Is my 9600GT CPU limited?

[reallyfull]

Hi,

I've just completed a small upgrade in anticipation of Left 4 Dead. I didn't have a lot of money to spend and used the 30% Live Cashback promotion to get the most for my very limited budget. I'm coming from a Athlon 64 3000+ (Socket 754), 1GB of RAM and a 6600GT (AGP). I've upgraded to a Athlon 64 X2 5200+, 2GB of RAM and a 9600GT. I'm using Team Fortress 2 and Fraps for benchmarking.

Setting all of the graphics settings to max in TF2 at 1280x960 with 4xAA and 16xAF my FPS are: Min: 22 Max: 112 Avg: 45.350. Using the same settings as before but upping the resolution to 1600x1200 my results are: Min: 22 Max: 110 Avg: 44.667. So I take it my CPU is holding me back? I am quite happy with the performance with this setup, but I'm wondering if overclocking my CPU would bring any kind of noticeable performance improvement? Thanks!

 

[happy medium]

Yes with that game you are and yes overclocking will help.

 

[dug777]

With my 4850 and my Q6600 at stock I seem to be almost entirely CPU limited in both the CSS Stress test and the Lost Coast Stress test at 1600x1200, even with edge-detect AA maxed out and Adaptive AA-quality.

 

[adlep]

Side Question:
Did you also upgrade the motherboard?
Because I don't think that there were X2s available for s754

 

[reallyfull]

Originally posted by: adlep
Side Question:
Did you also upgrade the motherboard?
Because I don't think that there were X2s available for s754

Of course, the ASUS M3A78-EM is the motherboard I picked after reading: Ars Ultimate Budget Box guide

 

[vj8usa]

TF2 is EXTREMELY CPU limited, since by default, it only uses one core. Even at 3GHz, I choke in big servers (dipping into the teens sometimes) especially with a lot of people in one spot. Even with 8xAA on at 1680x1050, my GPU usage doesn't break 50%.

You can try using mat_queue_mode 2 (type that into the console, default is -1) to enable some multithreading. There are other commands like r_threaded_renderables 1 (default 0), but they won't have as much of an impact. They greatly improve my framerates (from 20s to 40s or so), but they aren't on by default for a reason - I crash within a few minutes, sometimes in less than 10 seconds after enabling them. It varies from configuration to configuration, though, so you might have better luck. Oh, and I seem to recall reading that mat_queue_mode 2 was designed for Core 2s, but I'm not sure. Still worth a shot though.

 

[mizzou]

not sure how its relevant anyway, you are going to smoke the FPS

 

[rogue1979]

Originally posted by: reallyfull
Hi,

I've just completed a small upgrade in anticipation of Left 4 Dead. I didn't have a lot of money to spend and used the 30% Live Cashback promotion to get the most for my very limited budget. I'm coming from a Athlon 64 3000+ (Socket 754), 1GB of RAM and a 6600GT (AGP). I've upgraded to a Athlon 64 X2 5200+, 2GB of RAM and a 9600GT. I'm using Team Fortress 2 and Fraps for benchmarking.

I upgraded both of my kids last Christmas from AMD X2 @ 2.6GHz cpu's to E2xxx @ 3GHz+. They were both running 9600GT's and the upgrade increased 3Dmark06 about
20%.

When you bought new cpu/motherboard/memory combo is there any reason you didn't go with a C2D? A good overclocking motherboard and E2180 is only about $100-$110, or with an E5200 about $125-$130.

If you can overclock do it, 3GHz should be easily attainable.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Originally posted by: rogue1979
I upgraded both of my kids last Christmas from AMD X2 @ 2.6GHz cpu's to E2xxx @ 3GHz+. They were both running 9600GT's and the upgrade increased 3Dmark06 about
20%.

When you bought new cpu/motherboard/memory combo is there any reason you didn't go with a C2D? A good overclocking motherboard and E2180 is only about $100-$110, or with an E5200 about $125-$130.

If you can overclock do it, 3GHz should be easily attainable.

