• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

p4 2.53 northwood on par with my new X2 4200?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: bob4432
Originally posted by: ribbon13
Originally posted by: Bobthelost
Fact is that you shouldn't have bought the Dual core system, the stuff you do doesn't benifit from it.

YET

Phtoshop will be making the jump to multithreading soon enough, as will most games. As such buying a DC machine is a good idea for the future, but in the short term you'd have done better with a faster single core CPU.
Click to expand...

Photoshop has been fully SMP aware since 1996.
Click to expand...

QFT
Click to expand...


True but HT is not as good as a dual processor/dual core setup. There are so many benches from IDF that will show you that multimedia/graphics design benefits from HT, but its NOWHERE close to dual core performance...
 
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Just because you have the latest greatest video card doesn`t mean a whole lot unless everything else is also the latest and greatest...

Too many variables to even start to list that affect the performance of video cards from one computer to another...

The sad fact is alot of the stuff on your newer video cards is just bling bling...
No super serious gamer that I know of uses any of that bling blimg....
In fact most of the bling bling is disabled....so go figure....

🙂
Click to expand...



what?
 
I agree...something's not right with your setup. I switched from a 3.4 prescott to a 3200+ A64 and I noticed a bit of a difference in multi-tasking (in favor of the P4), but when I swapped that out for a 3800+ and eventually a 4000+, there was an noticeable improvement over the P4.

But then again, I switched for heat/power/cooling reasons 😀
 
WoW is FPS capped to 60FPS, so you aren't gonna get higher than that. You should definatly be seing a big differance in photoshop. Are you running windows XP with SP2, and did you install the X2 driver? My X2 is way faster at everything, than my P4 at 3.8ghz was, so something isn't right.
 
clean win xp install just 2 days ago.
i have newest chipset/AMD/Geforce drivers
WoW tops out at 64.1 fps, but most of the time its 25-45
 
WoW is probably framerate limited to ~60, what settings are you using? If you run 800*600 do you get mad framerates?

There is no point in comapring load times as it is dependent on the hard drive, which isn't much faster than your old one.
 
Originally posted by: supaidaaman
My geforce ti4600 runs around 45-60 fps in WoW (Iron forge with full load of players) (The graphics look like crap but still very smooth)
My geforce 7800 GT runs around 45-60 fps in WoW (Iron forge with full load of players) (The graphics look amazing)
Click to expand...
Well, how about you tell us what changes you made to the graphics settings?

Originally posted by: supaidaaman
3DMARK 05 with athlon system is where it should be at compared to other models.
Click to expand...
How about you tell us exactly what your score is so we can determine if your system is actually underperforming or whether you're just expecting too much?

Originally posted by: supaidaaman
so, Shouldnt i be seeing amazing graphics and maxed frame rates in WoW with my new system?
it boggles my mind that they would even compare.
Click to expand...
See above, you're asking us to compare apples to oranges without letting us see the details.
 
Originally posted by: Hyperlite
Originally posted by: Yakomo
Try turning off Cool'n Quiet in your BIOS

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;896256

IIRC Windows XP Home edition only supports 1 processor. I've never used Home edition so I'm not sure if that pertains to or effects dual core processors.
Click to expand...

i think your right...
Click to expand...

Um, no.

XP is licensed by socket. XP Home supports dual-core processors (and even hyperthreaded dual-core processors) just fine. Look for threads in the OS forum that have discussed this to death.

You do need XP Pro if you want to run multiple Opteron 2XX or Xeon MP CPUs.
 
Originally posted by: Yakomo
Try turning off Cool'n Quiet in your BIOS

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;896256

IIRC Windows XP Home edition only supports 1 processor. I've never used Home edition so I'm not sure if that pertains to or effects dual core processors.
Click to expand...

Windows goes by sockets, not by cores. A dual core IS supported by XP home, just like hyperthreading is, as is the dual core with hyperthreading. XP pro supports 2 sockets, so with dual dual cores with hyperthreading, it could see 8 logical proccessors.
 
Your looking at lower resolution and lower quality and comparing it to much higher quality graphics, which are taking up the CPU and GPU power.....yet your still looking for higher frame rates.
You should be comparing the same exact resolution and quality in a game and comparing it if you want to see just frame rate increases.

