QX6700 - possible bottleneck for 8800GTX SLI?

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: JAG87
dude I have the same config as you. i can honestly tell you, apart from call of duty 2, fear, and graw, there is nothing else that brings this system below 60 fps.

Like I said, I'd love to see a Supreme Commander benchmark run on that system. It'd make you cry.

 

[Matt2]

Man.

My e-peen seems quite inadequate at the moment...

 

[terentenet]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: JAG87
dude I have the same config as you. i can honestly tell you, apart from call of duty 2, fear, and graw, there is nothing else that brings this system below 60 fps.

Like I said, I'd love to see a Supreme Commander benchmark run on that system. It'd make you cry.

Wasn't Supreme Commander supposed to use all 4 cores? How did you benchmark yours? Is there a included benchmark within the game? Or with FRAPS?
I played it a little, before I sent the system to my buddy to mod it. I remember it only loaded 2 cores out 4. Max. CPU usage was 50%.
And at 1680x1050 was smooth like butter with all on max. SLI indicators were at the middle, showing that the video cards were not stressed.
So I guess, it will be a CPU hog. A CPU OC will make it better.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: terentenet
Wasn't Supreme Commander supposed to use all 4 cores? How did you benchmark yours? Is there a included benchmark within the game? Or with FRAPS?
I played it a little, before I sent the system to my buddy to mod it. I remember it only loaded 2 cores out 4. Max. CPU usage was 50%.
And at 1680x1050 was smooth like butter with all on max. SLI indicators were at the middle, showing that the video cards were not stressed.
So I guess, it will be a CPU hog. A CPU OC will make it better.

Run "SupremeCommander.exe /map perftest"

Yeah, 1680x1050 isn't too tough. It's the 2560x1600 that I'm curious to see. It will use four cores, but it won't max them out. IIRC, core 1 is for physics, core 2 is for game play, and 3 and 4 are for sound and other crap. Anything above two cores is used for misc stuff.

 

[MADMAX23]

JAG87,

Well, if you can't notice the difference, that's your problem I guess.....

But just to point this out.....FSB is like a Highway that connects the CPU and RAM mainly, but that it also connects (gateways and exits) the rest of the system, so, the more lanes it has (higher FSB speed/bandwidth) the more cars will be able to travel at the same time in both directions (more data flow allowed).

The narrower the Highway (less lanes), the less cars will be able to travel at the same time, the wider, the more....

It's like why people care not to use RAM memory dividers (1:1 ideal situation)....we don't want any toll in a Highway, we want perfect data flow....no partial bottlenecks...

 

[terentenet]

On the dividers situation. How is it correct for 1:1? If FSB is 300, memory should be 300? or 600?
FSB is quad pumped, DDR2 is just doubled.
FSB 300 quad pumped = 1200MHz
Memory 300 = 600MHz
Memory 600 = 1200MHz

How is it good? Memory at 300 or 600?

 

[MADMAX23]

Originally posted by: terentenet
On the dividers situation. How is it correct for 1:1? If FSB is 300, memory should be 300? or 600?
FSB is quad pumped, DDR2 is just doubled.
FSB 300 quad pumped = 1200MHz
Memory 300 = 600MHz
Memory 600 = 1200MHz

How is it good? Memory at 300 or 600?

In your case, memory should be 300, but I see no point not to set it to work at 600. The higher the better if your FSB can't go higher.

Your Ram is very expensive PC8500, that's a Ram speed of 533Mhz....if you could set your FSB speed to 533 Mhz you'd be running in 1:1 mode. Otherwise, you'll have to use a divider.

Dividers are not optimal when the ratio is negative for the memory, say a FSB ratio of 5:4, meaning that FSB speed is higher than Ram speed, i.e.: you set your FSB speed to 333 Mhz but your Ram is running at 266 Mhz.

Different is when your Ram is running at a higher speed than your FSB's (4:5) .....there's a bottleneck, yes....but it is a better situation than 5:4....

In 1:1 (synchronous FSB:Ram speeds), if you set your FSB speed to, say 333 Mhz, your RAM memory should be set to 333 Mhz, that's DDR2 667 speed (333 Mhz FSB x 2).

To know the real speed of the FSB itself, related to the CPU, you have to multiply your FSB speed by 4. In the example above, say you set your FSB speed to 333Mhz, then your FSB speed would be 1333Mhz (333Mhz x 4 QuadPumped FSB).

 

[terentenet]

So it's OK if I go for 400-450 FSB and set the memory to it's default 600. I will try to lower the timings from default though. Give it some extra volts and try 1200MHz 4-4-4-8 2T.
I can hardly wait for this system to be up and ready.

 

[MADMAX23]

Originally posted by: terentenet
So it's OK if I go for 400-450 FSB and set the memory to it's default 600. I will try to lower the timings from default though. Give it some extra volts and try 1200MHz 4-4-4-8 2T.
I can hardly wait for this system to be up and ready.

Your default Ram speed is 1066Mhz (533 Mhz x 2 = PC8500), not 1200 Mhz, that would be PC9600 memory.

