see a VAST increase in performance.
 
Right now, your chip is very bottlenecked and that's what's causing your bottleneck.
 
EVGA isn't responsible for your choice in hardware, they're simply advertising how their card performs which, is very reasonable.

Not sure if troll...
 
Your CPU is old. That's a fact. Your GPU is new. It was released last year, and it's currently one of the fastest GPUs on the planet. It's not surprising that it'd be held back by your old, SLOW CPU. 2.4 Ghz is NOT fast. It's slow.
 
My i7 920 is faster at stock. It's running at 4.5 Ghz, so it's not bottlenecking my GPU, unlike your processor running at 2.4 Ghz. 2.4 Ghz is slow any way you look at it. Run my i7 920 at 2.4 Ghz, it's too slow. It WILL bottleneck my cards. I hate to be so to the point with you, but you seem to not be getting it. Your GPU is much more powerful than the rest of your computer. The rest of your computer is holding your GPU back.
 
It's not EVGA's fault. It's your fault. No one else's. You should be educated about what you are buying. This is advanced technology that you need to understand to use properly. Most of it is plug and play, or like putting together a puzzle, but you still need to know which pieces are right for others.
 
Bottlenecks exist, get over it, upgrade the rest of your computer, be happy!

IceCreamLover

As a fellow Q6600 user myself I also feel that I've extracted about all of the performance that I can from that CPU.  This is especially true with my having only 2gigs of Ram.  I just upgraded from the Q6600 to a 2500k and Z68 so I'm hoping to see a nice jump in performance.  It was a tough decision not to get the 2600k.  The promised increase in folding capacity would have been nice.

I am running an ATI 5850 currently.  I am hoping to upgrade to a GTX 580 and possibly get a second one once prices come down more.  It's hard to spend a ton of money on a GPU since the 5850 isn't completely outdated yet.  

I'd highly suggest looking at how much of an upgrade a SB would be for you.  You could also use your GTX570 to fold for some bux you could use for a new MOBO to help offset the cost of an upgrade.

I have 12 GBytes Sdram DDR2.
Certainly not the fastest Ram but no time is wasted by the CPU looking for available Ram.
Looks like your new CPU choice will require a new motherboard with a LGA1155 socket. I assume that is the Z68.
The question is, how does the integrated graphics of the Z68 motherboard compare to the GTX 570 ?
 

You need DDR3.
A new CPU with LGA1155 socket is a good choice.
Integrated graphics do not compare to a GTX 570. 

houkom

Sleinous

Memory clock that EVGA Precision displays is always half of what is advertised on the box.

No need to worry your card is actually operating at 3800mhz mem clock (1950 x2 = 3800)

As for the lozer than average GTX 570 performance figures this is likely due to the Q6600 slowing the card down, if you want you can try and overclock your Q6600 a little and you should notice the GTX 570 unleash the rest of its potential.

EDIT: Valarioth beat me to it ;)

Im really sorry i just thought this was slightly funny , 1950 x 2 = 3900 not 3800... its okay. Its the morning, i forgive you . Sorry to interrupt, proceed with thread

Its actually the evening for me ;) That's my excuse.

I came from using a Q6600 with a GTX 570 and it was an awful bottleneck, do you know what stepping version your q6600 is? If it is the G0 stepping you should be able to overclock it some and get a decent performance boost. However once I upgraded to the i7-2600k a while back, the difference is honestly night and day. Dump the q6600 and get a 2500K or a 2600k, whichever fits your needs accordingly. Do not freak out, your computer is doing exactly what it should be doing.

whitnasty1

I came from using a Q6600 with a GTX 570 and it was an awful bottleneck, do you know what stepping version your q6600 is? If it is the G0 stepping you should be able to overclock it some and get a decent performance boost. However once I upgraded to the i7-2600k a while back, the difference is honestly night and day. Dump the q6600 and get a 2500K or a 2600k, whichever fits your needs accordingly. Do not freak out, your computer is doing exactly what it should be doing.

Yep, Q6600 is old tech  I know as I have one   I see my cpu bottlencking my gpu also and that's why I ordered a 2500k/mobo/ram for an upgrade
 
That's what will need to be done to utilize all that GTX 570 can offer....just the way it is.

Aeneas32

IceCreamLover

As a fellow Q6600 user myself I also feel that I've extracted about all of the performance that I can from that CPU.  This is especially true with my having only 2gigs of Ram.  I just upgraded from the Q6600 to a 2500k and Z68 so I'm hoping to see a nice jump in performance.  It was a tough decision not to get the 2600k.  The promised increase in folding capacity would have been nice.

