robberbaron
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2004
- Messages
- 6,101
nForce4 isnt any faster than nForce3, aside from the faster buses for harddrives and video cards (which dont translate into a noticeable performance increase)
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
sabrewolf732 said:Obviously in quake 4 which is a multi threaded game title the dual core p4 outperforms a single core a64. BUT obviously the dual core a64 will outperform the dual core p4. Use logic people![]()
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amd athlon 64 fx60_010906100124/10513.png
Huh what? Do I win? You guys have no idea what you're talking about.
So you 754 people's excuse that dual core does nothing for gaming are obviously wrong, especially with several multi threaded games coming out this year, not to mention that multi threaded vid card drivers make up for the clock speed loss of going dual core
cherrypik said:Well I might have to change my mind because the reason I'm buying another s754 mb is for the new 7800gt I purchased.
We're on water and our 3700+ CPUs are 13 micron. It's OK. Running a 9-micron Venice like yours at 1.85V would be suicide, but that's not what we have
aldamon said:I've had the NF4X since October and I have three minor complaints:
1.) It has the nForce4 / X-FI conflict. I had to RMA my X-Fi to get the firmware flashed.
2.) The temp sensors are broken.
3.) The location of the PCI-E slot is way too low. I literally could not buy a 7800 GTX because it's too long and my pump is in the way. My GT barely fits. I'm not sure why DFI chose to put the slot so low, but it sucks.
Good, cheap board otherwise and the 1.85V VCORE makes it perfect for water.
well.. technically no desktop board has official support for any mobile.. but that's another story.Ruiner said:Another quibble is the bios doesn't fully support my Newark.
(cf)Eclipse said:well.. technically no desktop board has official support for any mobile.. but that's another story.![]()
Ruiner said:
robberbaron said:nForce4 isnt any faster than nForce3, aside from the faster buses for harddrives and video cards (which dont translate into a noticeable performance increase)
nigerian_businessman said:At 1024x768? Who really gives a shit about 1024x768? Sorry, but I don't even give a shit about 1024x768 on my budget build, why would I care about it on a FX or Pentium D build?
Again, why do you care what other people do with their money? Go start a "Love your dual core thread" if you love it so much. Frankly, I don't think many people in here give a damn what you think.
Nigerian said:LOL @ Dual 2.8 P4 being better for games than FX. hahahahahahahahahahahaha
Pass that pipe over here, I want a hit of what you're smokin.
To sum it up AMD X2 processors win 7 categories out of 7. Gaming was a total drubbing by AMD - even the 3800X2 beat Intel's very best.Intel should be embarrassed with its showing in round 2. At every turn, AMD beat it to the punch. Even the Athlon 64 X2 3800+, the lowest end of AMD's dual-core CPUs, is better suited to 3D gaming than Intel's highest-end Extreme Edition 840 CPU, which lost by a full 10 percent.
That said, we should point out that games aren't really designed to take advantage of CPUs with multiple processing threads yet. We expect to see multithreaded games that will take advantage of dual-core CPUs sometime next year, at which point the 3D gaming results will need revisiting (there will likely be new chips available by then, as well). But for now, if you are a gamer in need of a dual-core rig, the only choice you need to make is deciding which Athlon X2 chip to pick up
BigMacAttack said:Saberwolf - I've been reading the posts about dual core/multithread capabilities you claim - especially the dual P4 outperforming the FX-57. I'm curious to see any documentation you may have because everything I've read indicates that the AMD's outgun Intel by a wide margin in games. Perhaps the FX-57 does get beaten but not the FX-60 or any of the current X2 cpu's. See link below for reference.
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6389077-1.html
The article says:
To sum it up AMD X2 processors win 7 categories out of 7. Gaming was a total drubbing by AMD - even the 3800X2 beat Intel's very best.
Is there some new review I have missed?
I never said the dual core a64's were slower than dual core p4's, however single core's get raped.
I see what you are saying. Multithreading has always been Intel's strong suit. I'll have to look for some more reviews.The slowest dual core p4 beats out the fastest single core amd in multithreaded optimized games
BigMacAttack said:I see what you are saying. Multithreading has always been Intel's strong suit. I'll have to look for some more reviews.
I just have stayed with my trusty old s754 systems because:
1. I'm cheap - or rather "thifty".![]()
2. I'm not a "power user". I use one system (3700+ CG Clawhammer, Asus K8V mobo, VisionTek X800Pro AGP 8x, Maxtor ATA133 250gb hdd, 1 gb (2x512) PC3200 DDR400 ram) at work for Acad R14 Civil work, HLDM/HL2DM gaming and some audio recording & editing. It oc's to 220x12 @ 1.65v
The other system at home is a s754 Venice 3000+ E6 (Asus K8N4-E Deluxe mobo, same ram and hdd and a Sapphire PCI-e X800Pro). Its more a gaming station for HLDM/HL2DM with the same capabilities as the work system for audio and cadd.