3DMark06 scores don't mean that much since it includes a test (which the final score is based off of) that only tests the speed of the CPU to render 3D graphics. In gaming applications, the new Pentium Dual Cores (E2xxx) and the Athlon X2s are pretty much equivalent clock-for-clock. Although in a few situations (games) the E2xxx might have a more significant advantage, overall the limited 1mb cache of the new Pentiums restrict their performance greatly from normal Core 2 processors.

To the OP: Yes, you should notice an improvement if you overclock your processor. And you would notce and improvement by enabling mat_queue_mode 2, but you do risk instability. This feature should also work on Athlon X2 systems, as I've done it before and noticed a huge increase in framerate.

 

[edplayer]

Originally posted by: rogue1979
When you bought new cpu/motherboard/memory combo is there any reason you didn't go with a C2D? A good overclocking motherboard and E2180 is only about $100-$110, or with an E5200 about $125-$130.

If you can overclock do it, 3GHz should be easily attainable.

Fry's has E7200 and ECS motherboard combos for $100 quite often. Most should be able to overclock to 3.166GHz

3MB of L2 cache vs 1MB

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Originally posted by: edplayer

Originally posted by: rogue1979
When you bought new cpu/motherboard/memory combo is there any reason you didn't go with a C2D? A good overclocking motherboard and E2180 is only about $100-$110, or with an E5200 about $125-$130.

If you can overclock do it, 3GHz should be easily attainable.

Fry's has E7200 and ECS motherboard combos for $100 quite often. Most should be able to overclock to 3.166GHz

3MB of L2 cache vs 1MB

Ha, oh yeh, an E2180 is not going to a substantial improvement over an Athlon X2. The 1MB of L2 really hinders the Core 2 architecture. Even the jump to 2MB provides a huge increase in Core 2's performance over 1MB of L2 cache in gaming. Simply put, upgrading from an Athlon 5200+ to an E2180 is not a smart investment, even after overclocking.

 

[rogue1979]

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln

DMark06 scores don't mean that much since it includes a test (which the final score is based off of) that only tests the speed of the CPU to render 3D graphics. In gaming applications, the new Pentium Dual Cores (E2xxx) and the Athlon X2s are pretty much equivalent clock-for-clock. Although in a few situations (games) the E2xxx might have a more significant advantage, overall the limited 1mb cache of the new Pentiums restrict their performance greatly from normal Core 2 processors.

Ha, oh yeh, an E2180 is not going to a substantial improvement over an Athlon X2. The 1MB of L2 really hinders the Core 2 architecture. Even the jump to 2MB provides a huge increase in Core 2's performance over 1MB of L2 cache in gaming. Simply put, upgrading from an Athlon 5200+ to an E2180 is not a smart investment, even after overclocking.

Wrong, the X2 4200+ (2.2GHz) has it's hand full with the E2140 (1.6GHz) in spite of 1MB of L2 cache. Link

This is in gaming benchmarks, which is what the OP asked about.

I also suggested the E5200 which in my opinion is a better buy, only mentioning the
E2180 cuz with the OP's choice of an AMD X2, I thought price might have been a factor.

The 15-20% increase in 3Dmark06 I mentioned was reflected in all games we tried.
Take overclocking into account and the 1MB cache Allendale scales better than Athlon
X2 when approaching 3GHz.

Boy, last year the E2xxx overclocked was the rage in Anandtech forums, how quickly we forget...

More cache for C2D is better, more so with todays superfast gpu's, with a 9600GT the difference will be less noticable.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Originally posted by: rogue1979

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln

DMark06 scores don't mean that much since it includes a test (which the final score is based off of) that only tests the speed of the CPU to render 3D graphics. In gaming applications, the new Pentium Dual Cores (E2xxx) and the Athlon X2s are pretty much equivalent clock-for-clock. Although in a few situations (games) the E2xxx might have a more significant advantage, overall the limited 1mb cache of the new Pentiums restrict their performance greatly from normal Core 2 processors.

