Well, I was looking to upgrade my cpu/motherboard/ram soon. Considering that games these days are having a hard time scaling with quad-cores, will Nehalem really be any better than an e8600 overclocked to ~4.2ghz? Considering the high price of ddr-3 and the (probably) high cost of nehalem motherboards, I'm not sure it'll be worth the extra money.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
Nehalem for gaming?
- Thread starter myndcrime
- Start date
Dangman
Ninja Editor SuperMod
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2005
- Messages
- 46,056
For many of us out there, it won't be worth the extra money. But so far, the Nehalem CPUs have shown at least a 20% performance increase over current Intel C2D CPUs. So that 20% might be worth it to some.
Though we're talking $1000 for the mobo, CPU and possibly RAM alone. For that price, it better show more than 20% performance increase in my opinion.
Though we're talking $1000 for the mobo, CPU and possibly RAM alone. For that price, it better show more than 20% performance increase in my opinion.
Dangman
Ninja Editor SuperMod
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2005
- Messages
- 46,056
Well, then it's simple: Wait till you can no longer wait and then upgrade.
If you have to upgrade now, then upgrade.
If you can wait, then wait.
But then again do you want to be left behind with few upgrade paths if you stick with Socket 775?
Wolfdales/Yorkfields, let alone Conroes/Kentsfields, are not left behind in anything when it comes to games nor will they be any time soon. A good GPU and peripherals enhances the gaming experience far more than a reasonable CPU.
Flexion
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Messages
- 1,607
The Nehalem Architecture will probably bring greater performance benefits in pro-apps, that require alot of memory shifting, for rendering, and such. Server performance will probably benefit too.
For current games, I don't think the Nehalem is going to leave any of the current processors (especially when overclocked) in the dust.
Sure there are performance gains, if there aren't any, then Intel's got some problems. By the time you've got games that'll max out Nehalems we're probably going to have vastly more powerful GPUs than the 4870x2s and GTX280s. I don't know if LCD or display technologies can keep up. Plus there are also diminishing returns, as you want to eek out more performance you need to spend an exponentially higher amount of money on your rig.
Yeah 5 years from now the LGA775 chips may not play the latest and greatest, but hey I bet there are alot of folks (who can afford the electricity bill) that still have P4s and Athlon Thunderbirds lying around doing simple tasks.
For current games, I don't think the Nehalem is going to leave any of the current processors (especially when overclocked) in the dust.
Sure there are performance gains, if there aren't any, then Intel's got some problems. By the time you've got games that'll max out Nehalems we're probably going to have vastly more powerful GPUs than the 4870x2s and GTX280s. I don't know if LCD or display technologies can keep up. Plus there are also diminishing returns, as you want to eek out more performance you need to spend an exponentially higher amount of money on your rig.
Yeah 5 years from now the LGA775 chips may not play the latest and greatest, but hey I bet there are alot of folks (who can afford the electricity bill) that still have P4s and Athlon Thunderbirds lying around doing simple tasks.
smileypaul
Weaksauce
- Joined
- May 5, 2008
- Messages
- 68
Im definitely looking forward to it, seems it will be a positive upgrade path for FlightSimX , as that application is CPU bound, and not GPU bound.. maybe, just maybe.. Nehalem will allow FSX to run at a decent res, or on.. *shock* 2 monitors!! ..
smileypaul
Weaksauce
- Joined
- May 5, 2008
- Messages
- 68
I am just talking from an upgrade path standpoint. The reason I am upgrading to Nehalem is for the new socket and memory controller being on the CPU. I think the Nehalem will bring lots of real world performance boosts as well. I guess what I am saying is I want to feel like I REALLY upgraded. I don't think that would be the case even if I went out right now and bought a QX9770. The tech just feels old to me. The Nehalem seems fresh.
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2003
- Messages
- 1,962
In what games that are out right now, or are due to be out in the next year, is the CPU a huge bottleneck to the point where the game isn't enjoyably playable? And don't say Crysis, that game is the face of GPU Bottlenecks
You could attempt to say Supreme Commander, but current CPU's run that game beautifully, a Nehalem performing 20% faster than the fastest C2D/Q right now still won't make Supreme Commander all of the sudden a greater experience
When games start to become bottlenecked more by the CPU than GPU, I'll eat my hat
I'm talking gaming only btw
You could attempt to say Supreme Commander, but current CPU's run that game beautifully, a Nehalem performing 20% faster than the fastest C2D/Q right now still won't make Supreme Commander all of the sudden a greater experience
When games start to become bottlenecked more by the CPU than GPU, I'll eat my hat
I'm talking gaming only btw
Not saying you're wrong, but counting on upgrade paths and stability with first-gen hardware is a good way to get burned. I've been burned many times. I prefer mature platforms now. Just wait. The onboard memory controller is going to make upgrade paths much more precarious, just like it did with the A64.
