Bottlenecking a 4870?

cannondale06 said:
perhaps you should read more carefully because that is a dual core at 2.0 each and easily much faster than his cpu. his performance would be much lower than that single core A64 that gets 18fps. you still fail to comprehend how weak a single core P4 is.
Click to expand...

You fail to comprehend that a dual core or a quad core CPU means nothing in a single threaded game. Like I said before, back up your claims with facts. Crysis is a multithreaded game so it will benefit from a dual core or a quad core CPU but there are still many games that are single threaded and a multi core CPU means nothing in those games.
 
alg7_munif said:
You fail to comprehend that a dual core or a quad core CPU means nothing in a single threaded game.
Click to expand...
coming up with new arguements now? are you actually saying Crysis is a single threaded game now? why dont you say "oops I messed up and didnt realize that was a dual core cpu"? since that 2.0 dual core Athlon 64 is getting better than the faster 2.4 clocked single core Athlon 64. :confused:

pretty much every game takes advantage of dual cores with several now utilizing quads somewhat. how do you want me to back that up? perhaps a link to every new game that compares cpus. then you will just argue that they arent comparing at 1920 even though some cpus that are much much faster than his P4 arent even delivering good performance at low res to begin with. you cant admit when youre wrong so whats the point?
 
cannondale06 said:
coming up with new arguements now? are you actually saying Crysis is a single threaded game now? why dont you say "oops I messed up and didnt realize that was a dual core cpu"? that 2.0 dual core Athlon 64 is getting better than the faster 2.4 clocked single core Athlon 64. :confused:

pretty much every game takes advantage of dual cores with several now utilizing quads somewhat. how do you want me to back that up? perhaps a link to every new game that compares cpus. then you will just argue that they arent comparing at 1920 even though some cpus that are much much faster than his P4 arent even delivering good performance at low res to begin with. you cant admit when youre wrong so whats the point?
Click to expand...

It is the same argument, I've said it before that Crysis is a multithreaded game, it benefits from a multi core CPU. There are many other single threaded games. :rolleyes:

Just read the Firingsquad article. Even the 8800GTX can gain a significant performance advantage over the X 1950XTX on a 2.0GHz AMD 64 at 1920x1200. The 3.0GHz P4 is not that far behind the 2.0GHz AMD 64 and it is actually faster in a single threaded game.
 
alg7_munif said:
It is the same argument, I've said it before that Crysis is a multithreaded game, it benefits from a multi core CPU. There are many other single threaded games. :rolleyes:

Just read the Firingsquad article. Even the 8800GTX can gain a significant performance on a 2.0GHz AMD 64. The 3.0GHz P4 is not that far behind the 2.0GHz AMD 64.
Click to expand...
again a dual core A64 2.0 is much faster than a P4 3.0 single core. Im going to just let you live in fantasy land as theres no point in showing links to cpu comparisons. just remember nobody would even think about putting a single core P4 in a modern game benchmark. the P4 was on the losing end of things 3 years ago and isnt capable of feeding a modern high card.
 
cannondale06 said:
again a dual core A64 2.0 is much faster than a P4 3.0 single core. Im going to just let you live in fantasy land as theres no point in showing links to cpu comparisons. just remember nobody would even think about putting a single core P4 in a modern benchmark. the P4 was on the losing end of things 3 years ago and isnt capable of feeding a high card.
Click to expand...

Back up your claim that a 2.0GHz AMD X2 is much faster than a 3.0GHz P4, especially in games @1920x1200.
 
alg7_munif said:
Back up your claim that a 2.0GHz AMD X2 is much faster than a 3.0GHz P4, especially in games @1920x1200.
Click to expand...
I will just let a few people read that for a good chuckle. the fact that you are even making that statement shows that you have no business giving advice.
 
 
alg7_munif said:
Not the latest games but at least it made me chuckle:

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTE0MjM2Mjc4MVdTMTdXT2VMdzRfNF8zX2wuZ2lm
http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTE0MjM2Mjc4MVdTMTdXT2VMdzRfOF8zX2wuZ2lm

