PDA

View Full Version : Looking for comments on FX card performance and dual cpu motherboards


psionprime
02-22-04, 04:54 PM
I am wondering if any have experienced "slower" fps when their FX card is in a dual cpu motherboard and faster when in a single.

I'm just fishing for comments and perhaps any tips if one has been in that situation but found a speedup.

I'm a little lackluster about my 2-3 fps with the Dawn FX demo. I have a Asus A7M266-D with two 2400+ Athlon MPs, 1G RAM, Win2K and a GeForce FX 5600 Ultra. Most of the time my system runs pretty good but seems to choke on intense graphics.

Thanks for any feedback !

Malfunction
02-22-04, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by psionprime
I am wondering if any have experienced "slower" fps when their FX card is in a dual cpu motherboard and faster when in a single.

I'm just fishing for comments and perhaps any tips if one has been in that situation but found a speedup.

I'm a little lackluster about my 2-3 fps with the Dawn FX demo. I have a Asus A7M266-D with two 2400+ Athlon MPs, 1G RAM, Win2K and a GeForce FX 5600 Ultra. Most of the time my system runs pretty good but seems to choke on intense graphics.

Thanks for any feedback !

For one, most games are not setup to take advantage of SMP. Another is that most mobo's that support Dual Processor configs don't have the best chipset's on them that really offer gaming performance.

Best advice, try to tweak your software as best as you can. Chipset drivers need to be updated when necessary, 53.03 drivers seem to be great for Nvidia cards at the moment, make sure you don't have any software conflicts, etc...

Good luck :)

Peace,

:afro:

Gator
02-22-04, 08:55 PM
Originally posted by psionprime
...GeForce FX 5600 Ultra. Most of the time my system runs pretty good but seems to choke on intense graphics...

It may have nothing to do with your dual CPU setup, and everything to do with your choice of video card and game settings. What resolution are you trying to play at? And are you using AA/AF? FX5600Ultra is not regarded as the best of cards, often performing at a GF3TI / GF4 TI4200 level in DX8 games. I recommend you play at no more than 1024x768, and disable AA/AF. That should resolve your performance issues.

zakelwe
02-23-04, 08:01 AM
Just on teh subject of dual AMD chipsets ( 760 ) it is a very slow chipset and also the RAM runs slow ( 133-144 choice typical ).

For instance above with GF4 4400 -> 10500 3dmark2001
Moved to nforce2 at 220FSB and -> 14000.

Not sure if this is the case herre though as are not the demo's quite intensive ? Gator's thoughts probably most correct.

Regards

Andy

Gator
02-23-04, 08:07 AM
Originally posted by zakelwe
Just on teh subject of dual AMD chipsets ( 760 ) it is a very slow chipset and also the RAM runs slow ( 133-144 choice typical ).

For instance above with GF4 4400 -> 10500 3dmark2001
Moved to nforce2 at 220FSB and -> 14000.

Not sure if this is the case herre though as are not the demo's quite intensive ? Gator's thoughts probably most correct.

Regards

Andy

your FSB increase to 220mhz is probably more likely the cause of your performance jump. 3dmark is VERY sensitive to increases in the FSB

Yes a chipset can make a big difference in performance, but not by 4000 marks, unless you OC ;)

zakelwe
02-23-04, 08:10 AM
Originally posted by Gator
your FSB increase to 220mhz is probably more likely the cause of your performance jump. 3dmark is VERY sensitive to increases in the FSB

Yes a chipset can make a big difference in performance, but not by 4000 marks, unless you OC ;)

Hi Gator,

I know, I was trying to get across there was a double whammy. it is a slow chipset and they only allow you up a few MHz on the FSB to try and compensate. But if the demo is intensive then this is by the by anyhow.

Regards

Andy

saturnotaku
02-23-04, 08:11 AM
Originally posted by Gator
your FSB increase to 220mhz is probably more likely the cause of your performance jump. 3dmark is VERY sensitive to increases in the FSB


3DMark 2001 is very sensitive, '03 isn't.

If you're interested in dual processors for gaming, your best bet would be to upgrade to an Intel 865 or 875 chipset and pick up a Hyperthreading-endabled Pentium 4 (the 2.6 and 2.8 GHz chips can be had for $200 or less right now). In that case, you'll be able to take advantage of the massive increase in front side bus speed, plus any applications that take advantage of Hyperthreading will benefit.

Gator
02-23-04, 08:16 AM
Originally posted by saturnotaku
3DMark 2001 is very sensitive, '03 isn't.

If you're interested in dual processors for gaming, your best bet would be to upgrade to an Intel 865 or 875 chipset and pick up a Hyperthreading-endabled Pentium 4 (the 2.6 and 2.8 GHz chips can be had for $200 or less right now). In that case, you'll be able to take advantage of the massive increase in front side bus speed, plus any applications that take advantage of Hyperthreading will benefit.

but why do that? Aside from the system not having overclockability and the AMD chipset not being the fastest... don't you agree that the FX5600U video card is probably more to blame for psionprime's lacking performance? He still hasn't answered my question about what settings he's playing games at... if he says more than 1024x768 with AA/AF then that's probably the real reason he's losing fps on that system, the FX5600U is not the greatest of cards ;)

psionprime
02-23-04, 09:49 AM
Thanks for the replies.