Also, I've had a Q6600 @ 3.5 for about a year now. I've seen no difference in gaming performance between my Q6600s and the E6xxx CPUs I had before. So you may have an upgrade path with Nehalem, but is the platform even necessary in the first place? I just don't see it for 95% of the tasks out there and certainly not for games, which is what this thread is about.
It can't be that CPU limited if you're running a P4. From what I've read, a two-year old Conroe is more than enough for FSX and a Q6600 runs it extremely well.
If you currently have a good LGA775 CPU, that's a very good reason not to jump on Nehalem when it first launches. Not only will you not get much benefit in most tasks, since your existing CPU can already deal with them, but you'll be paying early adopter prices and buying first-revision hardware. Buying LGA775 right now may not be the best idea, if you can wait for Nehalem and don't mind paying more for the new platform when it launches, but I don't see that there's any need to hurry away from LGA775 purely because it's coming to the end of its life.
As always, the time to upgrade is when what you have isn't fast enough, not because there's something new out.
For most games, I don't see Nehalem as providing significant immediate benefits from a decent Core 2, purely because games are generally GPU-bound at decent resolutions. CPU reviews which do games tests at low resolutions are very misleading and artificial.
smileypaul
Weaksauce
- Joined
- May 5, 2008
- Messages
- 68
Actually, i don't run the simulator.. i couldn't if i tried. Generally a Q6600 OC'd to 3.6, with vista 64 and 4 gigs of ram only hits about 25-26 fps .. and this is with traffic and some clouds turned down. Try to run on 3 monitors (which would be ideal), and we're looking at 7-8 fps..
my P4 is not used for games.. just for downloading, surfing, and file serving..
With what GPU? I noticed you left that out.
Im sorry but if you take 2 modded AIs against 2 real people with fog of war OFF even, the game network timings become horrible as the game progresses... I will be upgrading to this platform if SC performance is enhanced...
Yeah, I mean I can play must of the modern games at least on very modest settings on my 5 year old processor based rig.
It is commonly known that FSX is extremely CPU bound. Any reasonably modern GPU (say Geforce 7800 or Radeon 2900 or better) is enough to push the bottleneck back on the CPU.
smileypaul
Weaksauce
- Joined
- May 5, 2008
- Messages
- 68
Choose your weapon.. It doesn't matter, as FSX is very cpu limited
Jakalwarrior
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2005
- Messages
- 3,189
Can you ever trust whatever motherboard you go with to be compatible with the next gen for very long?
Maybe on a single monitor, but FSX in triple monitor is running in the neighborhood of 3840x1024. How could that be CPU limited with even moderate effects applied?
smileypaul said he'd get 7-8 fps in triple monitor with a Q6600 @ 3.6. From what I've read, that just doesn't sound right. That's why I asked for the GPU. I bet one of the newer cards like the 4850/4870/260/280 and a Matrox TripleHead2Go could run FSX on three monitors fine and faster than 7-8 fps.
jonneymendoza
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2004
- Messages
- 6,415
its going to be more then 20% performance. the initial benchmarks where done using alpha chipset drivers
The speculation is closer to 50% in most apps and upwards of 100% faster in others. This is also at the same clock speeds as current Quad cores. In other words from what I have read we can expect roughly 50% more performance clock for clock. That is pretty damned amazing. I think the naysayers for the most part are the ones that jumped the gun and upgraded too early and they are frustrated that the baseline cheapest Nehalem is gonna spank even the highest end Quad core you can get now. That coupled with the triple channel DDR3 support on the CPU and I think you'll start to realize just how much faster the Nehalem will be compared to current extreme highend systems. I can't wait.
LOL.
Give me a break. Nehalem is clock for clock 45% max (uber best case) faster. That's with SMP that games do NOT utilize.
Games at max should be 25% faster, I would not be surprised it they were 10-15%.
For games the only noticable improvement is the onchip memory controller. Besides that, this is pretty much the same Core 2 architecture you're seeing.
I am an optimist. Sue me.LOL.
Give me a break. Nehalem is clock for clock 45% max (uber best case) faster. That's with SMP that games do NOT utilize.
Games at max should be 25% faster, I would not be surprised it they were 10-15%.
For games the only noticable improvement is the onchip memory controller. Besides that, this is pretty much the same Core 2 architecture you're seeing.
Now THAT's a certain arguement against benchmarks and architecture writeups!
FYI: No architecture has ever improved performance vs the last king by 100%. Not even 50%. In most cases, 30% is the max, and Core 2 Duo got a ~20% lead against the K8.
jonneymendoza
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2004
- Messages
- 6,415
LOL.
Give me a break. Nehalem is clock for clock 45% max (uber best case) faster. That's with SMP that games do NOT utilize.
Games at max should be 25% faster, I would not be surprised it they were 10-15%.
