6600GT FPS

[Insomniak]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: Emultra
To Jeff and Insomniak:

Then why do I have a similar problem with an A64 and 6600GT?

Good question... I don't have a problem with my 2.6 GHz A64 and 6800GT... and I run 4XAA and 8XAF. What do you get in the Stress Test?

Stress Test at 10x7 = ~150 FPS

Paintball: I think your CPU is holding you back. A 2.6 Intel is a pretty good bottleneck by today's standards. I think you're making the right move by popping over to an A64 setup.

Originally posted by: Emultra
120-140 I think. But when I look at that test, it's like a different game to CS:S in terms of smoothness.

That sounds about right - I get about 10 more due to my card being OC'd. Hmm...Very odd...not sure what your problem is.

 

[Emultra]

Texture resolution: medium
Model detail: medium
Shader detail: low
Resolution: 1024x768
Water detail: reflect world
No AA/AF
Shadow detail: high (can set to medium)
Trilinear rendering

 

[Jeff7181]

Maybe you have something running in the background using CPU power every so often?

 

[Paintballfreak66]

Originally posted by: Emultra

Originally posted by: Paintballfreak66

yes there is A64 3500 clawhammer

OK. I'm an "inexperienced player" when it comes to hardware.

By the way, I found something. Is your card PCI Express? If so, check this out: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/2004-27gpu2_14.html

You'll see that the AGP version of the 6600GT has overall much better performance in CS:S than the PCIe version. At the bottom it says it occured when they updated the game to the [then] latest version. That should be it, both for you and for me.
At 10x7 without AA/AF, the AGP version has about twice the amount of FPS.
Something's not right...granted, the AGP one *may* have 256MB's of VRAM, but that should in no way account for such differences.

Hopefully it will be fixed; we should lobby for it.

Sorry didn't see your post. Mine is actually agp but only has 128MbDDR3 ram so I don't know if it fits the one you are talking about.

 

[Emultra]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Maybe you have something running in the background using CPU power every so often?

But HL2 runs better with full detail except water, and there's more shaders then even. Plus I can have some AA/AF on.

 

[Paintballfreak66]

Originally posted by: Insomniak




Stress Test at 10x7 = ~150 FPS

Paintball: I think your CPU is holding you back. A 2.6 Intel is a pretty good bottleneck by today's standards. I think you're making the right move by popping over to an A64 setup.

My 3DM05 is 2934, so you think it would kick quite a bit more with a faster cpu. That's what I had reasoned myself. I have kinda wondered how exactly does say an A64 3500 outperform some intel chips with faster clock speeds? I mean I know the A64 is 64 bit which is double the p4 but I guess what I don't understand is how that ties into the clock speed. Wouldn't you want both the 64bit chip AND faster clock speeds? I guess that's what you pay the big bucks for (FX series). Lol, whatever, if anyone cares to bother with a noob(me) I was just curious.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Emultra

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Maybe you have something running in the background using CPU power every so often?

But HL2 runs better with full detail except water, and there's more shaders then even. Plus I can have some AA/AF on.

Could it be a crappy NIC using a lot of CPU time for the data transfers?

 

[bcoupland]

Well, i'm not a CS major but i'll do my best to explain this: the 64 bit capability does not mean that an A64 can process double the information versus a 32 bit proc, it means that it has more registers and for some types of code that take advantage of the extra registers, you could see a performance gain. However, none of the software written for windows (other than the XP-64 stuff) is written in 64 bit. The reason why an A64 @ 2.0 Ghz is around the same speed or faster than a P4 @ 3.2 is because the A64 has a higher IPC, or instructions per clock. For every clock cycle, the A64, on average, will turn out more results. Basically, an A64 is more efficient. Also, an A64 has an 11-stage pipeline (pretty sure) versus a Prescott P4's 31-stage pipeline. The shorter pipeline in the A64 means that it is less effected by a mis-prediction by the cache. However this architecture is not as condusive to high clock speeds as the P4 is. Generally, the P4's high clockspeed is beneficial in content creation/encoding, where the instructions are simple and easily predicted, whereas an A64 is more suited to games. (I'm not sure of the technical reason as to why the A64 does well in gaming with regards to game code, maybe someone from highly technical can help me out)
I hope this helps you to further understand the A64 vs. P4 and why both architectures can be beneficial.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: bcoupland
Well, i'm not a CS major but i'll do my best to explain this: the 64 bit capability does not mean that an A64 can process double the information versus a 32 bit proc, it means that it has more registers and for some types of code that take advantage of the extra registers, you could see a performance gain. However, none of the software written for windows (other than the XP-64 stuff) is written in 64 bit. The reason why an A64 @ 2.0 Ghz is around the same speed or faster than a P4 @ 3.2 is because the A64 has a higher IPC, or instructions per clock. For every clock cycle, the A64, on average, will turn out more results. Basically, an A64 is more efficient. Also, an A64 has an 11-stage pipeline (pretty sure) versus a Prescott P4's 31-stage pipeline. The shorter pipeline in the A64 means that it is less effected by a mis-prediction by the cache. However this architecture is not as condusive to high clock speeds as the P4 is. Generally, the P4's high clockspeed is beneficial in content creation/encoding, where the instructions are simple and easily predicted, whereas an A64 is more suited to games. (I'm not sure of the technical reason as to why the A64 does well in gaming with regards to game code, maybe someone from highly technical can help me out)
I hope this helps you to further understand the A64 vs. P4 and why both architectures can be beneficial.