Also did you install the AMD Dual Core drivers?....and not just the patch to fix the Dual Core performance issues?
Edit: here is the page for the drivers http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/Tec...lResources/0,,30_182_871_13118,00.html

Also 6.65 is not the newest NVidia chipset driver version I don't think.
 
Originally posted by: DLeRium
Originally posted by: bob4432
Originally posted by: ribbon13
Originally posted by: Bobthelost
Fact is that you shouldn't have bought the Dual core system, the stuff you do doesn't benifit from it.

YET

Phtoshop will be making the jump to multithreading soon enough, as will most games. As such buying a DC machine is a good idea for the future, but in the short term you'd have done better with a faster single core CPU.
Click to expand...

Photoshop has been fully SMP aware since 1996.
Click to expand...

QFT
Click to expand...


True but HT is not as good as a dual processor/dual core setup. There are so many benches from IDF that will show you that multimedia/graphics design benefits from HT, but its NOWHERE close to dual core performance...
Click to expand...

yes and no. say you have a 3GHz p4 with ht, the os sees it as 2 cpus, each one being 1.5GHz, where a x2 3800 will have 2 cpus each at 2.0GHz. from what my experiences have been with both ht machines and true dual proce machines is that the usage is pretty close regardless of whether it is a dual cpu or ht. smt/smp aware apps will take full advantage of a ht processor, utilizing both of the 1.5GHz virtual cores just like it would with a x2 3800, it would use both physical cores.

here is a quick test i did to see just how different apps would work in a ht/smt enviornment compared to turning ht off ( or a single cpu enviornment). - http://bf2hardware.sytes.net:6583/cpu_usage.html
 
Originally posted by: Markbnj
Fact is that you shouldn't have bought the Dual core system, the stuff you do doesn't benifit from it.

YET
Click to expand...

Bull. That Northwood has like a 400 mhz front side bus. Look at the ram differences! He should be seeing a huge improvement, as I did when I upgraded from a similar Intel system. I mean, geez guys, I understand you're all hot to shoot down dual cores since you don't want to spend the money for one, but this is a little bit much.

OP, are you sure both cores are being recognized by Windows? Some BIOS will not recognize both cores without an upgrade.
Click to expand...

His FSB looks like it is actually @533 with the PC1066 RDRAM.
 
Originally posted by: bob4432
Originally posted by: DLeRium
Originally posted by: bob4432
Originally posted by: ribbon13
Originally posted by: Bobthelost
Fact is that you shouldn't have bought the Dual core system, the stuff you do doesn't benifit from it.

YET



yes and no. say you have a 3GHz p4 with ht, the os sees it as 2 cpus, each one being 1.5GHz,
Click to expand...

No, thats not anywhere near how it works. It sees it as 2 3ghz CPU's, it's just that the HT part isn't a full CPU, and gives usualy up to at most a 15% boost, where a true dual core can give an 80-90% boost(maybe even 100% in some rare situations).
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: stevty2889
Originally posted by: bob4432
Originally posted by: DLeRium
Originally posted by: bob4432
Originally posted by: ribbon13
Originally posted by: Bobthelost
Fact is that you shouldn't have bought the Dual core system, the stuff you do doesn't benifit from it.

YET



yes and no. say you have a 3GHz p4 with ht, the os sees it as 2 cpus, each one being 1.5GHz,
Click to expand...

No, thats not anywhere near how it works. It sees it as 2 3ghz CPU's, it's just that the HT part isn't a full CPU, and gives usualy up to at most a 15% boost, where a true dual core can give an 80-90% boost(maybe even 100% in some rare situations).
Click to expand...

if the os sees it as 2x3GHz machine, then ht really sucks, i assumed, based on performance that the o/s just viewed it as 2x1.5GHz cpus....becuase it was not much faster than my old 2x1GHz p3 machine with smt/smp apps...:thumbsdown: for intel...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: Bobthelost
Ok, can we stop quoting my erronious information now 😱 😀

Guess it's time for me to head back to photoshop school.
Click to expand...

i wasn't quoting you per se, just part of the response for my erroneous P4 HT info 😱
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top