SLI leaving me disappointed

[Lonbjerg]

Looks like the raising of the BS flag is quite common following a post by Fx1...

Just put him on ignore...he is either lying to hard...or to ignorant to understand technical stuff.

 

[Fx1]

I have owned games from BIS since Operation Flashpoint -> ARMA -> ARMAII



That is your llimited view, not a fact.

You find another engine that does ALL the stuff that the ARMA engine does....and don't look like wireframes...I dare you!


Besides the what does that have to do with the CPU performance?
You are just barking now...did ARMA hurt your E-peen?



Compared to what it actually DOES....it's amazing.
And WFT is "clunky"? LOL



You try and do gymnastics in full combat gear...you don't jump aound in that.




Good thing they are going PhysX for ARMA III then...as a former veteran myself, I can tell you no other game comes even close to real life combat.
You have one option if you want realism...that is ARMA II.

BF and COD are just kiddie-shooters.



IT's hard to take you serious when you are obvious ignrant about the topic.

ARMAII is a home user vesion of VBS...used by armed forces...because it's the best mil-sim out there....do read up!
There is a reason why the commnuity consists of many former and current military servicemen...*sigh*



Again, you view conflicts with reality:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2009/08/10/arma_ii_gameplay_performance_image_quality/



Name a better mil-sim...come on...I dare you!

All you FUD is about how ARMA broke you E-peen and you cannot run it at max settings.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/04/23/intel-core-i7-3770k-review/7

Do you have anything relevant...like data, documentation ect. for any of your claims?
What?
No.

Didn't think so.

I have run ARMA 2 on max believe me it wasnt that hard. The game has hardly any graphical bling at all.

The way the character models behave with the environment are pretty comical.

You could argue that Arma 3 lives up to its claims better than Arma 2 does.

Far Cry 3 has more realistic guns than Arma 2 which is supposed to be a "simulator"

 

[2is]

Eh, he's entertaining. Besides, I wouldn't want some poor soul not knowing any better to get fooled by the lies. Be strong, its our duty to sift through the BS for the common good! lol

 

[Fx1]

Mass effect 3 = consoleport....LOL

Skyrim @60 FPS on Q6600 = lie: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/skyrim-performance-benchmark,3074-9.html

I give up...you are going on ignore for lying.

What a croc of crap.

That bench shows the 4ghz i5 at 43 FPS 2500k CPU.

I have a 4ghz i7 950 that never goes below 60 FPS on Ultra at 1900x1200.

So much for those benches.

Also Skyrim is a console port!

 

[Lonbjerg]

Eh, he's entertaining. Besides, I wouldn't want some poor soul not knowing any better to get fooled by the lies. Be strong, its our duty to sift through the BS for the common good! lol

I have done my duty...can only stand so mcuh BS or lies before I shut off.

 

[notty22]

Looks like the raising of the BS flag is quite common following a post by Fx1...

I have to agree. It's gone from asking and interjecting for help, to belligerent, thread capping know it all, no evidence, change of point, minutia arguing. Which is in the end not helpful to the original topic.
An Older NV chipset , with a quad core is not a stellar performer nowadays, with DDr2. And it will not O/C that well either. Long ago proven as fact. That should be what the OP took from this. A potential sale/upgrade could uncover some more gaming edge that he was looking for.

 

[omeds]

Have you seen ARMA 2? IT LOOKS LIKE CRAP.

:awe:

I beg to differ. You just don't know how to get the best visuals out of a real PC game, or what's needed to make it run well it seems.

Couple screenies of ArmA2 I took a while back

(I know you will dislike them ofc, but posting for others benefit)

 

[Lonbjerg]

I have to agree. It's gone from asking and interjecting for help, to belligerent, thread capping know it all, no evidence, change of point, minutia arguing. Which is in the end not helpful to the original topic.
An Older NV chipset , with a quad core is not a stellar performer nowadays, with DDr2. And the fact it will not O/C that well either. Long ago proven as fact. That should be what the OP took from this. A potential sale/upgrade could uncover some more gaming edge that he was looking for.

Remeber back in the day...when there was a heated deabte aboyt if quadcores ever would be needed for gaming?
Many people claimed their dualcore would do fine.

Now we have reached the point, where just a "quadcore" won't do the job.
Now you need a newer multicore CPU to max out the most demanding games.

I love progress.