For games the only noticable improvement is the onchip memory controller. Besides that, this is pretty much the same Core 2 architecture you're seeing.
no its a completely new architecture. i agree it maybe just 20% faster for gaming ONLY BUT since when do people build pc's just to play games? i dont. i use mine for other things such has encoding etc which will be over 50% faster then teh fastes quad core system out there. thats whats appealing to me and others. stick with your core 2 while us nehalems will be encoding stuff twice has fast as urs
pc is not just about gaming, its other things. if you want a system juist for gaming, you should be reading teh console forums mate
greyt_Autumn
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 2, 2001
- Messages
- 572
I'm a sim geek. Nobody I know runs FSX as stock. We've got so many addons that it is barely recognizable as FSX.
My Q6600 generally hovers around 20-25 FPS. Unheard of to the FPS gamers, but it's what we get. Sure I could turn stuff down, but why? I love flying into Atlanta with 100% Delta and Airtran traffic.
My Q6600 generally hovers around 20-25 FPS. Unheard of to the FPS gamers, but it's what we get. Sure I could turn stuff down, but why?
I love flying into Atlanta with 100% Delta and Airtran traffic.bassballboy
Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2007
- Messages
- 526
I'd have to agree with the general concensus... I don't see Nahalem bringing enough performance considering they're talking clock for clock and we don't know if it can be OC'd.
I doubt an e8400 @4Ghz or Q6600 @3.2+ will be a bottle neck for the next 2+ years in 98% of games
I doubt an e8400 @4Ghz or Q6600 @3.2+ will be a bottle neck for the next 2+ years in 98% of games
jonneymendoza
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2004
- Messages
- 6,415
it wont but like i said, many of us our system more then just gaming and a nehalem is a nice upgrade to consider. prices of nehalem doesnt seem that high if the rumours are true that we will have an affordable nehalem cpu by october/novemember.
either way there is no harm in waiting for nehalem but if you can wait, build one now. i did a similar thing with my p4 3.2ghz northwood. the 775 sockets where out but i opt to buy a socket 478 instead and in some ways i do regret it has i couldnt realy upgrade my system to a faster cpu or even gpu has i had a agp system.
wayneangie
n00b
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2008
- Messages
- 1
So from what I'm reading here, for gaming, most agree it's not worth it to upgrade to Nehalem if your current system still cuts it--but for those of us who actually do need an upgrade, is there anyone who thinks its not worth the expense in the long run to move to Nehalem rather than building a fresh system on old tech that won't last as long?
Nehalem + DDR3 + mad expensive first-gen mobo with all of the bugs and fixins' + questionable overclocking = ? Your guess is as good as mine on the price-to-performance ratio.
How will it compare to a $170 overclocked Q6600, almost free DDR2, and cheap and rock-solid stable S775 mobos? Who knows? This combo certainly isn't a bad buy and will definitely still have value after Nehalem debuts.
Flexion
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Messages
- 1,607
Exactly. The real question is value. Right now deals are to be had. No matter what, Nehalem is good for everyone, because it drives down the prices of today's hardware.
The integrated memory controller is a logical progression, because CPU transistors (in the form of an X86 processor that is to be mass producted) kind of topped out at around 3 GHz (manufacturer spec.) that's why all of this stuff is happening with architecture changes; it's to eek out as much performance possible.
There are plenty of people who are willing to spend 3K-10K on a system, so I'm sure they'll want to try out the Nehalem architecture, but current LGA775 boards, CPUs and Tech are just great values, especially when overclocked, and will be powerful enough to run things for the next couple of years.
Current quads may be hindered by the FSB, because all 4 cores share the same bus, So drop those multis and pump up your NB voltages!
We really don't know if processors are going to run stock at 4-5GHz anytime soon even with the die shrinks to 32nm, we may only see energy savings. That's what we've been seeing since 60nm.
So if you've got the upgrade bug, get a great setup that'll last a couple of years for $500. Then you can get the latest and greatest when that feels slow!
Zorachus
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2006
- Messages
- 12,476
Amen...it does not matter if your running the highest end Intel eXtreme cpu for $1400
or a budget Core2Due for $199, and your benchmarks will be within 1-2% the same It is all about the VideoCard, but this mainly for high rez like 1920x1200 or 2560x1600rez. The cpu does make a difference if running cell phone size rez like 1280x10124, but no one actually uses that anymore.jonneymendoza
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2004
- Messages
- 6,415
Amen...it does not matter if your running the highest end Intel eXtreme cpu for $1400
then why is my p4 3.2ghz a major bottleneck on COD4 then?
Dangman
Ninja Editor SuperMod
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2005
- Messages
- 46,056
Because it's old. I think Zorachus meant that with newer CPUs aren't a bottleneck. However with older CPUs like yours, they are the bottlenecks.
Because COD4 is optimized for dual core CPUs. A PD 3.2GHz would probably run it OK, not great, but with acceptable framerates.