phenom x4 955 --> low frame rates

[dirtyboy]

I just upgraded to a phenom x4 955 cpu from an intel e2160 pentium dual core oc'd to 3ghz. But my frame rate has dipped from 60fps to 30fps?! This happens in stalkers SoC/CS and in Neverwinter Nights 2. It does not happen in Unreal Tournament 3 or in Street Fighter 4.(it's possible that because I always use vert sync that in those games the frame rate I get are just off the charts, but I definitely feel the difference in stability between the games in which this issue affects.)

If I hide the GUI (character icons, chat window, etc) in Neverwinter Nights 2 the frame rate returns to normal.

I have tried many dual core optimizations and AMDs CPU drivers as well as old drivers. I am at a loss as to what to do next.

Anyone have any ideas?

I used to have this motherboard with 2gb ram and an e2160 pentium dual core oc'd to 3ghz:
Abit IX38 QuadGT (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813127033&cm_re=abit_ix38_quadgt-_-13-127-033-_-Product)

Now I have this one, with 4gb ram with a phenom x4 955:
DFI DK 790FXB M3H5 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813136067&cm_re=dfi_am3-_-13-136-067-_-Product)

I use Windows XP SP3 with an MSI GTX 260

[Wolken007]

When you upgraded hardware, did you do a clean install of windows?

[hell_of_doom227]

Phenom I and Phenom II are slow CPUs. The difference between Phenom II and i7 for example will be even bigger with ATI/NVidia DX11 release.

[dirtyboy]

When you upgraded hardware, did you do a clean install of windows?

Yes.

Phenom I and Phenom II are slow CPUs.

I really don't think it has anything to do with lack of hardware performance. If anything it has to do with my chipset not liking my graphics card. Although, I do get the performance, it just seems like there's some sort of conflict rendering both 2D and 3D at the same time, or just a problem rendering 2D period. As even the title screen (in NWN2) gets half the frame rate when I turn off vsync, like 2000fps instead of 4000fps.

I'm thinking I may not have made this quite as clear as I thought I did as many may not have played NWN2. If you look at the screenshot below you can see where the character icons and chat window and spell slots are. In NWN2 you can hit a key and hide all that stuff leaving you with just the 3D image. When I do that the frame rate returns to what it should be: >60fps.

http://i26.tinypic.com/2hqgd36.jpg

[Q]

Phenom I and Phenom II are slow CPUs. The difference between Phenom II and i7 for example will be even bigger with ATI/NVidia DX11 release.

The Phenoms are slower than the i7 at the majority of tasks, but the Phenom x4 955 still sweeps the floor with the Intel e2160. He should have seen a large increase in speed.

Since you are running XP SP3, are you running all of the AMD specific multicore drivers, registry tweaks, and applications? I see you mention running the dual core tweaks, but did you change that one registry setting that MS recommends?

Pretty much, just follow this:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=983781

[Redeemed]

Phenom I and Phenom II are slow CPUs. The difference between Phenom II and i7 for example will be even bigger with ATI/NVidia DX11 release.

I do apologize, but that can't be farther from the truth.

I've not owned a PhII myself, but I did own a PhenomX4 9600 BE back in the day. Ran it for a while, and then went on to a Q6600. And here within a month (hopefully) I'll be rocking an i7 920. But bluntly put, my old Phenom X4 9600 wasn't noticably slower than my Q6600... both were always at stock clocks. Never oc'd either of them. Granted, had I oc'd the Q6600 it probably would have then proven to faster, how much remains unknown. But then the comparison wouldn't be fair (comparing an oc'd Q6600 to a stock-clocked 9600BE is far from fair). And honestly speaking, I'm not expecting the i7 920 to appear all that much faster than my Q6600.

Any person that claims the original Phenom and the Phenom II are slow CPUs clearly has no experience with either... at least no extensive experience, or they are incredibly biased. Heck, I just built a brand new rig for my older sister. It's sporting a PheomII X2 550 BE and that is one snappy little rig. Rockin' 3 Gigs of RAM on Vista HP x64 using on-board video. She doesn't do any gaming. Very basic stuff (surfing web, e-mail, small photo/video collection, no music), but it excels at all the she does. And since it's AM3 she has a lot of upgrade options down the road.

Not trying to single you out or anything, just wanting to correcting an improper assumption you've seemed to make. :) Anything recent from both Intel and AMD seems to be rather speedy for basic day to day functions.