Ha, oh yeh, an E2180 is not going to a substantial improvement over an Athlon X2. The 1MB of L2 really hinders the Core 2 architecture. Even the jump to 2MB provides a huge increase in Core 2's performance over 1MB of L2 cache in gaming. Simply put, upgrading from an Athlon 5200+ to an E2180 is not a smart investment, even after overclocking.

Wrong, the X2 4200+ (2.2GHz) has it's hand full with the E2140 (1.6GHz) in spite of 1MB of L2 cache. Link

This is in gaming benchmarks, which is what the OP asked about.

I also suggested the E5200 which in my opinion is a better buy, only mentioning the
E2180 cuz with the OP's choice of an AMD X2, I thought price might have been a factor.

The 15-20% increase in 3Dmark06 I mentioned was reflected in all games we tried.
Take overclocking into account and the 1MB cache Allendale scales better than Athlon
X2 when approaching 3GHz.

Boy, last year the E2xxx overclocked was the rage in Anandtech forums, how quickly we forget...

More cache for C2D is better, more so with todays superfast gpu's, with a 9600GT the difference will be less noticable.

Those are pretty antiquated benchmarks. These benchmarks show no difference in performance scaling:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3051&p=6

And Look at the performance of the E2220 to 4800+ 2x1M:
http://www.matbe.com/articles/...processeurs/page29.php

Both run at 2.4 GHz and they are basically tied in performance. In gaming applications, they are pretty much on equal terms. There is no huge advantage for either chip, so upgrading from an Athlon X2 to an Pentium Dual-Core is just stupid if one is looking for immediate gaming performance gains. Upgrade to a Phenom, E8400, or Core 2 Quad instead.

And I wasn't a member of these forums last year, but I was never "in a rage" over the introduction of the E2xxx. I will admit, they are a good option for someone on a budget now who plans to upgrade to a better Intel Core 2 processor later.

 

[rogue1979]

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln

Those are pretty antiquated benchmarks. These benchmarks show no difference in performance scaling:
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3051&p=6

And Look at the performance of the E2220 to 4800+ 2x1M:
http://www.matbe.com/articles/...processeurs/page29.php

Both run at 2.4 GHz and they are basically tied in performance. In gaming applications, they are pretty much on equal terms. There is no huge advantage for either chip, so upgrading from an Athlon X2 to an Pentium Dual-Core is just stupid if one is looking for immediate gaming performance gains. Upgrade to a Phenom, E8400, or Core 2 Quad instead.

And I wasn't a member of these forums last year, but I was never "in a rage" over the introduction of the E2xxx. I will admit, they are a good option for someone on a budget now who plans to upgrade to a better Intel Core 2 processor later.

Hmmm....

Quite a difference in benchmarks results. Your first link shows roughly equal performance but the second link shows a E2160 performing about the same as an X2 300-400MHz faster?

The second link you gave gets my vote. Benchmarks aside, I had both AMD X2 and Intel E2xxx. I found that in gaming benchmarks the C2D 1MB cache had a significant boost in fps compared to Athlon X2.

So if a E2xxx costs the same as an Athlon X2, both cheaper than a E7xxx, E8xxx or Phenom, how is it stupid to upgrade to the E2xxx from at Athlon 64 socket 754? Especially when a $45 motherboard like the Biostar BIOSTAR G31-M7 TE supports Wolfdale, Quad-core and 1600MHz fsb making future upgrades possible.

Nobody said anything about the OP upgrading to a E2xxx from an Athlon X2. I simply asked why he didn't choose E2xxx over AM2 when he upgraded his socket 754.
I also mentioned that I had upgraded that way last Christmas, but that was socket 939,
not AM2. Socket 939 doesn't generally make 3GHz easy like AM2 (I was stuck at 2.6GHz) and it supported DDR1, so upgrading memory at that time (like now) was well worth the change in platforms. Though it still was a significant boost in performance for gaming. Believe the first link if you want to :roll:

 

[cusideabelincoln]

I think you can still get an Athlon X2 cheaper than the E2xxx series, and there are pretty nice and cheap AM2 motherboards available. If anyone was going to pick up a new system, I would recommend (for gaming on a budget) that they get the E5200 over the E2xxx anyway.

