CPU Bottleneck....

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

aigomorla

CPU, Cases&Cooling Mod PC Gaming Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 28, 2005
20,895
3,247
126
Originally posted by: Zap
Originally posted by: j0j081

Here's a neat trick to pull on someone. Change their desktop color depth to 16 bit when they aren't around. Let them use it for a while and then strike up a conversation about how awesome their wallpaper looks...

Alternately, set someone's overclocked system back to defaults when they're not paying attention, then compliment them on their uber-fast overclocked system (after they use it for a while)...

Seriously, most people wouldn't know the difference off-hand, and get really suprised when you point out that their systems aren't running overclocked, or in 32 bit color mode.

DISCLAIMER: I'm posting this on an overclocked E6750 with a 24" monitor set to 32 bit color. And yes, I just checked those out before making this disclaimer. ;)

ROFL... my cousin did this to me. He swapped my only air cooled quad with a C2D @ stock speeds and waited to see how long i would realize he did that.

Took me 4 seconds. I opened bionic an saw 8 hour WU times on 2 threads and not 4. Normal WU time for that rig is about 5 hours 35min give or take 10 min.

LOL....

C2D will RAPE any AMD in any benchmark program. The quickness can be more related to hard drive being faster on one system, or because one system is on RAID or the memory on the system, or the controler.

My 680i RAID is faster then my intel's by a lot. It would only take 5-7 sec to boot into windows on the 680i RAID with 4 raptors. It takes about 20 seconds for my Q6600 on P35 Chipset. But the P35 is faster when I open the applications i need.
 

EdzAviator

Member
Mar 22, 2005
186
0
0

As stated in these forums, that X2 runs smoother and snappier in day 2 day task using Windows XP compare to C2D...Maybe due to AMD's IMC and large L1 Cache..

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2109138&viewresults=y

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...ht_key=y&keyword1=poll

But how about in Vista...????

Does it follow the same as XP...???

My C2D E4300 @ stock runs not to snappy in Vista 32...had it 2GB DDR2 800 Geil on a Seag8 8mb sata HDD...OC it to 2.4 & later tp 3.0 to see any difference but still not not snappy..(Vista is updated regularly...)

X2 is snappier than C2D in XP...

How about in Vista...???

Any comment on users of both X2 & C2D in Vista32...???

If X2 still snappier then in vista then it is generally due to the IMC...

Comments....................Comments.........
 

Zenoth

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2005
5,198
203
106
I wouldn't want to appear as the party-breaker but my current "new" temporary machine (until I get my own parts myself when Yorkfield is out in about two months) feel and ... well, not only "feel" but IS faster in every sense possible of the word than my previous X2 system, and that's coming from an AMD consumer since the past four years.

Right now I'm running on an E6600 at stock frequencies, along with some C5 PC2-800 Kingston RAM, on my new X38-DQ6, and I could compare my previous system's speed and snappiness as a turtle. Well perhaps a turtle on steroids. I mean my X2 was far from being "slow" for every day, non-gaming applications and such, but still, my (well my friend's) E6600 does make an oh so tangible difference, at least to me, but that's the point, the C2D makes everything faster than my X2 tried to.

Maybe because I'm also on brand new SATA drives, because I do believe that HDD's have a MAJOR role on an overall system's "snappiness", not just CPU's, without an HDD the CPU alone wouldn't be able to open anything, heck without HDD's we wouldn't have the need for CPU's since we wouldn't be able to run on any OS, let's try not to forget about that guys. The CPU's transmit and receive data/commands, and some times executes commands, but the HDD has to bring you where your clicks demand.
 

amenx

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 2004
4,124
2,405
136
Snappiness is all in the mind, even if there was something to it, the poll/link you gave shows C2D perceived as being snappier. So you shot you're own argument down. As stated there will be other factors contributing to the sense of snappiness/slowness, mainly other hardware or software. Are you from AMDZone? :p
 

