Upgraded from 3500+ Winnie to X2 4400+

biff420

Member
May 24, 2003
60
0
0
As the title says, I just upgraded to a dual core proc from a single core version. Went with the 4400+ because of the speed and cache. Basically I got two of what I had with double the cache. The main reason for this was to help out with my SLI setup. I was noticing some major isses when trying to play COD2 at 1600x1200 in DirectX 9.

Well, now that I have got it, im not impressed with the performance in COD2 still. I might have gained about 5-10FPS but it still seems very laggy to me. Oh well, will just stick with DirectX 7 and my 500FPS.

As for other apps...haven't tested them all but I do notice a decent increase in overall windows response times. Things feel snappier to me now.

Oh and one more thing...with BOINC I can now run two instances of seti@home so that roxors!
 

biff420

Member
May 24, 2003
60
0
0
Well like I said...I dont like the "laggyness" i get with dx9. I get like 60-70FPS usually but the game seems less fluid as it does with dx7 enabled.

I have no idea why COD2 needs so much horsepower other than the fact that it was written like $hit for dx9.
 

Regs

Lifer
Aug 9, 2002
16,665
21
81
Single player is fine for me on a 2.4 3200 on a 7800GT. Like PC Surgeon said 40 FPS is perfectly playable. Granted that the minimum frame rates at times will be around 20 FPS yet they come scarce -- the eye candy will make them look they were never there. I waiting to see if future technology, conroe for example, can double the framerates.
 

Bobthelost

Diamond Member
Dec 1, 2005
4,360
0
0
Why did you think there would be any noticable improvement?

The 4400X2 is two 2.2Ghz cores, the 3500 is a single 2.2Ghz core with half the cache. The increased cache is pretty irrelevant, nearly all programs don't use it or don't care. The game is not known to be brilliant with SMP support.

The failure is that you were expecting something unreasonable. You'd have gotten more improvement going for a 4000+ or FX-57 or just overclocking.

Of course if you now want to do some DVD transcoding you're laughing.
 

Regs

Lifer
Aug 9, 2002
16,665
21
81
Well I believe there was a thread a few months back saying a dual core CPU increases framerate in CoD. Which was speculation or flimsical to begin with as everybody's system is different and 2-3 FPS is marginal to say the least.

The rule for cache on the AMD is the faster the better not the larger the better. Unfortunately AMD has no intention in improving cache hits or latency until their next architecture.
 

biff420

Member
May 24, 2003
60
0
0
Well my original thoughts were that COD would directly benefit from the dual cores. But mostly, since I run a lot of other programs while gaming, if figured on core could take on the other stuff and one could be dedicated to COD. This, I thought, would make a pretty big difference. Guess I was mistaken....I am still pleased with the purchase. I just blame the a$$hats at Activision for not knowing how to write code for dx9 properly.
 

fixxxer0

Senior member
Dec 28, 2004
357
0
0
fps doesnt account for stuttering... like when you dont have enough ram for bf2 or something.....

so u can have 100fps and still get stuttering crappy game play
 

ddviper

Golden Member
Dec 15, 2004
1,411
0
0
Wow i can play with 30FPS and im happy, as long as the game runs mostly smooth, Im fine, i dont need 100000000FPS

-Got spoildnessnessness?