All of you who claim "REAL WORLD performance"

Feb 19, 2001
20,155
23
81
Remember when 7800GTXes came out? How did Anand show that 7800GT(X)es were pwnage? They had to run at 20:15 resolution with AA and AF for the 7800GTXes to flex their wings, especially with SLI.

Why?

Because otherwise you're CPU limited.

So does this mean 7800s weren't that great because most of us didn't run at 20:15 resolution? NO

So shut up AMD fanboys, and recognize Conroe is 20% faster, and even if you don't have dual GPUs today, the next generation of GPUs may double performance once again or at least increase performance by a significant margin that you are once agian CPU limited.
 

OBCT

Senior member
Jul 10, 2006
236
0
0
And you posted this....for the fun of it? I don't know, there isn't really much of an intent shown except to blow off some steam.
 

unfalliblekrutch

Golden Member
May 2, 2005
1,418
0
0
Originally posted by: gersson
Originally posted by: unfalliblekrutch
Originally posted by: dexvx
http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html

Last update was April 2006, so its still fairly recent.

95% of people (of 710,000 responses) were running 1280x1024 or below.

Is that supposed to be evidence for or against the OP's position?

@ that res games are CPU limited, so FOR

If someone plays at that res, they either don't have great graphics cards, or their monitor limits them to it. Either way, someone with a nice conroe isn't going to be playing it at 1280x1024. But the OP's point stands: if you have a conroe, chances are you're someone who wants the most out of your system. And that means have the fastest CPU, even if many of the faster CPUs all offer the same FPS on current games at your res.
 

Allio

Golden Member
Jul 9, 2002
1,904
28
91
Originally posted by: gersson
@ that res games are CPU limited, so FOR

NVIDIA GeForce 7800 Series 28,656
NVIDIA GeForce 7900 Series 783
ATI Radeon X1800 2,081
ATI Radeon X1900 1,698

Out of 700,000 respondents. We are talking "real world" here, right? I bet the other 670,000 people are pretty severely CPU limited with their 6600s and 9800 pros :roll:

I'm not sure what anyone's point is here. Intel has released a faster chip that is significantly faster at everything than the AMD counterpart. Very, very few people are going to notice a difference in gaming performance because very, very few people have the kind of video subsystem to stress it. Of course, very, very few people are actually going to buy one of these high-end core processors anyway. Those who do will probably get it with an X1300 Pro in their $2499 Dell.

If you're building a new high-end gaming system you'd obviously go with the Core because it's faster and better value for money, but I think people upgrading from X2s would be pretty damn stupid to spend $800 on a platform change when you could get a bigger gaming boost from a couple of X1900 XTs anyway.
 

Amplifier

Banned
Dec 25, 2004
3,143
0
0
I'm not really sure what you're trying to say OP. There really aren't many brandloyal posters on this forum.

As far as CPU limited, we aren't cpu limited until the marginal fps per dollar is increased more by putting money into the CPU instead of the GPU and then you have to account for things like the chips ability to overclock and the application but im getting ahead of myself.

Conroe looks to be king for now and amd is slashing prices and that makes me happy.
 

Xcobra

Diamond Member
Oct 19, 2004
3,675
423
126
Originally posted by: Megatomic
Originally posted by: dexvx
http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html

Last update was April 2006, so its still fairly recent.

95% of people (of 710,000 responses) were running 1280x1024 or below.
*raises hand*

I am impressed with Conroe, but at this point I don't care much for it nor the AM2 platform. My current system is balls to the wall right now.
word.
 

dev0lution

Senior member
Dec 23, 2004
472
0
0
Originally posted by: RichUK
Who cares about Conroe, i'd rather spend money on :beer:


Amen, but then again I could probably afford Conroe if I cut back on :beer: :laugh:
 

xtknight

Elite Member
Oct 15, 2004
12,974
0
71
Why is it always about games? Some people actually do work with CPUs (those weirdos!) and nothing can ever be too fast for that.
 

MichaelD

Lifer
Jan 16, 2001
31,528
3
76
I will be building a dual WC Xeon (higher performing than a single CPU Conroe system) box within the next few months. I have a nice monitor (Viewsonic VX922) and it runs at 1280x1024.

So, the statement that "Anyone building a Conroe system isn't going to run at 1280x1024" is inaccurate.

Do I wish my monitor would do 1600x1200 natively? Yep. But it doesn't.
 

cheesehead

Lifer
Aug 11, 2000
10,079
0
0
I spend my money on my girlfriend. I'm buying an AM2 2800+, and overclocking it.
In the real world, I have a girlfriend, and I will be able to play games on my shiny new PC.
 

ZOXXO

Golden Member
Feb 1, 2003
1,281
0
76
Is it ironic that the collective AT forums definition of "real world" performance seems to be the ability to aid in rendering fantasy games?
 

