Gaming slowdown with CPU swap

T

timmus

n00b
Joined
Sep 18, 2006
Messages
18
(moved from other board)

I upgraded from a $70 Celeron 3.2 GHz to a $90 P4 2.8 GHz chip. My frame rates in Flight Simulator 2004 have dropped significantly -- from 18 fps to 6 fps sitting on the runway at DFW in LD767. FS2004 also takes much longer to load..... 2 minutes 31 seconds just to get to the main menu... this should only take about 45 seconds.

Yes, I realize I went from 3.2 to 2.8, but I shouldn't be getting THAT much slower performance. I thought the P4 was supposed to be much better for gaming.

Should I return the P4 and reinstall the Celeron? Or does Windows need a driver for the new CPU to run right?

Specs are: PC Chips P21G, P4/511 775 socket 1MB L2 cache, Via bus, 1 GB RAM, PNY geForce 6600 256K, AMI Bios, Arctic Freeze fan/sink. I essentially just swapped out the drive, thus the software config is exactly the same. Peak CPU temperature is 51C, so I know that the BIOS is not slowing the CPU.

Old CPU: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116225
New CPU: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116235

Tim
 
Ghz don't matter. What matters is how good the processor is.

Your processor should be killing your celeron. It also should have it own format of windows...

Their are no drivers for cpus. Reformat, and you should see a big change.
 
Reformat the hard drive? I don't mind at all reinstalling Windows from scratch, but I want to make sure you're not suggesting a HD format.

Thx... Tim
 
Case in point: My core 2 duo in my sig has less mhz/ghz then yours, and would finish the race before your machine got started ;)

EDIT: Is their a problem with reformatting the HDD?
 
You shouldn't need to reinstall windows to see a change. Here's something to try: overclock that p4 to 3.2 and see what kind of difference you've got.

The cache difference may not make as big of a deal as the loss of 400mhz.
 
you can TRY reinstalling windows, but generally speaking its a good idea to reformat whenever you add a new component.

A few more questions: Does you motherboard support this chip? Is it showing up in the bios?

Why would you need to overclock a Pentium 4 that should already be killing a Celeron at core clock speed?
 
Newsboys2004 said:
Why would you need to overclock a Pentium 4 that should already be killing a Celeron at core clock speed?
Click to expand...

because a 400mhz frequency difference could be more valuable to flight sim 2004 (and the videocard) than the extra cache.

EDIT: OP, just to clarify, you're saying that this P4 is causing load times to be about five times longer? It's possible that your motherboard isn't set to the right FSB. Download and verify that the processor is running at the correct speed with a utility like CPU-Z.
 
The problem is though is that his fps went down. His fps should've went UP vastly. Overclocking would only delay fixing a problem that shouldn't be there to begin with.
 
Newsboys2004 said:
His fps should've went UP vastly
Click to expand...

So why exactly should his fps increase drastically when he's running a processor that is 400 mhz slower? Sure it has more cache, but that isn't going to make up such a big discrepency. It does however seem strange that the load times have increased so much.
 
I'd at least suggest going into bios and seeing if it's being picked up by your bios. If it says something like 'celeron' instead of penitum 4, then it's not and it's power isn't fully utilzed (this is the only real solution I can think of). You'll need to flash the bios then. Either you'll hafta, or get someone who knows how.

EDIT: The pentium 4 is a much more efficient chip, and level 2 cache is very important.

Either way it goes, even if it became LESS effiecient, a drop of 300% framrates is not right.
 
quadnad said:
because a 400mhz frequency difference could be more valuable to flight sim 2004 (and the videocard) than the extra cache.

EDIT: OP, just to clarify, you're saying that this P4 is causing load times to be about five times longer? It's possible that your motherboard isn't set to the right FSB. Download and verify that the processor is running at the correct speed with a utility like CPU-Z.
Click to expand...

Flight-sim is more CPU dependant, but 400 mhz should make like 2-3 FPS difference IMHO
 
OK... result of CPU-Z:

Intel Pentium 4 511 (that and all other specs look good)
Core speed 2793.0 MHz, Multiplier x21.0, Bus Speed 133.0 MHz,
Rated FSB 532.0 MHz, Cache L1 Data 16 Kbytes, L1 Trace 12 Kuops, Level 2 1024 KBytes

Motherboard, Memory, and Bios are correct too. AGP transfer rate 8x, max supported 8x.

Now before I do something like reinstall Windows, what is the point, if there are no CPU drivers for Windows?

Tim
 
Why is your bus speed at 133.0 mhz?

Is that normal for a Pentium 4?

Hell, I had my Athlon 2500+ running at 166.0 mhz bus speed :-\

EDIT: It's always a good idea to reinstall windows when you get a new device, but I wouldn't worry about it this time.
 
That looks to be in order...the FSB is quad-pumped to get the figure quoted on the box (533mhz).

I'm not surprised you noticed a drop in your performance as a result of switching the processors, but I would still suggest checking for a new bios for your motherboard. Increasing load times five fold isn't normal.

gta95 said:
Flight-sim is more CPU dependant, but 400 mhz should make like 2-3 FPS difference IMHO
Click to expand...
I agree...there would most likely be a performance drop, but it should only be a little bit.
 
Uh... I have no idea why it's at 133 MHz. I figured that's where the BIOS wanted it.

One detail I didn't tell you guys is that I changed the motherboard... but for the same exact make and model (P21G) to replace the one that broke. The serial number is only about 8000 off. I figured a simple change like this wouldn't be a big deal but maybe I'm assuming too much. The only detail I had to re-edit in the BIOS was the AGP aperture size (the usual half of RAM); everything else looked the same as the last system.