 

[2is]

Remeber back in the day...when there was a heated deabte aboyt if quadcores ever would be needed for gaming?
Many people claimed their dualcore would do fine.

Now we have reached the point, where just a "quadcore" won't do the job.
Now you need a newer multicore CPU to max out the most demanding games.

I love progress.

Ahh yes... The E8400 vs Q6600 wars. The memories... (I went with the Q6600)

 

[Lonbjerg]

Ahh yes... The E8400 vs Q6600 wars. The memories... (I went with the Q6600)

So did I...a golden CPU..and pay off not too long after...when games started putting the hurt on Core2Dou's

 

[Fx1]

:awe:

I beg to differ. You just don't know how to get the best visuals out of a real PC game, or what's needed to make it run well it seems.

Couple screenies of ArmA2 I took a while back

(I know you will dislike them ofc, but posting for others benefit)

Static photos of Arma dont prove anything. Especially when that helicopter will behave erratic and wont interact with the environment correctly. What makes Arma 2 ugly is the way it all behaves.

Have the player try and jump a fence and then tell me it looks "amazing"

 

[notty22]

There was a forum 'era' of the i7 920 VS the "best ddr3 chipset/Q9650" add in water cooled o/c's , on a mature VS immature platform, as which was the best gaming platform. That was , what 4 years+ ago now. We can look back with hindsight, hopefully and know which has lasted longer in the test of time !

 

[Firestorm007]

I have done my duty...can only stand so mcuh BS or lies before I shut off.

Agreed. Don't bother. It's not worth it. He'll only respond with an insult or more of his BS.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

I think I lost the thread somewhere, but the OP has a Q9550 which can be clocked a mile past stock and is quite a bit more capable than a Q6600 on account of its higher efficiency 12 meg L2 cache (Core2's were always starved for cache because of their 2x2 configuration).

Overclocked Q9550's are still very capable processors that will give you raw FPS even if they don't give you the smoothest gameplay in the qualitative sense.

 

[notty22]

I think I lost the thread somewhere, but the OP has a Q9550 which can be clocked a mile past stock and is quite a bit more capable than a Q6600 on account of its higher efficiency 12 meg L2 cache (Core2's were always starved for cache because of their 2x2 configuration).

Overclocked Q9550's are still very capable processors that will give you raw FPS even if they don't give you the smoothest gameplay in the qualitative sense.

Did you miss the very first original post that read, a STOCK , clocked Q9550.
And was not comparing to past platforms, but possibly newer ones?

 

[Fx1]

Did you miss the very first original post that read, a STOCK , clocked Q9550.
And was not comparing to past platforms, but possibly newer ones?

So rather than overclock his CPU.

Its a better idea to buy a new CPU, Mobo, Ram?

Games havent come very far in the last 5 years. So why would you need the best CPU to play them.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

Did you miss the very first original post that read, a STOCK , clocked Q9550.
And was not comparing to past platforms, but possibly newer ones?

-No actually, I got that, I was just wondering why a sub thread about Q6600's showed up halfway through the discussion. Sorry, I did not mean to offend you.

Obvious answer for OP is overclock CPU + RAM if possible since he still has a decent enough set-up (not that I'm biased or anything...) and see if that gets him to the promised land. After he exhausts the free solution, then he should consider the pay solutions which include new CPU and/or ditching SLI for a current single card.

 

[FalseChristian]

Some games are CPU limited and some games are GPU limited. That's the way it has always been. That's why it's important to have a CPU like my i5 2500K overclocked to 5GHz and 2 GTX 460 1GB overclocked to 870/1740/4200 so you're ready for both types of games.

 

[jellowiggler]

He should try the going the OC route with the q9550.

I still run a g0 q6600. Good processor at 3+ ghz. It still keeps up pretty well. Not oc'd i5 2500k fast. But fast enough to play at 1080p on my 560 ti in mwo and wot. If you have an ok cooler try it. You won't hurt anything if you don't touch the voltage settings. Play with the mem speed and dividers. If you pick up enough speed consider it a free upgrade. If not, go get yourself a new toy. Awesome either way!

 

[Fx1]

Some games are CPU limited and some games are GPU limited. That's the way it has always been. That's why it's important to have a CPU like my i5 2500K overclocked to 5GHz and 2 GTX 460 1GB overclocked to 870/1740/4200 so you're ready for both types of games.

Worth upgrading those 460's i had that setup.

BF3 and Crysis and Far Cry are going to need 7970 speeds to play on Ultra.