NickelPlate

Senior member
Nov 9, 2006
652
13
81
What does "snappier" or "not too snappy" mean? Don't get me wrong you're entitled to your opinion and I'm not saying you're right or wrong but without any data, benchmarks and whatnot, qualitative statements such as those are just that, some guy's opinion.
 

jones377

Senior member
May 2, 2004
452
47
91
I'm already looking forward to your new thread tomorrow. I wonder what it will be about?
 

kotrtim

Member
Jun 9, 2007
77
0
0
It is not logical for a cpu that is faster to be less snappier, dual core is snappier than single core, but todays processors should be fast enough (winxp) and it is impossible to distinguish which one is snappier. Vista is not snappy at all :)
 

vaylon

Senior member
Oct 22, 2000
219
0
71
Vista works completely diff than xp. You wont start seeing a "snappier" diff for about a week of use with vista.

But the diff between the two cpu's is almost unnoticeable to normal people. Only a second or two at most.

I have a 6750 (mildly OC'd) and a x2 4400+(skt939 OC'd alot). Both start and work applications almost exactly the same.
The X2 can rip dvd's just a fraction faster than the 6750, but the 6750 can play unreal tornement just slightly better than the x2. But then again HL2 plays much better on the X2 than on the 6750.
My office tools run a noticable diff faster on 6750 than on the X2, but my x2 can run PSP9 fatser than my 6750.

My older games like Battlezone and Battlezone2 play much better on the X2 than they do on the 6750.

and then there is crysis.
Running both systems with 850xt's set to 1280x800. I can play crysis in dev mode at all medium settings, high physics and high effects.
The 6750 runs at average of 27-30fps
The X2 runs about 30-34fps .
BUT
If I used the TAC cannon and launch 4-6 war heads all going off at once, then my x2 system will drop to like 14 fps but the 6750 wont drop below 25.

My friends system has a 6750 with a foxxcon motherboard and more memory than mine, but regardless of how much tweaking I do to his setup. It crawls. but I have also seen plenty of X2 systems also crawl.
So I think it really depends on the user and how well they keep the systems tuned and cleaned up.
 

Zap

Elite Member
Oct 13, 1999
22,377
2
81
Originally posted by: jones377
I'm already looking forward to your new thread tomorrow. I wonder what it will be about?

:roll:

OMG, not another thread. Gonna start ignoring EdzAviator.
 

JoLLyRoGer

Diamond Member
Aug 24, 2000
4,153
4
81
Originally posted by: badnewcastle
Seriously? Your starting another thread?

Didn't get the response you want from this thread?

Or from this thread?


When are you going to give up? People like what they like. If you like X2 you will like X2, if you like C2D you'll like C2D and you back up and support what you like.




P.S. I prefer "more responsive" to "snappier".

Heh... he does favor that word alot doesn't he?

That said, I just "snapped" up the parts for a new C2Q build and I'm guessing it will be pretty "snappy" at ~ 3.2-3.5Ghz too. I've just gotta wait for the UPS guy to "snap" too it so I can start "snapping" all the parts together. Wish me luck so I don't "snap" my motherboard when I "snap" my "snappy" looking HSF together. :p

Edit: Wow!! That was a pretty "snappy" reply huh??....
 

AmberClad

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2005
4,914
0
0
This is getting really old. Are we starting a new feature at AT now? "Daily Shill/Stealth Marketing Thread"?
 

secretanchitman

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
9,352
23
91
is this the new akshayt or rollo, by any chance?

btw, my htpc computer is snappy in 32bit vista ultimate and 32bit xp pro...and that runs a c2d @ 3.0Ghz. my desktop runs an opteron @ 2.5Ghz and its snappy also in 32bit vista ultimate and 32bit xp pro.
 

AmberClad

Diamond Member
Jul 23, 2005
4,914
0
0
As far as the whole Rollo tie-in, AMD has apparently been known to employ viral marketing companies in the past. NGOHQ story. TechReport story here.