Tim
 
Yeah, with that low a bus speed... Anything could run slower...

Still, a drop of 300% fps? And increased load times?

Something isn't right
 
PC... Chips?

If you want your pentium 4 to run good your gonna hafta do ALOT of configuring with that SOB.

Might be wise to go back ot the Celery.. RUN NOW
 
timmus said:
Uh... I have no idea why it's at 133 MHz. I figured that's where the BIOS wanted it.

One detail I didn't tell you guys is that I changed the motherboard... but for the same exact make and model (P21G) to replace the one that broke. The serial number is only about 8000 off. I figured a simple change like this wouldn't be a big deal but maybe I'm assuming too much. The only detail I had to re-edit in the BIOS was the AGP aperture size (the usual half of RAM); everything else looked the same as the last system.

Tim
Click to expand...

The FSB is quad-pumped, which is why it's reported the way it is.

The new mobo could very well be the issue, even if they are the same model. Could be a new NB/SB or anything else on there that could be causing it. I'd do a repair install of windows and see (you should ALWAYS reinstall if you swap a motherboard, although I understand why you may have thought you got away with it).

NEWSBOYS: Do you mind not making fifteen posts in a row? Just edit the last one you made if you want to say something inconsequential.
 
Okay...

PCChips is not really a bad mobo, they are just very hard to configure. VERY HARD. Takes a pro.

Thing is, people who do, love them.

The problem may be the mobo.

Honestly though, you're looking for gaming performance right? You're not really gonna find that from an uopgraded cpu. You're gonna find that frm an upgraded gpu. Return the cpu and get something like this:

http://www.pricegrabber.com/p__Sapphire_Radeon_X800_GTO_Video_Card,__12725162/search=x800

or this:

http://www.pricegrabber.com/p__PNY_GeForce_7600_GS_Video_Card,__24239906/search=7600+agp
 
Have you tried running throttlewatch (or something like it) to make sure your processor isn't throttling at all when your gaming?

Also, your 533 fsb is fine for that chip, it's the same fsb that you were running with the celeron.
 
timmus said:
Reformat the hard drive? I don't mind at all reinstalling Windows from scratch, but I want to make sure you're not suggesting a HD format.

Thx... Tim
Click to expand...

Dont reformat, its a stupid answer to a good question...Its not necessary. Try resetting your bios, that might actually do some good...
 
OK, good news... problem was fixed tonight by reinstalling Windows. Program start time has dropped from 150 seconds to 13 to 32 seconds, and graphics are running faster than on the Celeron. Beats me... I notice that the mobo drivers CD came with chipset drivers V1.30 rather than V1.1 with my old board, so I gave that a try. I have no idea if that did it or the Windows rebuild was the solution... but it works and I'm just glad it's not in the BIOS or mobo.

Anyhow I am amazed by the level of help here and I tip my hat to you all. Hopefully this saga helps someone else.

Tim
 
just a thought, dose the celly have HT support? if so was it enabled with the install of windows was done?

If not and you stuck a P4 with HT in there then windows is certianly useing the wrong HAL, (uniprocessor over multiprocessor) this can cause a system to run like crap.



timmus said:
OK, good news... problem was fixed tonight by reinstalling Windows. Program start time has dropped from 150 seconds to 13 to 32 seconds, and graphics are running faster than on the Celeron. Beats me... I notice that the mobo drivers CD came with chipset drivers V1.30 rather than V1.1 with my old board, so I gave that a try. I have no idea if that did it or the Windows rebuild was the solution... but it works and I'm just glad it's not in the BIOS or mobo.

Anyhow I am amazed by the level of help here and I tip my hat to you all. Hopefully this saga helps someone else.

Tim
Click to expand...


EDIT just read this, im sure it was the wong HAL thats why the orignal install wasnt not running right.
 
I checked Newegg and it says the Celeron 351D that I was using has no hyperthreading support. So perhaps HT conflicts were not the cause.
 
Neither of the chips support hyperthreading, so the HALs should be the same, uniprocessor AHCI. I suspect it was more due to the motherboard switch, something needed to be reinstalled. Glad you have it working correctly.
 
1. At first you didnt tell us you had replaced the MB, even with the same one.
2. It was the chipset drivers, almost certainly. Should have tried them first, or got the latest ones from the MB website.
 
Even so, by replacing the mobo and cpu, you still have chipset drivers in your windows. A complimentary reinstall of windows should be done before you add new chipset drivers.

Hey man, have fun with your new chip! :)
 
All you had to do was replace your shipset drivers, and you would have been fine. A reinstall of windows should be the last thing you possibly do, after everything else has been tried.

New chipset drivers should have been far up the list from a windows reinstall. Dont listen to people who say otherwise, they are speaking from ignorance.
 
I(illa Bee said:
a standard 2.8Ghz p4 dossne support HT? Since when? its not a pentium D
Click to expand...

There are tons of P4's that don't support hyperthreading. This is a 533 fsb Pentium 4. Of the 533 fsb Pentium 4's, only 1 ever supported HT, which was the 3.06 Socket 478 Northwood.
 
Comte said:
All you had to do was replace your shipset drivers, and you would have been fine. A reinstall of windows should be the last thing you possibly do, after everything else has been tried.

New chipset drivers should have been far up the list from a windows reinstall. Dont listen to people who say otherwise, they are speaking from ignorance.
Click to expand...

The thing is, he used the exact same motherboard, there should be no reason to replace the chipset drivers as they are exactly the same. I've replaced many a motherboard with the exact same one and have never had to reinstall the chipset drivers.
 
but in this case, he ended up with a different revision. But far before you reinstall windows, chipset drivers would be a solid troubleshooting step to take.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top