Huh? I'm CPU limited?

[Denithor]

Crap, good catch there, I missed that he is on skt754.

In that case it's time for a full system upgrade.

:evil:

 

[jonmcc33]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Well, there was a pretty big difference in overclocking from GT to Ultra speeds in both Farcry and Doom3/Prey/Quake4 (Doom 3 engine) for me. In GT speeds 1280x960 was solid all settings turned up. On GT speeds 1600x1200 all settings turned was quite laggy. Ultra speeds and it was as solid as 1280x960 on GT speeds.

ROFL! Now I know you are making shit up!

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2290&p=11

There's a 5 FPS difference between the 6800GT and 6800 Ultra on Far Cry.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2290&p=10

Same as Doom 3 engine. You're freakin kidding me! You think there's a huge difference in 5 FPS? You've been gaming too long it seems. You don't even understand the hardware you run on.

Edit- Sorry to sound rude but that's what you get when you WHOOSH someone!

 

[jonmcc33]

Originally posted by: myocardia
You're obviously not a gamer. See, some video games are almost CPU-bound, while others are almost GPU-bound. To expound on what soccerballtux was trying to say, in this same game, if you overclock your video card, your framerates should be higher, if it's a GPU-bound game, but they weren't. Your framerates would increase if you overclocked your CPU, though, since it's a CPU-bound game. That would be if you kept the same in-game settings, and had all other settings exactly the same.

You need to wake up too it seems...AnandTech even did an article.

CPU performance: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2381&p=5

So his Sempron would be comparable to the Athlon 64 3000+ on this. Notice how he'd only get maybe 10FPS more with an Athlon FX-55? That's at 1024x768 as well. When you start to increase the resolution to the 1600x1200 that he's running it makes THAT MUCH LESS OF A DIFFERENCE. Add at least 4XAA and 8XAF to that and it's even less.

GPU performance: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2381&p=4

See how much more of a curve there is by upgrading the video card? No, not overclocking it. Only a fool overclocks their video card expecting anything real world out of it. If he upgraded to a 7900GS he'd see a difference. There's nothing socket 754 that he can get that will boost his performance and overclocking 500MHz only got him a whopping 2FPS more. Do some thinking next time.

Not a gamer? Come play some Call of Duty 4 and we'll see who is a gamer and who isn't.

 

[JSK07]

I had similar issues with my former system. I was running an AMD X2 (939) 3800+ with 2Gb of generic ram (4x512mb) and a ATI Saphire X850XT. Generally the game was playable but when I went into large cities like Shattrath my frame rate would drop to 20-30fps on average.

Just by installing a 8800GT I picked up 12-15fps in those problem areas. But when I installed the new motherboard, cpu and ram my system hit the FPS cap in WoW. Even in the problem areas I have not seen the framerate drop below 55fps. Most of the time it's pegged at 75fps.

 

[soonerproud]

jon:

Quit trying to compare World of Warcraft to FPS games. They are not even remotely the same same thing as the graphics to the games you keep using as an example are based on more advanced graphics engines. A MMORPG like WoW is very dependent on the CPU in high population areas. Your computer is not just trying to process your information, but is also trying to process the information from thousands, sometimes tens of thousands players at the same time. In heavy populated areas this slows down even high end systems to where they perform no better than a low end system. This is both a latency and CPU issue and not a graphics card issue in this case.