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTE0MjM2Mjc4MVdTMTdXT2VMdzRfNV82X2wuZ2lm
http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTE0MjM2Mjc4MVdTMTdXT2VMdzRfOV8zX2wuZ2lm

http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTE0MjM2Mjc4MVdTMTdXT2VMdzRfNl8zX2wuZ2lm
http://www.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTE0MjM2Mjc4MVdTMTdXT2VMdzRfMTBfM19sLmdpZg==
Click to expand...

well touche...at least for the 4-5 year old games. lol ;)

that would be a different story in modern games of course. to be honest neither cpu but especially the single core P4 can feed the kind of video card it takes to run modern games at 1920.
 
cannondale06 said:
well touche...at least for the old games. lol ;)

that would be a different story in modern games of course. to be honest neither cpu but especially the single core P4 can feed the kind of video card it takes to run modern games at 1920.
Click to expand...

At least we know that the 2.0GHz X2 can feed the 8800GTX @1920x1200 just fine in these games:
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/geforce_8800_gtx_gts_amd_cpu_scaling/page5.asp

We also know that a single core 2.8GHz P4 is comparable to the 2.0GHz X2 in the older games ;)
 
You made a lot of claims without backing them up. I have backed up my claims with facts, now why don't you back up your latest claim.
 
alg7_munif said:
You made a lot of claims without backing them up. I have backed up my claims with facts, now why don't you back up your latest claim.
Click to expand...
the modern games claim? um nobody is foolish enough to waste resources testing a P4 in modern games.
 
cannondale06 said:
the modern games claim? um nobody is foolish enough to waste resources testing a P4 in modern games.
Click to expand...

At least in the article above, the 2.0GHz X2 did well feeding the 8800GTX @1920x1200 in HL2, FEAR, Oblivion and CoH. Those games are quite modern imo.

We also know that a single core 2.8GHz P4 is comparable to the 2.0GHz X2 in the older games
 
alg7_munif said:
At least in the article above, the 2.0GHz X2 did well feeding the 8800GTX @1920x1200 in HL2, FEAR, Oblivion and CoH. Those games are quite modern imo.

We also know that a single core 2.8GHz P4 is comparable to the 2.0GHz X2 in the older games
Click to expand...
in older games yes but in most newer games the P4 will make games completely unplayable. these all use a 4000 A64 which is much faster than a 3.0 P4 so a P4 would be even more pathetic. after looking at these i hope you will realize that asking for 1920 benchmarks is completely silly. like I said earlier 1920 doesnt matter if the game isnt even playable on low settings to begin with. the op needs BOTH a modern cpu and better gpu for modern games at 1920.



you already saw the Crysis benchmarks from earlier that show the faster 4000 A64 not delivering playable framerates. http://www.gamespot.com/features/6182806/p-6.html

here shows the 4000 A64 which is much faster than the 3.0 P4 not able to even get playable framerates. http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,663817/Reviews/Far_Cry_2-_GPU_and_CPU_benchmarks/?page=2

again the much stronger Athlon 64 cant get playable framerates. http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...ecial_and_general_info_about_the_game/?page=2

once again the faster 4000 A64 cant deliver playable framerates http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...U_benchmark_review_with_13_processors/?page=2
 
cannondale06 said:
in older games yes but in most newer games the P4 will make games completely unplayable. these all use a 4000 A64 which is much faster than a 3.0 P4 so a P4 would be even more pathetic. after looking at these i hope you will realize that asking for 1920 benchmarks is completely silly. like I said earlier 1920 doesnt matter if the game isnt even playable on low settings to begin with. the op needs BOTH a modern cpu and better gpu for modern games at 1920.



you already saw the Crysis benchmarks from earlier that show the faster 4000 A64 not delivering playable framerates. http://www.gamespot.com/features/6182806/p-6.html

here shows the 4000 A64 which is much faster than the 3.0 P4 not able to even get playable framerates. http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,663817/Reviews/Far_Cry_2-_GPU_and_CPU_benchmarks/?page=2

again the much stronger Athlon 64 cant get playable framerates. http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...ecial_and_general_info_about_the_game/?page=2

once again the faster 4000 A64 cant deliver playable framerates http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...U_benchmark_review_with_13_processors/?page=2
Click to expand...

Nice, using Crysis, Crysis Warhead, Far Cry2 and GTA 4 as an example. :rolleyes: In those games, a quad core processor would be better than a dual core CPU too. Like I said before, for multi threaded games, the P4 will be slow but there are still many single threaded games around.