Gator, I play at what ever ressolution I feel comfortable at. Everquest was 1600 x 1200 x 32 with quin AA. Most RT games are set the same. FPS at whatever setting makes it smooth. I just finished Temple of Elemental Evil with everything maxed. But these don't matter as I don't think they use much of the FX features. I may be wrong.

I downloaded some of the demos that should (I would have thought) showcase the FX cards in the best light. DawnFX, even at 1024x768 no AA & no filtering runs very choppy with before and after cpu loads showing < 2% and no file I/O going on.

What bothers me is the FX future. My expectations for the DawnFX / anyFX demo running two(+) resolution modes below max without AA or filtering on a non-first generation card to be silky smooth. I expect to run at that resolution with maxed settings and it run silky smooth as 1024x768x32 is my minimum choice for a modern desktop ressolution. The FX gaming future, at least for my system, looks bleak (Halflife 2 coming soon ;) )

Thanks again !

Malfunction
02-23-04, 10:08 AM
Originally posted by psionprime
Thanks for the replies.

Gator, I play at what ever ressolution I feel comfortable at. Everquest was 1600 x 1200 x 32 with quin AA. Most RT games are set the same. FPS at whatever setting makes it smooth. I just finished Temple of Elemental Evil with everything maxed. But these don't matter as I don't think they use much of the FX features. I may be wrong.

I downloaded some of the demos that should (I would have thought) showcase the FX cards in the best light. DawnFX, even at 1024x768 no AA & no filtering runs very choppy with before and after cpu loads showing < 2% and no file I/O going on.

What bothers me is the FX future. My expectations for the DawnFX / anyFX demo running two(+) resolution modes below max without AA or filtering on a non-first generation card to be silky smooth. I expect to run at that resolution with maxed settings and it run silky smooth as 1024x768x32 is my minimum choice for a modern desktop ressolution. The FX gaming future, at least for my system, looks bleak (Halflife 2 coming soon ;) )

Thanks again !

Spec Summary Asus A7M266-D:


Supports up to 2 socket A Athlon MP processors and single socket A Athlon™ MP / Athlon™ XP/ Athlon™ / Duron™ processor
200/266MHz Front-Side-Bus (FSB)
AMD 762 north bridge and AMD 768 south bridge
Supports up to 3.5GB registered (4 DIMMs) or 2GB (2 DIMMs) un-buffered PC2100/PC1600 ECC / non-ECC DDR DIMM
2 x Ultra-DMA 33/66/100
AGP Pro / 4X support
3 x PCI 33-MHz 32-bit slots, 2 x PCI 66/33-MHz 64/32-bit slots
Bundled PCI USB 2.0 card
C-Media CMI8738 6-Channel audio controller
WfM 2.0, DMI 2.0, WOL, WOR, Chassis Intrusion, SM Bus
ASUS PC Probe™ system health monitoring software

And your concerned about Nvidia's FX Future? :confused:

Peace,

:afro:

Nephilim
02-23-04, 10:31 AM
Originally posted by psionprime
What bothers me is the FX future. My expectations for the DawnFX / anyFX demo running two(+) resolution modes below max without AA or filtering on a non-first generation card to be silky smooth.

I may be misunderstanding what you are saying, but I think that's part of the problem right there.

The fact that you have a midrange card coupled with a poor gaming motherboard just compounds that problem.

...this is just what I think, I could be wrong.

Gator
02-23-04, 10:43 AM
Originally posted by psionprime
... Everquest was 1600 x 1200 x 32 with quin AA...

Well that could be the problem if your performance is lacking, 1600x1200 is pretty high, especialy with some AA/AF. I really think the problem here is yoru choice of video card, not your dual CPU setup. Either lower your resolution, or grab yourself an FX5900NU to solve your performance issues.

saturnotaku
02-23-04, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by Gator
the FX5600U is not the greatest of cards ;)

Indeed. 1600x1200 with AA and AF on anything lower than a Radeon 9800XT or FX 5950 Ultra just isn't a good idea. If you turn AA and AF off, you can get away with that resolution on a 9800 Pro or FX 5900.

The FX 5600U doesn't totally suck, but at the settings he's running that would far more easily explain the performance woes. The 5600 should do just fine at 1024x768 with 2x or Quincux AA and 2x or 4x AF, but anything more and it will choke.

zoomy942
02-23-04, 05:47 PM
that 5600 is based off the 5800 core and it had problems from the beginning. so i think his dual cpu is okay for now, he just needs to toss that 5600 into some other rig and get a 5900NU or a 5700 NU. (i gotta plug my card)