I am running an ATI 5850 currently.  I am hoping to upgrade to a GTX 580 and possibly get a second one once prices come down more.  It's hard to spend a ton of money on a GPU since the 5850 isn't completely outdated yet.  

I'd highly suggest looking at how much of an upgrade a SB would be for you.  You could also use your GTX570 to fold for some bux you could use for a new MOBO to help offset the cost of an upgrade.

I have 12 GBytes Sdram DDR2.
Certainly not the fastest Ram but no time is wasted by the CPU looking for available Ram.
Looks like your new CPU choice will require a new motherboard with a LGA1155 socket. I assume that is the Z68.
The question is, how does the integrated graphics of the Z68 motherboard compare to the GTX 570 ?

the cpu is your problum becouse it can't keep your GPU bussy enuff. let me use a example, your cpu is sending out pages in a book to the gpu to read. it's sending the gpu 2.4 pages of info for it to render per a clock cycle, per a book (aka core of your cpu) for the gpu. that's 4 book's being read by the cpu and sent to the gpu. you mite think w0w that fast! NO ! ! ! ! WRONG ! ! ! ! that's way slow that is the proformance you get from a laptop cpu. whitch is crap!
take a i7 920 cpu for instent that is the lowest of the i7 9xx's chip's it's runing at 2.6ghz x8 thread's that is more than dubble the proformance of your cpu, and would cost you about $300 bucks for mobo and cpu. that meen's that the cpu is sending 2.6 pages of info being read by the cpu and sent to the gpu for rending (x8). that would keep your 570 bussy if you realy want to get the proformance of the 570 can do. You can overclock the 920 to 3ghz-3.5ghz on air alone. Or you can get a All In One Liqueld Cooling Loop. (AIOLCL) for about $80 buck's, and see 4ghz+ on the cpu and realy rock in roll in games.
 
btw there is no intergrated graphas on any 1155 chip set motherboard there is a small gpu eng. on every SB cpu. whitch is crap for game play. it may help in video ed. but that it's.
I hope this info is helpful and you can pm me the link and i'll post it for you.
 
edit: WELCOME to the board's man. 

I think you should play some demanding games and compare results with your old ati card. I bet you would see a nice boost in performance even with the 6600 cpu. That would put it in a real world application. Afterall; The main reason for these powerful cards is playing games at higher details, Resolutions, etc...
  I have no doubt(as others have expressed) that the 6600 is going to be a significant bottleneck in a lot of ways.
 
Of course if benchmarking is your main reason for owning the 570 than please disregard my previous comments 

I never could figure out how others can blame new equipment for being defective while running it on old stuff.  Yeesh.
 

First, welcome to the forums.  Second, you'll have to forgive some of our members, we're accustumed to interacting with people who either have a decent idea of lingo and terminology or are easy to manipulate and coerce into buying things to "fix" their "problems".   But it goes both way, as long as you're patient, you'll be fine.
 
I'm more about understanding and getting you to help yourself rather than just take the advice given as if we speak for you with your preferences in mind.    Unless anyone asks you what you do or what you want, you technically should not accept the opinions of others as your own; don't even take mine.
 
Concepts:

1. All programs are coded such that the central processor (CPU) runs the program and instructs all other hardware what to do, namely graphics in this case.  No piece of hardware can run independant of the CPU, otherwise you should be able to remove the Q6600 from your system and it should work fine; it won't.
2. Understand and accept that many of us overclock our parts, we push the frequency beyond what we buy. Those of us that purchased Q6600's before got them anywhere from 3.6GHz up to 4Ghz, but with better after market coolers since stock cooler is really only good for stock speeds.   The primary advantage to overclocking is that your programs run faster, disadvatange is lifespan degradation and voiding warranty.   It is assumed we all accept that risk. 
3. Benchmark programs are mathematical number crunchers, they take frame rates and through some math make up a score value -- this score is only revelant under certain conditions. For example, two different CPU using the same graphics card can have different scores, or a reference clock and an overclocked CPU can be compared -- which is the mistake you're making when you compare different frequecies of the same hardware. 