See how the 3.16GHz C2D can be a bottleneck in Far Cry 2 compared to the C2Q?:
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTU4MCwyLCxoZW50aGlzdWFzdA==

See how GTA 4 uses the quad core here?:
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTU5Niw5LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

See how the Cry Engine 2 which is behind Crysis and Crysis Warhead benefits from a fast quad core?:
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTE5NTQzNTAzNzN1Q25HQmZCSWxfOF83X2wuZ2lm

I guess that you are going to link to a SupCom benchmark next :rolleyes:
 
I would like to share my experience. I used to own a HD 3850 with a Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3.4GHz, and when I moved to a Pentium M 750 at 2.70GHz, the performance difference in games was astonishing!! That little chip without hyper threading was much faster than the fastest Pentium 4 S478 in existence. It even was able to match an Athlon X2 4200+ in multi threaded benchmarks and outperformed the Athlon X2 4800+ in single threaded scenarios.

It would be a waste of money putting a fast card on a Pentium 4 CPU which can bottleneck a X1950GT card. Pentium 4 architecture has a very low IPC which may only shine in multi threaded scenarios thanks to hyperthreading which can increase the performance up to 30% and is still much slower than any dual core AMD. Single thread performance on the Pentium 4 is slower than the AMD equivalent and it's gaming performance is horrible compared to what we have today. Just save some money and do a system overhaul. When I moved to this Quad Core system, at 3.0GHz stock, its single threaded performance was barely faster than the Pentium M CPU, specially on WinRaR, a very powerful little chip.
 
evolucion8 said:
I would like to share my experience. I used to own a HD 3850 with a Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3.4GHz, and when I moved to a Pentium M 750 at 2.70GHz, the performance difference in games was astonishing!! That little chip without hyper threading was much faster than the fastest Pentium 4 S478 in existence. It even was able to match an Athlon X2 4200+ in multi threaded benchmarks and outperformed the Athlon X2 4800+ in single threaded scenarios.

It would be a waste of money putting a fast card on a Pentium 4 CPU which can bottleneck a X1950GT card. Pentium 4 architecture has a very low IPC which may only shine in multi threaded scenarios thanks to hyperthreading which can increase the performance up to 30% and is still much slower than any dual core AMD. Single thread performance on the Pentium 4 is slower than the AMD equivalent and it's gaming performance is horrible compared to what we have today. Just save some money and do a system overhaul. When I moved to this Quad Core system, at 3.0GHz stock, its single threaded performance was barely faster than the Pentium M CPU, specially on WinRaR, a very powerful little chip.
Click to expand...

1) HD 3850 is much faster than the 7950GT
2) 2.7GHz Pentium M is like a single core 2.7Ghz Core 2, which is a faster than a 3.0GHz single core Athlon 64.
3) Were you using 1920x1200 at the time?
 
alg7_munif said:
1) HD 3850 is much faster than the 7950GT
2) 2.7GHz Pentium M is like a single core 2.7Ghz Core 2, which is a faster than a 3.0GHz single core Athlon 64.
3) Were you using 1920x1200 at the time?
Click to expand...

1) Yes, it does
2) yes, except that the Pentium M FPU is weaker than the Core 2 FPU, but that doesn't matter in games
3) No, at that resolution I would be more GPU bound
 
alg7_munif said:
Nice, using Crysis, Crysis Warhead, Far Cry2 and GTA 4 as an example. :rolleyes: In those games, a quad core processor would be better than a dual core CPU too. Like I said before, for multi threaded games, the P4 will be slow but there are still many single threaded games around.

