If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Phenom Processor's
Hi i currently run a 939 4400+x2 cpu on an n force 4 chipset
i am a gamer and im looking at upgrading my system to get better FPS in some of the newer games out i.e. crisis COD4 etc.. i have already decided to get a nvidia 8800GTS 512 video card to replace my existing 7900gtx ive been wondering whether to use either an MAD 6400+ Black edition Dual core or an new Phenom 9600+ black edition or against my better judgement an Intel C2Duo or C2quad then new 45 mm core version's the primary use of my pc is for Gaming however i also download and encode DVD's i have read articles on the net about there being a flaw in some of the instructions within the current B2 revision Phenom's also looking at most of the review's ive read the C2Duo's are out performing both the dual core amd's as well as the quad core intels and amd's the last time i used an intel chip was when the pentium first cam on the market ever since then ive been an avid AMD user but now im wondering if its time to go back to intel for the extra performance im looking for or should i stay a Loyal AMD user. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Phenom Processor's
Sir-Les-MP wrote:
Hi i currently run a 939 4400+x2 cpu on an n force 4 chipset i am a gamer and im looking at upgrading my system to get better FPS in some of the newer games out i.e. crisis COD4 etc.. i have already decided to get a nvidia 8800GTS 512 video card to replace my existing 7900gtx ive been wondering whether to use either an MAD 6400+ Black edition Dual core or an new Phenom 9600+ black edition or against my better judgement an Intel C2Duo or C2quad then new 45 mm core version's the primary use of my pc is for Gaming however i also download and encode DVD's i have read articles on the net about there being a flaw in some of the instructions within the current B2 revision Phenom's also looking at most of the review's ive read the C2Duo's are out performing both the dual core amd's as well as the quad core intels and amd's the last time i used an intel chip was when the pentium first cam on the market ever since then ive been an avid AMD user but now im wondering if its time to go back to intel for the extra performance im looking for or should i stay a Loyal AMD user. I think the first thing I'd want to understand, is how the particular games use a dual, versus a quad. I've read two performance reviews, where the CPU charts showed one core at 100% loading, and the other three cores at about 30% loading. If you think about it, it isn't going to be easy for a game to dice up the work, so that all cores get used equally. So gaming loads will be asymmetric, and perhaps not a good fit for a quad. On the other hand, some multimedia applications are nicely divisible. Photoshop might be an example, of something that can spread the load. I think Cinebench scales perfectly, and even eight cores can be occupied equally. (Depending on where you look for Photoshop benchmarks, it appears some sites are only getting their filters to run on two cores. There may be a patch, to get all four cores to work. Photoshop contains a mix of single threaded, and multi-threaded filters, and the person doing the benchmarking should watch the CPU performance charts, to make sure their copy of Photoshop is doing the right thing. For example, the results on Tomshardware, are suggestive of operation on two cores out of four. Notice how the E6850, a dual core, is near the top of the chart.) http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_20...75&cha rt=437 The other thing to look at is price. Consider what your budget is, and then decide what to do. If your upgrade budget is small, maybe it doesn't make a lot of sense to try to upgrade from your current configuration. The bug in the processor, was in the Translation Lookaside Buffer. So not an instruction as such. A BIOS workaround was issued to fix it. http://www.theinquirer.net/articles/...om-ghz-due-tlb So first I would carefully review whether a quad is the right answer or not. Make a list of your favorite games, and research how multi-threaded they are, and whether the loading pattern favors a quad or not. And for a dual, the decision there, may be influenced by whether you are an overclocker, and what the current overclocks are like on air, for the contenders. Some of the very latest Intel offerings, have widely varying overclock results. Paul |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Phenom Processor's
Paul wrote:
Sir-Les-MP wrote: Hi i currently run a 939 4400+x2 cpu on an n force 4 chipset i am a gamer and im looking at upgrading my system to get better FPS in some of the newer games out i.e. crisis COD4 etc.. i have already decided to get a nvidia 8800GTS 512 video card to replace my existing 7900gtx ive been wondering whether to use either an MAD 6400+ Black edition Dual core or an new Phenom 9600+ black edition or against my better judgement an Intel C2Duo or C2quad then new 45 mm core version's the primary use of my pc is for Gaming however i also download and encode DVD's i have read articles on the net about there being a flaw in some of the instructions within the current B2 revision Phenom's also looking at most of the review's ive read the C2Duo's are out performing both the dual core amd's as well as the quad core intels and amd's the last time i used an intel chip was when the pentium first cam on the market ever since then ive been an avid AMD user but now im wondering if its time to go back to intel for the extra