[Shamrock]

make sure your motherboard supports PhII 955. Might need a BIOS update. If it's not updated, it will only run at 1.7Ghz. At least mine did, till I updated.

[kaptkarl]

I do apologize, but that can't be farther from the truth.

I've not owned a PhII myself, but I did own a PhenomX4 9600 BE back in the day. Ran it for a while, and then went on to a Q6600. And here within a month (hopefully) I'll be rocking an i7 920. But bluntly put, my old Phenom X4 9600 wasn't noticably slower than my Q6600... both were always at stock clocks. Never oc'd either of them. Granted, had I oc'd the Q6600 it probably would have then proven to faster, how much remains unknown. But then the comparison wouldn't be fair (comparing an oc'd Q6600 to a stock-clocked 9600BE is far from fair). And honestly speaking, I'm not expecting the i7 920 to appear all that much faster than my Q6600.

Any person that claims the original Phenom and the Phenom II are slow CPUs clearly has no experience with either... at least no extensive experience, or they are incredibly biased. Heck, I just built a brand new rig for my older sister. It's sporting a PheomII X2 550 BE and that is one snappy little rig. Rockin' 3 Gigs of RAM on Vista HP x64 using on-board video. She doesn't do any gaming. Very basic stuff (surfing web, e-mail, small photo/video collection, no music), but it excels at all the she does. And since it's AM3 she has a lot of upgrade options down the road.

Not trying to single you out or anything, just wanting to correcting an improper assumption you've seemed to make. :) Anything recent from both Intel and AMD seems to be rather speedy for basic day to day functions.

Hey Redeemed, you really can't put to much stock into what this guy says. He's a Nvidia/Intel fanboy who trolls most threads not contributing much fact about a particular topic. I totally agree with you about the Phenom II CPU's. My current rig has the X3 720, oc"d to 3.6GHz on air....yes on air, and it flies. Best bang for the buck anywhere.:D

I've found Phenom CPU's to be reasonably priced, fast and stable, and overall a very good value. The "high end" Intels are the "fastest", but Phenoms are NOT slow by any stretch.

Kapt

[gstanford]

Motherboard chipset drivers would be my guess.

There is nothing slow about a Phenom II x4 955.

[dirtyboy]

Motherboard chipset drivers would be my guess.

Does AMD make their own drivers? Like Intel does. The only thing I could find on their website was some disk performance utility, which doesn't seem like it would help me.

NM, They are here: http://game.amd.com/us-en/drivers_catalyst.aspx?driver=Integrated/xp32-chipset

[shilk]

Have you tried using the AMD .exe for NWN2? There was one specific for AMD CPUs in the game directory.

I think the CPU drivers are already included in SP3, iirc. If you install them, I think it screws up the installation again. Are you using XP64?

[dirtyboy]

That AMD executable is specifically for Athlon XP chips.

The CPU drivers in Windows XP are written by Microsoft. I don't really know what AMDs drivers do exactly, but I thought it couldn't to try them.

Right now, I'm convinced this is a bug in the drivers somewhere. I don't know what else it could be. Like, it can't address 2D and 3D to the same memory space or they are taking up the same memory space because the chipset won't tell the drivers where to stick it or something like that, I'm not a programmer.

[gstanford]

Well, presumably AMD will have chipset drivers available for their motherboards. Their driver download section of the site is an absolute joke (as are their ATi based chipsets). I know its obvious but have you checked for drivers on the disc that should have come with your motherboard.

Personally, I'd flog the 790FX motherboard off and get an nForce based board instead. Less hassle, no less performance and my 940 is effortlessly doing 3.4ghz in my motherboard.

[dirtyboy]

The following games are fine:
Aquamark
3Dmark06
FEAR
Drakensang
Unreal Tournament 3
Street Fighter 4
Age of Wonders Shadow Magic
Fallout 2
Neverwinter Nights
Temple of Elemental Evil
X2 The Threat
Ys Oath in Felghana
X3 Demo

The problem effects these games:
Hearts of Iron 2 (I should get 60fps but it gets 40fps)
Neverwinter Nights 2
Stalkers Clear Sky
Stalkers Shadow of Chernobyl

I don't know if anyone can see a pattern. I can't.

[dirtyboy]

OK, this is a little delayed, but the problem was that I was using 3D avatars in NWN2 and when I switched to 2D avatars the frame rate returned to normal. I guess the problem was game specific after all. I can only guess that the problems I had with the other games had to do with that crumby DFI board I had.