See how the 3.16GHz C2D can be a bottleneck in Far Cry 2 compared to the C2Q?:
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTU4MCwyLCxoZW50aGlzdWFzdA==

See how GTA 4 uses the quad core here?:
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTU5Niw5LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

See how the Cry Engine 2 which is behind Crysis and Crysis Warhead benefits from a fast quad core?:
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/image.html?image=MTE5NTQzNTAzNzN1Q25HQmZCSWxfOF83X2wuZ2lm

I guess that you are going to link to a SupCom benchmark next :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
because I said MODERN GAMES right from the beginning. the newer games that would require a 4870 to play would also require a decent cpu. nobody else would be silly enough to suggest using a high end card from the end of 2008 with slow cpu from 2004. let me see if I can roll my eyes too...:rolleyes:

Im going to try and stop by my fathers today with my gtx260 to run some benchmarks in his 3.2 P4 pc. Im going to show you just how silly it is for MODERN games.
 
cannondale06 said:
because I said MODERN GAMES right from the beginning. the newer games that would require a 4870 to play would also require a decent cpu. nobody else would be silly enough to suggest using a high end card from the end of 2008 with slow cpu from 2004. let me see if I can roll my eyes too...:rolleyes:

Im going to try and stop by my fathers today with my gtx260 to run some benchmarks in his 3.2 P4 pc. Im going to show you just how silly it is for MODERN games.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of games that can benefit from a faster GPU than the 7950GT @1920x1200 without needing a new CPU. A faster GPU would not necessarily mean the HD 4870 but since he said that he will be upgrading the system soon, why not just get a faster GPU now so that he can have a nice performance increase in games @1920x1200. If he just buys a new mobo, a new RAM and a new CPU now, his performance won't change at all in games because the 7950GT is a slow card for 1920x1200.

When you stop by your father, make sure that you run the games at a high resolution, at least 1600x1200. Compare the performance with a 7950GT or anything else comparable. i dare you to put up numbers here. Try other games as well, not just Crysis, FarCry 2, and GTA4.
 
alg7_munif said:
There are plenty of games that can benefit from a faster GPU than the 7950GT @1920x1200 without needing a new CPU. A faster GPU would not necessarily mean the HD 4870 but since he said that he will be upgrading the system soon, why not just get a faster GPU now so that he can have a nice performance increase in games @1920x1200. If he just buys a new mobo, a new RAM and a new CPU now, his performance won't change at all in games because the 7950GT is a slow card for 1920x1200.
Click to expand...
and it wont change enough to matter if he keeps that P4 and upgrades to a 4870. he needs to upgrade BOTH.

I will run benchies at 1680x1050 and I will use an 8600gt and then the gtx260. the 8600gt is about even or slightly slower in modern games than the 7950gt. although older games the 7950gt would be better it will still illustrate how bad the P4 sucks.

tell me what games you want me to test.
 
cannondale06 said:
and it wont change enough to matter if he keeps that P4 and upgrades to a 4870. he needs to upgrade BOTH.

I will run benchies at 1680x1050 and I will use an 8600gt and then the gtx260. the 8600gt is about even or slightly slower in modern games. although older games the 7950gt would be better it will still illustrate how bad the P4 sucks.
Click to expand...
Why run the benchies at such a low resolution? I would say that the 8600GT is comparable to the 7950GT so why don't you try running games at a higher resolution. The 7950GT would take a nose dive when going from 1680x1050 to 1920x1200.

I agree that he needs to upgrade both but if you read the Firingsquad article, you can see that @1920x1200, the 8800GTX has twice as much fps as the X 1950 XTX even on a slow 2.0GHz AMD 64. We know that 2.0GHz AMD 64 is comparable to the 2.8GHz P4.
 
alg7_munif said:
Why run the benchies at such a low resolution? I would say that the 8600GT is comparable to the 7950GT so why don't you try running games at a higher resolution. The 7950GT would take a nose dive when going from 1680x1050 to 1920x1200.

I agree that he needs to upgrade both but if you read the Firingsquad article, you can see that @1920x1200, the 8800GTX has twice as much fps as the X 1950 XTX even on a slow 2.0GHz AMD 64. We know that 2.0GHz AMD 64 is comparable to the 2.8GHz P4.
Click to expand...
while I do have 24inch Acer in the house right now I dont feel like hauling all this crap over there. if the games arent playable at 1680 then my point will be proven anyway.

of those 5 games I only have STALKER. I think DIRT has a demo though and I can use Fallout 3 too.
 
If you can test the games @1920x1200, I would suggest you to try Oblivion, Stalker, the Witcher, Rainbow six Vegas and maybe DiRT.

Fallout 3 would be nice since it uses the same engine as Oblivion.
 