Uhhhhh... did you reply to the wrong thread?

 

[Emultra]

What's NIC?

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Emultra
What's NIC?

Network Interface Card... or are you (god forbid) using dialup?

 

[Emultra]

2Mbit down, 256kbit up ADSL. I'm using the whatever's-in-the-A8N SLI Deluxe Mobo to connect my network cable.

EDIT: damn asphalt-makin' machine outside disables my function to think!

 

[Paintballfreak66]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Uhhhhh... did you reply to the wrong thread?

Uhhhhh... he replied to me since I started the thread ya know..

 

[Emultra]

Bump.

 

[Munky]

2900 in 3dmark05 is a little low for a 6600gt, but it's not that big of a deal. My bro's 6600gt gets 2700, and hes using a A64 3200. However, 3dmark05 is mostly limited by your video card, whereas a normal game like CS:S would also be dependent on your cpu. I'm going to suggest the standard procedure for testing this kind of problem: turn down the game resolution all the way, and turn doen the settings for textures, shaders, etc. The run the game again, and see if you get the slowdowns. If you do, then it's not the video card, and your cpu is bottlenecking. If the slowdowns go away, then it's the video card, and you either have to reinstall different drivers, or something else is broken in the video card.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Paintballfreak66

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Uhhhhh... did you reply to the wrong thread?

Uhhhhh... he replied to me since I started the thread ya know..

Ahh... I didn't see your last question. I was like what the hell is he talking about this for? lol

 

[Paintballfreak66]

Originally posted by: munky
2900 in 3dmark05 is a little low for a 6600gt, but it's not that big of a deal. My bro's 6600gt gets 2700, and hes using a A64 3200. However, 3dmark05 is mostly limited by your video card, whereas a normal game like CS:S would also be dependent on your cpu. I'm going to suggest the standard procedure for testing this kind of problem: turn down the game resolution all the way, and turn doen the settings for textures, shaders, etc. The run the game again, and see if you get the slowdowns. If you do, then it's not the video card, and your cpu is bottlenecking. If the slowdowns go away, then it's the video card, and you either have to reinstall different drivers, or something else is broken in the video card.

Ok I tried that and it ran the same. I'll be buying the new chip and mobo as soon as I can afford it. Thanks for the help.

 

[dstigue]

I am having a very similar problem x800xt 256mb P4 3.0c w/HT 1.5Gb ram all on a P4S800D-E. Counter Strike Source gets great frame rates initially then they drop and drop until they get about 15-35 range and they stay there. It is not my graphic settings because I turn everything down and still the same outcome. When I say everything down I mean 640x480 no AA no AF textures all low. No difference my frames stay in that area. I have read reports all over the internet of this problem. I have yet to find a solution. This spans all types of cards and other games aren't affected. This leads me to believe it is a CS:S problem. I am not sure how to fix it. People in other forums said reinstalling the game didn't help. I tried Omega Drivers with a clean uninstall of my ATI drivers. I tried adding extra ram from my 512 I originally had. I checked my powersupply it is fine. I score 5064 on 3dmark so that is in normal range. Other games are fine. Any help on this topic would be greatly appreciated. The strange part is some people just don't have this problem. They can have the same exact setup and still nothing.

 

[Emultra]

It's the chassi midgets, dude.

 

[dstigue]

I read in a few places that this might be related to sound. I have both the drivers for my onboard sound and my Audigy 2 installed. I am going to try tonight to disable my onboard sound from bios. If that doesn't work I am going to disable all sound and see where that goes. It makes sense though seeing as sometimes I have these frame dips when alot of action is going on even if it is not in my frame of view. And I think to myself how do I know there's lots of action? Hmm. I can hear it! I hope this works because I refuse to upgrade! Not when people with geforce 3s on an athlon xp 2500+ are getting better frames.

http://forums.cyborg2.com/showthread.ph...cdac989a78ae2dbe5&t=27641&page=2&pp=40

 

[Emultra]

I believe CS:S is poorly balanced. HL2 uses the exact same engine and does much better.

 

[dstigue]

I give up it wasn't the sound card or at least I don't think. I uninstalled them both and no difference. I am now completely uninstalling and reinstalling the game. If this doesn't work I don't know what will. It could also be hyperthreading? or maybe the network driver? I am leaning towards network driver seeing as it only happens online. I tried making my own server complete with bots locally and I was getting 170+ frames constant. It was on scoutznknivez which is a pretty simplistic map but still I never get that online. I am currently running onboard.