Kromis

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2006
5,214
1
81
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
Is it ironic that the collective AT forums definition of "real world" performance seems to be the ability to aid in rendering fantasy games?

Lol. True, true. Well...not "fantasy" games but "fantasy worlds" (i.e. games)!
 

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,314
690
126
So thing is this.

1. Conroe trounces A64.
2. Unfortunately today's games are pretty much GPU bound, and can't really help Conroe to strech its muscle.
3. If your workloads involve heavy CPU utilization, upgrading to Conroe will be very beneficial.
4. If your main CPU load results from gaming, and if you have a system built within past 12 months, Conroe won't do you much good. (Most of us, Pragmatists)
5. Then again, if you're a type of "geek" who likes to have a new tech and enjoys OC'ing to see improved bench results, you'll still want to try out Conroe. (Most of us, Hobbiests)

So I'm finding myself in #4 and #5. I have a feeling many others are same. I use my computer for surfing, e-mailing, word processing and spread-sheet'ing, sometimes video editing after a trip or a party, and photo managing/editing here and there, and chatting, and watching movies and listening to music, and playing games. (Phew) Plus, I have a bad habit of buying hardware just for the sake of that hardware.

I know some of you do use apps that push your CPUs to the max, but really, other than those folks, how many of you run 3DMax here? How many of you run database with your precious Opteron rig or soon-to-be-built Conroe-rig? The No.1 CPU heavy activity under current home PC usage scenarios is undoubtedly gaming. That's why so many people were fascinated when the first Conroe benchmarks from Taiwan were disclosed, and were disappointed to see it's still the GPUs that matter in gaming.

I doubt anyone here can possibily deny the superiority of Conroe over A64. But the impact on individuals will be different. What I don't understand is, often times people impersonify hardware and objectify people. One could have different views on certain hardware but does that justify an attack on others?!

So to the OP who hasn't been back to his own thread:

Originally posted by: DLeRium
Remember when 7800GTXes came out? How did Anand show that 7800GT(X)es were pwnage? They had to run at 20:15 resolution with AA and AF for the 7800GTXes to flex their wings, especially with SLI.

Why?

Because otherwise you're CPU limited.

So does this mean 7800s weren't that great because most of us didn't run at 20:15 resolution? NO
You should have stopped right there.
Originally posted by: DLeRium
So shut up AMD fanboys, and recognize Conroe is 20% faster, and even if you don't have dual GPUs today, the next generation of GPUs may double performance once again or at least increase performance by a significant margin that you are once agian CPU limited.
This was totally unnecessary and only makes me wonder.. your (hopefully) physical age. (See, a comment like this is what we call "name-calling", which will be inevidently accompanied by a counter name-calling. )

Let's talk about tech. Not about people. There are other forums you can unload your stress to your heart's content.
 

TanisHalfElven

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2001
3,512
0
76
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
Is it ironic that the collective AT forums definition of "real world" performance seems to be the ability to aid in rendering fantasy games?

quote worthy
 

Polish3d

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2005
5,500
0
0
Originally posted by: Cheesehead
I spend my money on my girlfriend. I'm buying an AM2 2800+, and overclocking it.
In the real world, I have a girlfriend, and I will be able to play games on my shiny new PC.

She's probably cheating on you
 

lopri

Elite Member
Jul 27, 2002
13,314
690
126
Originally posted by: ZOXXO
Is it ironic that the collective AT forums definition of "real world" performance seems to be the ability to aid in rendering fantasy games?

One could ask himself/herself how many, and which of their daily apps push the CPU usage to 100%. The answer to that question is probably what's being reflected on here. Talking about daily apps, I could never understand why "Mozilla Firefox" in AT's benchmark suites ;) and complained it should be removed in the past. (A64 used to trump P4 big time there) I still don't know how they can have FireFox load 100%. :D
 

TanisHalfElven

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2001
3,512
0
76
Originally posted by: Frackal
Originally posted by: Cheesehead
I spend my money on my girlfriend. I'm buying an AM2 2800+, and overclocking it.
In the real world, I have a girlfriend, and I will be able to play games on my shiny new PC.

She's probably cheating on you

hey if he get some i don't see any reason to complain.
any OP what ancient games do you play .20:15 my ass. a 7900gtx/x900xtx can barely handle oblivion at 1280x1028 with everything maxed out.
pfft 20:15
maybe if you turn of foliage,shadow,bloom,hdr,AA,AF, then you'll have oblibion player on ay single card today.
 

dev0lution

Senior member
Dec 23, 2004
472
0
0
any OP what ancient games do you play .20:15 my ass. a 7900gtx/x900xtx can barely handle oblivion at 1280x1028 with everything maxed out.
pfft 20:15
maybe if you turn of foliage,shadow,bloom,hdr,AA,AF, then you'll have oblibion player on ay single card today.

Is this english? I got lost somewhere with all the .'s and typos.