performance im looking for or should i stay a Loyal AMD user. I think the first thing I'd want to understand, is how the particular games use a dual, versus a quad. I've read two performance reviews, where the CPU charts showed one core at 100% loading, and the other three cores at about 30% loading. If you think about it, it isn't going to be easy for a game to dice up the work, so that all cores get used equally. So gaming loads will be asymmetric, and perhaps not a good fit for a quad. I don't think that will be true in the future, the game designers are just trying to figure out how to do it correctly. If the load is 100%, 30%, 30%,30% on a quad, it's because the game programer multi-threaded it for two cpus. 100% and essentially 100%. I would think a good game designer could carve the program up into really small threads, like 64 threads, then let the multi-core processor split it up the work. It might run 100% on a single processor, 95% on each of a dual, 93% on each of a quad. I've noticed on my quad, the cpu switches from one to another for a multi-threaded program. It was the two thread pi computation, I wonder what it cost time wise to switch cpus? BTW, the NVIDIA card 8600 and 8800 can be programmed in c++, it's called CUDA. Game designers can actually start using the graphics card for a whole lot more than just the display. When is the first Octal processor coming out? What is the problem with the Phenom, and should he be worried? -- Craig Fink Courtesy E-Mail Welcome @ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Phenom Processor's
Craig Fink wrote:
I don't think that will be true in the future, the game designers are just trying to figure out how to do it correctly. If the load is 100%, 30%, 30%,30% on a quad, it's because the game programer multi-threaded it for two cpus. 100% and essentially 100%. I initially didn't make too much of the quad core thing. It was when I saw a picture of a CPU performance chart, while a game was running, that the unsuitability for quads and gaming came to mind. I read a glowing article, where Microsoft was crowing about how FSX SP1 launched threads on the fly, to make better use of multi-core processors. But the thing is, a game cannot be chopped into an arbitrary number of threads. You have rendering, AI, physics, as examples of tasks. Even at that level, they have to be synchronized (rendering can only be done, when physics says what blew up etc). Inside of those tasks, there are dependencies that prevent chopping any finer (like 16 physics threads). Or else, you could create an arbitrary number of threads, where most of the threads are stopped, waiting on dependencies to be delivered by another thread. And that would be pointless, because there are still a limited number of things actually in a running state at any one point in time. I would think a good game designer could carve the program up into really small threads, like 64 threads, then let the multi-core processor split it up the work. It might run 100% on a single processor, 95% on each of a dual, 93% on each of a quad. I think finer division is possible in things like Photoshop, or some of the other multimedia applications, where the image can be chopped into pieces. It makes more sense that tools like that could make better use of multi core. I've noticed on my quad, the cpu switches from one to another for a multi-threaded program. It was the two thread pi computation, I wonder what it cost time wise to switch cpus? BTW, the NVIDIA card 8600 and 8800 can be programmed in c++, it's called CUDA. Game designers can actually start using the graphics card for a whole lot more than just the display. When is the first Octal processor coming out? What is the problem with the Phenom, and should he be worried? As stated, the bug was in the TLB. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transla...okaside_buffer "A Translation Lookaside Buffer (TLB) is a CPU cache that is used by memory management hardware to improve the speed of virtual address translation." What the actual bug is, isn't stated in articles like the one on theinquirer.net. If the bug was fatal, shipments would stop. If the bug can be handled by a BIOS upgrade, with some performance loss caused by whatever part of the chip is disabled, then the parts can ship. In terms of hardware, I think the industry is in a "perfect state of chaos". (For example, trying to run a quad 45nm processor, and use your two SLI cards, and have a decent overclock using some Nvidia chipset.) It's nice, when there isn't a single thing you can buy, that doesn't have issues :-( Paul |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Phenom Processor's
i have already decided to get a nvidia 8800GTS 512 video card to replace
my existing 7900gtx Well, I'd do this first, and wait on the cpu change. Unless I'm mistaken, nothing new is due on the videocard market til the fall. BTW, COD4 runs fine on my 939 dcore opteron (oc'd to 2.9ghz) + 7900gtx at 1024x768. Crysis is another matter, though rms |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AMD Phenom L3 cache bug explained | Yousuf Khan | General | 10 | December 8th 07 01:05 AM |
Thinking about upgrading to AMD Phenom | James | Asus Motherboards | 10 | November 30th 07 02:30 AM |
AMD to allow per-core overclocking for Phenom? | YKhan | General | 6 | November 26th 07 03:40 AM |
AMD to allow per-core overclocking for Phenom? | YKhan | Intel | 6 | November 26th 07 03:40 AM |
Does a processor's performance degrade over time? | Mark Oueis | General | 4 | February 13th 05 03:16 PM |