When I moved from the X1950XT to the HD 3850 with my P4EE @ 3.4GHz, my benchmarks results were identical and didn''t got any improvement in FPS besides more FSAA levels and eye candy. Does it make a difference playing a game at 1280x1024 with low details and NO AA at 20FPS or 1600x1200 with max details and 4xFSAA at 20FPS? CPU power is important guys, P4 is just too old to benefit from a newer card, it already bottlenecks a 7950GT, so I don't know how it cannot bottleneck a much faster card like the HD 4870. The "Netbust" architecture was never suited for gaming, just for professional workstation applications at that time.
 
 
evolucion8 said:
Does it make a difference playing a game at 1280x1024 with low details and NO AA at 20FPS or 1600x1200 with max details and 4xFSAA at 20FPS?
Click to expand...

If it is 20fps then there will be no difference but if you can reach at least 40fps, there is a huge difference between 1280x1024 with low details without AA and 1920x1200 with max details with 4xFSAA.
 
Lol i went to my old dell that has a p4 dual core with ht and put in my old 8600gt and just laughed as how every game would not even get more than 30 frames on decent settings @ 1680x1050. Should of put in my 9800gtx but damm 300w psu.
 
alg7_munif said:
If you can test the games @1920x1200, I would suggest you to try Oblivion, Stalker, the Witcher, Rainbow six Vegas and maybe DiRT.

Fallout 3 would be nice since it uses the same engine as Oblivion.
Click to expand...
sorry its not going to happen because he has a 305 watt power supply so the theres no way I can test the gtx260 in there. what i can do is lower my cpu to 2.0 and turn off one core. a P4 at 3.0 would be about equal to 1.8 to 2.0 core 2 in single threaded stuff.
 
cannondale06 said:
sorry its not going to happen because he has a 305 watt power supply so the theres no way I can test the gtx260 in there. what i can do is lower my cpu to 2.0 and turn off one core. a P4 at 3.0 would be about equal to 1.8 to 2.0 core 2 in single threaded stuff.
Click to expand...

a P4 at 3.0 would be about equal to 1.8 to 2.0 Athlon 64 in single threaded stuff (Fixed);)

My Pentium M @ 2.70GHz were about equal against a Core 2 1.86GHz to 2.13GHz in multi threading, and a Pentium M has a much higher IPC than a Pentium 4, don't know how a 3.0GHz Pentium 4 can pull that off.
 
evolucion8 said:
a P4 at 3.0 would be about equal to 1.5 to 1.6 Athlon X2 in single threaded stuff (Fixed);)

My Pentium M @ 2.70GHz were about equal against a Core 2 1.86GHz to 2.13GHz in multi threading, and a Pentium M has a much higher IPC than a Pentium 4, don't know how a 3.0GHz Pentium 4 can pull that off.
Click to expand...
well still at 1.8 if the Core 2 with one core disabled has trouble running it then we know that the 3.0 P4 would be even worse.
 
E8500 @3.16 stock vs E8500 @1.86 single core(slightly stronger than 3.0 P4)

Call of Juarez 1680x1050 all high no AA
E8500 @3.16.... 61 fps
E8500 @1.86.... 26 fps

Fallout 3 1680x1050 max settings 4x AA
E8500 @3.16.... 59 fps
E8500 @1.86.... 27 fps

Crysis 1680x1050 DX10 very high no AA
E8500 @3.16.... 24.43 fps
E8500 @1.86.... 4.47 fps

Far Cry 2 1680x1050 ultra settings 2x AA
E8500 @3.16.... 52.22 fps
E8500 @1.86.... 10.86 fps

so you want even crack 30fps even in games that arent cpu intensive. newer more cpu intensive games are a complete slideshow.
 
If the 8800GTX was being bottlenecked by single cores as shown in past articles, how's a faster card not going to be bottlenecked?
 
bfellow said:
If the 8800GTX was being bottlenecked by single cores as shown in past articles, how's a faster card not going to be bottlenecked?
Click to expand...
yep and the numbers I got are worse than running an 8600gt in my system. in most situations a gtx260 with an outdated single core cpu will lose to a wimpy 8600gt and core 2 duo in modern games especially the newest ones. the op will likely gain zero improvement by going with a 4870 and keeping his single core P4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top