It oc's to 260x10 @1.55v
Both systems still have a lot of life left in them for my needs. I guess that's what it all boils down to - what do you need from your computer? It just makes me laugh that all of us spend so much money on cpu's, video cards (I want an ATI x1900XTX bad!) and everything else just so we can play $50 games and do a little video and audio editing. I gave up trying to be the big kid on the block a long time agoit just makes you broke.
sabrewolf732 said:the GUY inquired about 939.Of course it's 1024, that would show the largest differance due to CPU. Think please.
Genius, I proved you wrong now you say you don't care. Also, if you're running anything faster than a 7800gtx you're gonna see a bottleneck even at 1280x1024 which seems to be the res most people run/ monitors are capable of. You're spreading bullshit, I correct you and you respond with "I don't care". Way to go.
(cf)Eclipse said:can we cut out the intel vs amd and dual vs single debate? this is s754 thread, which means single channel, single core, amd. don't like it, get out. this clutter is hurting my brain.![]()
The LAN doesnt work. Dont wanna RMA cause I got my watercooling stuff installed.cherrypik said:Might pick up that DFI NF4X Infinity. I already have the 3700+. Is there anything that you don't like about the MB. It looks like a good layout.
nigerian_businessman said:Pentium D 2.8 FX 57 FX 57 i820 FX 57 X2 3800 i
Socket 939
robberbaron said:IF YOU LOVED SOCKET 754 YOU WOULDNT TALK ABOUT THOSE CHIPS.
How did those chips even come up in a thread like this?
Circuitbreaker8 said:This is the last day on my 754 rig!I'm gonna miss it! Truely an amazing setup, and i've never had ONE problem with it. But, I figured it was time for my to upgrade....
Going from...
AMD Athlon 64 3400 Claw CG 2.2Ghz/1Mb
Zalman 7000cu
DFI LanParty UT nF3 250Gb
Gigabyte X800-XT 256Mb VIVO
1Gb OCZ EL Platinum 3200 rev2
to...
AMD Opteron 170 ( 2.0ghz/2Mb cache )
Zalman 9500
DFI LanParty Ultra-D nF4
Sapphire X1900XTX 512Mb
2Gb OCZ Platinum 3200
![]()
ATIIsBetter said:I see you like DFI, Zalman, and OCZ![]()
Anyway, I just left socket 754 too. I finished my 939 rig appx 1 week ago. I liked my old 754 rig, but PCI-E, and a 128 bit mem controller is pretty nice...
BigMacAttack said:As for increased memory performance - 3%-5% isn't enough to make me want to jump from s754 to s939. My work system will run superpi 1M in 34 seconds and the home system (with looser timings) will run the same test in 37-39 seconds. Both systems play HLDM/HL2DM with no issues.
The only reason I'd leave s754 is for the dual core upgrade path. Opty, FX-60 ($$) or X2 is very, very sweet! Sounds like you've got a nice system there Circuitbteaker8.![]()
BigMacAttack said:Definitely. 7800GTX or X1900XTX is niiiiice. Expensive but oh so sweet!
Let me know how that goes. I'm not too happy with my K8N4-E Deluxe because vcore tops out at 1.55v. I know I could get more than 2.6 out of my Venice if I could get to 1.625v. I've seen 2.8 out of these s754 Venice cpu's and I'd love to get it myself!I'm changing the Asus K8V for a MSI Neo Platinum for some overclocking magic
If you decide to sell it let me know, I've been trying to find one but everyone is sold out.BigMacAttack said:Let me know how that goes. I'm not too happy with my K8N4-E Deluxe because vcore tops out at 1.55v.
The more the merriercan i join? ;D
Will do CrimandEvil. Email me at mcmopar@aol.com and we can talk it over. The board is only about 6 months old and I have flashed it to the latest bios version (1010). Its a good board but the bios limits it to 1.55v. The older bioses showed more voltage options but for some reason would only allow about .04v over stock. My Clawhammer 3400+ would go to 1.54v (CPU-z) and my Venice only to 1.44v. It was very odd. Now CPU-z shows me 1.52v on the Venice when set to 1.55v in the bios.If you decide to sell it let me know, I've been trying to find one but everyone is sold out.
BigMacAttack said:I flashed to v1007 bios for my Asus K8V but all it did was lock me at a vcore of 1.66v (as reported by CPU-z which is about .025v lower than the bios setting). I couldn't change the voltage for anything - even set it at 1.5v in bios and CPU-z still reported 1.66v - so I went back to v1005 and got my vcore adjustability back.
Here's a question for you guys: my 3700+ Clawhammer's cpu multiplier is locked in the bios. Is this a bios issue or was the cpu multiplier locked on these chips? I didn't try it on bios v1007 because of the voltage problems listed above.