Since you were trying to get the OP to rationalize his decision, I just took it upon myself to try to rationalize it for him. And I most certainly do believe the more real-world-scenario results. In your link they were testing pretty old games at their lowest details. Heck, now that I look at it, the difference isn't all that huge. The Athlon X2 4200+ @ 2790 MHz (310x9) performs right in between the E2160 @ 2394 MHz (266x9) and the E2160 @ 2997 MHz (333x9), with it performing closer to the slower 2394 MHz E2160 in most of the tests. Would it be so hard to believe that another Athlon X2, with the bigger 2x1MB L2 Cache, at 3.2 GHz can match an Pentium E2160 at 3.2 GHz?

 

[edplayer]

Originally posted by: cusideabelincoln
Ha, oh yeh, an E2180 is not going to a substantial improvement over an Athlon X2. The 1MB of L2 really hinders the Core 2 architecture. Even the jump to 2MB provides a huge increase in Core 2's performance over 1MB of L2 cache in gaming. Simply put, upgrading from an Athlon 5200+ to an E2180 is not a smart investment, even after overclocking.

read my post again, I didn't even mention the E2180

It was an

E7200 w motherboard

for $100

 

[reallyfull]

Originally posted by: rogue1979

Originally posted by: reallyfull
Hi,

I've just completed a small upgrade in anticipation of Left 4 Dead. I didn't have a lot of money to spend and used the 30% Live Cashback promotion to get the most for my very limited budget. I'm coming from a Athlon 64 3000+ (Socket 754), 1GB of RAM and a 6600GT (AGP). I've upgraded to a Athlon 64 X2 5200+, 2GB of RAM and a 9600GT. I'm using Team Fortress 2 and Fraps for benchmarking.

I upgraded both of my kids last Christmas from AMD X2 @ 2.6GHz cpu's to E2xxx @ 3GHz+. They were both running 9600GT's and the upgrade increased 3Dmark06 about
20%.

When you bought new cpu/motherboard/memory combo is there any reason you didn't go with a C2D? A good overclocking motherboard and E2180 is only about $100-$110, or with an E5200 about $125-$130.

If you can overclock do it, 3GHz should be easily attainable.

I did post a thread in general hardware asking for advice and didn't get much input. I mostly followed the Arstechnica budget guide which recommended this configuration. I'm happy with this upgrade, but if I could do it again I would probably follow your advice as I'd have better upgrade options then I do with AM2+.

 

[VirtualLarry]

cusideabelincoln's benchmarks were debunked here

Yet he still continues to whip out that benchmark showing AMD64 and C2D in a dead heat, apparently unaware that it is a statistical outlier, much like a cache-constrained benchmark showing a P4 EE with 2MB L2 as faster than an equivelent clock-speed AMD64 chip with less cache.

 

[rogue1979]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
cusideabelincoln's benchmarks were debunked here

Yet he still continues to whip out that benchmark showing AMD64 and C2D in a dead heat, apparently unaware that it is a statistical outlier, much like a cache-constrained benchmark showing a P4 EE with 2MB L2 as faster than an equivelent clock-speed AMD64 chip with less cache.

He's not listening, possibly because he has an Athlon X2 in his signature?

It looks like a classic case of PPJ (purchase/performance justification). I have seen this many times in this forum. They bought it, so it's gotta kick some butt, regardless of the real facts, especially if it was cutting edge and real expensive at the time. But often times you will see these same people put down the hardware they were fanatical about six months later....

Cuz their new set-up is king and the old stuff just sucks! I loved my Athlon X2 set-ups, had three of them running and they still have decent performance today, just not as fast as a C2D for gaming regardless of the L2 cache size.

My kids are both running 2180's @ 3GHz+, while my E6600 @ 3GHz with 4MB of cache isn't much better at gaming with an overclocked 9600GT or 8800GT. But I paid more for it, so maybe I can convince myself it is way better!