Whatever the case may be, what burns me most is not the marketing itself. Hell, we've got "official" Intel ad threads stickied all over the freakin' forum. It's the fact that I really don't like being taken for a gullible fool. Seriously lame tactics...
 

sutahz

Golden Member
Dec 14, 2007
1,300
0
0
@badnewcastle
Thanks for the link to EdzAviator's other 2 posts.
EdzAviator, 'snappiness' is in the eye of the user (we're talking what, 1/8 to 1/2 of 1sec).
I experience no difference between my old X2 4400+ and my new Q6600 in day to day things in XP or Vista.
If you want someone to agree w/ you so you'll feel validated ok, I THINK X2 RULEZ OVER C2D, PWNZOR!!!!
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,553
2
76
Originally posted by: NickelPlate
What does "snappier" or "not too snappy" mean? Don't get me wrong you're entitled to your opinion and I'm not saying you're right or wrong but without any data, benchmarks and whatnot, qualitative statements such as those are just that, some guy's opinion.

Vista is just plain noticably slow for me. Not snappy. Bringing windows to the foreground feels laggy, especially when multitasking.
 

bwanaaa

Senior member
Dec 26, 2002
739
1
81
lopri mentioned that "snappiness" (I dont think that version of the 'snap' root has yet been used) has to do with chipset latency and strap frequency. Please note that he distinguishes strap frequency from FSB and memory speed. What is strap frequency/chipset latency and how does one adjust it in the bios?
 

EdzAviator

Member
Mar 22, 2005
186
0
0


Nope amenx....I'm not from AMDZone..

In fact I'm not a fanboy of any...I have used both systems in the past..from K6-II, P3 800, P4 1.4, Athlon XP 3000+, P4 3.0, Athlon 64 3000+, Athlon X2 4000+ & now C2D E4300..

I just wrote what i've observe in moving from X2 4000+ to C2D E4300...

If all of u guyz say that My C2D shud be snappier than my X2 4000+...then I must have bought a bad chip...
 

badnewcastle

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,016
0
0
Originally posted by: EdzAviator


Nope amenx

If all of u guyz say that My C2D shud be snappier than my X2 4000+...then I must have bought a bad chip...

Sounds like you found your answer go buy a new chip then come back and start 3 or 4 new threads on the same subject.

Please take no offense, I DON'T have an X2 to compare and I'm happy with my C2D's performance. WE GET THAT YOU LIKE YOUR X2 BETTER THEN YOUR C2D.
 

j0j081

Banned
Aug 26, 2007
1,090
0
0
Originally posted by: vaylon
Vista works completely diff than xp. You wont start seeing a "snappier" diff for about a week of use with vista.

But the diff between the two cpu's is almost unnoticeable to normal people. Only a second or two at most.

I have a 6750 (mildly OC'd) and a x2 4400+(skt939 OC'd alot). Both start and work applications almost exactly the same.
The X2 can rip dvd's just a fraction faster than the 6750, but the 6750 can play unreal tornement just slightly better than the x2. But then again HL2 plays much better on the X2 than on the 6750.
My office tools run a noticable diff faster on 6750 than on the X2, but my x2 can run PSP9 fatser than my 6750.

My older games like Battlezone and Battlezone2 play much better on the X2 than they do on the 6750.

and then there is crysis.
Running both systems with 850xt's set to 1280x800. I can play crysis in dev mode at all medium settings, high physics and high effects.
The 6750 runs at average of 27-30fps
The X2 runs about 30-34fps .
BUT
If I used the TAC cannon and launch 4-6 war heads all going off at once, then my x2 system will drop to like 14 fps but the 6750 wont drop below 25.

My friends system has a 6750 with a foxxcon motherboard and more memory than mine, but regardless of how much tweaking I do to his setup. It crawls. but I have also seen plenty of X2 systems also crawl.
So I think it really depends on the user and how well they keep the systems tuned and cleaned up.
that doesn't make any sense does it? I thought the e6750 should kill just about anything AMD offers right now especially with a mild oc...