Formula: Say PC8500 memory: 8500/8 = 1066 Mhz DDR2, 1066/2= 533 Mhz actual speed

Yours is running at 533 Mhz by default, not 600 Mhz.

So, yes, you could set your FSB to 400-450 Mhz and your ram at any higher speed like 500, 533, 600, whatever higher...

Hope this helps.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Cant wait to do Intel V8 + 8900X2 SLI when it's out and then I will be the last to laugh ahahahaha! :evil:


(man, these popsicles have too much sugar in them!)

 

[terentenet]

Originally posted by: MADMAX23
Your default Ram speed is 1066Mhz (533 Mhz x 2 = PC8500), not 1200 Mhz, that would be PC9600 memory.
Formula: Say PC8500 memory: 8500/8 = 1066 Mhz DDR2, 1066/2= 533 Mhz actual speed
Yours is running at 533 Mhz by default, not 600 Mhz.
So, yes, you could set your FSB to 400-450 Mhz and your ram at any higher speed like 500, 533, 600, whatever higher...
Hope this helps.

No, I was talking about the new memory that should arrive sometime this week, the memory that will end up in the new system. Team Xtreem 1200mhz. 2 kits of 2x1gb each. 4gb total.
As far as OC'ing the memory, I don't know if I can get too far. It's the memory controller that's the culprit. It handles overclocking 2 sticks very good, but 4 sticks will hinder the overclock some MHz. I will keep the stock frequency and try to lower the timings.

@gersson
Waiting for the 8900 as well. If R600 is a flop and I hope it's not, I wonder: when will Nvidia release the 8900 without having real competition for 8800 GTX/Ultra?

EDIT: Where can I get a good quality Dual Link DVI cable?

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: terentenet
@gersson
Waiting for the 8900 as well. If R600 is a flop and I hope it's not, I wonder: when will Nvidia release the 8900 without having real competition for 8800 GTX/Ultra?

EDIT: Where can I get a good quality Dual Link DVI cable?

You're seriously going to upgrade to the 8900s from the 8800s?

 

[terentenet]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: terentenet
@gersson
Waiting for the 8900 as well. If R600 is a flop and I hope it's not, I wonder: when will Nvidia release the 8900 without having real competition for 8800 GTX/Ultra?

EDIT: Where can I get a good quality Dual Link DVI cable?

You're seriously going to upgrade to the 8900s from the 8800s?

If, but just IF the 8900 are worth the upgrade, why not? I mean, if those come with 160 stream processors and perhaps a little speed bump on the core and memory, the performance increase will be big enough to justify my upgrade.
I'll sell the 8800GTXs and buy 8900 instead.

 

[JAG87]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42
You're seriously going to upgrade to the 8900s from the 8800s?

Of course, so will I. Our hardware is too expensive to let it just sit. The monetary value of it will decrease exponentially once a new generation comes out. Its the vicious cycle you enter once you decide to buy all the highest end parts.


On the FSB topic MADMAX, I cannot argue with your logic, but core 2 is definetely not a bandwith starved platform. and its not just me saying it, various tests have been done, and even with sky high FSB speeds the gains are minimal, within 5% which for me is not worth time for stability testing. The only reason I would touch FSB is to help me achieve my maximum cpu speed (between multipliers). Thats all. Nonetheless, I cannot argue with you that a better interconnect like Hypertransport evidently boosts perfomance. But front side bus is just an old and inefficient architecture. take a look, if you double its speed from 1066 to 2133 (its been done), and run a Sandra memory bandwith benchmark, your throughput is nowhere near 2x. even thou the frequency is doubled.

chaotic42, supreme commander would run like silk on terente's or my computer. here is proof.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: JAG87
chaotic42, supreme commander would run like silk on terente's or my computer. here is proof.

Like I said, run the performance test. When you've got a five player game on an 81x81 map, it eats the system alive. His video there was on a tiny map with nothing on the screen.

 

[JAG87]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42

Originally posted by: JAG87
chaotic42, supreme commander would run like silk on terente's or my computer. here is proof.

Like I said, run the performance test. When you've got a five player game on an 81x81 map, it eats the system alive. His video there was on a tiny map with nothing on the screen.

He was also using only one of his cards because SLI does not work with Vista, and he was running the game under Vista. Under XP with SLI enabled the game will never fall below 30 fps (which is the threshold for RTS games). Believe me dude, I've seen it all. The only games that drop below playable frames at 2560x1600 4xAA 16xAF are COD2, FEAR, GRAW, VEGAS, and FLIGHT SIM X. But they still run anywhere from 30-60 fps which is "acceptable" for single player games. But COD2 Multiplayer for example has to be ran in DX7 unless you wanna get owned every round.

 

[VERTIGGO]

I get a steady 20fps in SUPCOM and 30 really close or really far with riginsig. x16HQAF no AA and 1920x1200 which is playable. But im definately feeling the need for Quad.

Hurry up Barcelona! At least give us a comparison to shop.