 
Facts:

1. There is nothing 'wrong' with your benchmark score or hardware.  Neither Intel, AMD or nVidia sell slow stuff; most people that buy computers for personal use don't have the insatiable desires many of us have.  As long as we make our preferences the datum of judgement, that bias gets in the way of just telling you like it is.   Modern stuff will never be so fast you don't need to overclock as long as you want more, for instance.  Really the only "wrong" aspect is the performance/score expectation of overclocked systems from a non-overclocked system.
2. Regarding multi-core CPUs, all programs are only coded for a few cores based on a target audience of customers and what CPUs they are getting, whatever the majority gets.  They are not coded for as many cores as you have such that a slower quad is better than a faster dual.  This is not true; otherwise why stop at a single-CPU desktop, go get a 8-CPU server and never upgrade for decades.  Dual-cores have been around for seven years and only now are a majority of programs dual-threaded.  Q6600 debuted in Dec 2006 and it could be another 3-4 years before a majority of programs use more than dual-threads.  That doesn't mean there aren't programs that use more cores; it is true multi-core is the future, but we're talking about a few generation because of slow mass adoption of technology.
3. The idea behind a bottleneck is that something slows the potential of a system, I put that in italics because that potential isn't a constant and varies with quality (luck of the draw), and it also varies with preferences.  We are only gauranteed stock speeds (what we buy), we not gauranteed how far we can overclock them. 

 
CPU bottleneck:
If you upgrade graphics and performance either doesn't increase or it is subtle.  This is because the CPU isn't any faster to keep up with new graphics hardware.  Most people expect to run higher 3D details with faster graphics, but the CPU still has to generate those color coordinates to give the graphics card to basically 'connect the dots' and give you a picture.  All modern graphics cards do is draw a picture; they don't generate the scene, lighting, characters reactions, etc - that's all the CPU's job; and a slow/old CPU ruins the experience of a better graphics card.
 
GPU bottleneck
Mostly seen with integrated video or old/slow graphics cards. if you overclocks or upgrade CPU and nothing else, and nothing happens in terms of game improvements.  An example is my own experience, I have a GTX260 and play the RTS game "World in Conflict" at 1920x1080 resolution and at max details.  My frame rates don't vary much (in the 50's) whether I had my Core i7 920 as low as 1.6Ghz or up to 3.6GHz.  My GPU is bottlenecking me, if I get another GTX260 for SLI or a 500 series card, my frame rates should scale with the CPU speed.  Problem is my preference, beyond 40FPS I can't visually tell the difference because I don't play games often, so if I get a better card and get 80FPS, it is still a waste of my money.
 
This is what you need to keep in mind, most high-end enthusiasts that buy GTX570 or better want max details smooth at or above 60FPS, this forces expensive upgrades and high overclocks-- but if you don't need such high preferences to play a game, you don't need their hardware suggestions.  Look at your games with the 2.4Ghz Q6600 and GTX570, how are they?  If you saw an improvement in your games and you're happy, that's all that should matter and to hell with what everyone is saying. 
 
But if you expected more, then look to your other hardware.
 
You asked about modern Intel integrated video performance, considering the GPU is in the CPU die now, LGA1155 processors graphics are onpar with GeForce 7900GT or 9500GT.  So you can play any games from 2006 or earlier on max details without a dedicated card.  When the 22nm shrink comes in the same socket by about April 2012, that integrated performance should be 50% faster, so we're talking about 9600GT or 8800GT type performance.  Of course you can get that performace right now if you got an AMD A8-3850 in socket FM1, which were the much touted Fusion processors with an ATI GPU core. 

I think its great that we are discussing potential upgrades and the wonders of Bottlenecks but this whole bringing the 570's worth into question resulted because of 3dmark 11 weird benchmark comparisons. Did you actually go and look at other peoples scores? I had a stock speed 580 and stock speed i7-2600k and ran the bench and it game me the same message, even with that CPU. I was like "AW i feel ripped off!! I spent all this money and it tells me there is something wrong?!?!" I went through and checked all my speeds and voltages and closed down background programs and reran it basically the same results. I felt EXACTLY what you feel right now. But than I actually went through and looked at the systems it was comparing me to. Cards with 30% overclocks and CPUs with 50% overclocks and everything in between that and my stock speeds. The issue isn't with your card. The issue is that the majority of the systems it is so-called "comparing" you to are all heavily modified. They had SSDs and better ram, and some of them were extremely watercooled. It "compares" (take that word lightly) based off the model of CPU and GPU you have, NOT including speeds and other components such as RAM.
So if you want to upgrade go for it, but it is very important that you take from this post that you can't let Futuremarks score emotionally get to you and make you question the value of your purchases because the scales of fairness are not in your favor and it is a rigged comparison, that you can't beat and I bet bullys a lot of people into buying more stuff.