PDA

View Full Version : Wheres the bottleneck


CptHawkeye
06-30-04, 11:58 AM
Hey all, with my 6800gt on the way I just want to make sure of my cpu's current bottleneck and how to deal with it.

When the card arrives, I'm gonna have a P4 2.6c overclocked to 2.8, 800fsb, 512 ddr-400(pc-3200) ram and the geforce gt all running on an Asus P4P800 mobo.

Looking at those specs, I would think that the bottleneck will now be in my ram, which could be easily fixed by adding another 512 stick.

After that I should have a nice gaming machine. Penny for your thoughts? Am I off-base here?

|JuiceZ|
06-30-04, 12:24 PM
Another 512stick for a total of a 1gig ram should tide you over until yer next cpu/mb upgrade. Keep in mind though, a cpu bottleneck will be noticed more or less in gaming depending on your rez. I'd say grab an extra stick now, plug in yer gt when it comes in and go from there. It'll be a heck of a lot easier on you to isolate bottlenecks once everything is installed.

Gator
06-30-04, 12:28 PM
your PC looks good, but yes you could use another 512 ram, go for it and as JuiceZ said that should tide you over for awhile

Enjoy the GT :)

Dazz
06-30-04, 12:43 PM
2.8Ghz is getting on abit try for 3+GHz

Gator
06-30-04, 12:47 PM
2.8Ghz is getting on abit try for 3+GHz

:screwy: How much difference could that possibly make. I mean if he can overclock the 2.6 to 3.0 or higher, DEFINETLY go for it. But if your implying he should spend money for another P4 when he already has 2.8ghz, that's just a waste of money in my opinion.

DaveW
06-30-04, 02:48 PM
You need more ram. I just upgraded from 768 to 1 gig because some games like UT2004 can have a payload of 900 meg at times. Those are times when your harddrive starts being accessed. Even if you harddrive is not "thrashing", each little blip on your HD LED = 1 lost frame. You want to get to a point when your HD is completely inactive during play.

CptHawkeye
06-30-04, 03:57 PM
Well, like a previous post mentioned, I dont relaly see the necessity in going to 3 ghz from over 2.8, as the difference should be minimal. However, that did peak my interest just a bit.

Anyone know of a good CPU cooling system (not water cooling, too risky) that I could purchase in order to hit the 3 mark and beyond?

Dazz
06-30-04, 04:03 PM
Of course i mean overclocking it more, P4 can do 400MHz easy.

CptHawkeye
06-30-04, 04:07 PM
You really think I should try going to 3ghz on stock?

My brain tells me no but my testosterone says YES.

Arioch
06-30-04, 04:12 PM
You really think I should try going to 3ghz on stock?

My brain tells me no but my testosterone says YES.

You can try it but if it screws up something I doubt anyone here will send you a check to cover the cost of a replacement!

Dazz
06-30-04, 04:13 PM
My P4 2.8C did 3.4GHz no problem, thats 600Mhz and also on stock cooling, but with Artic Silver 3.

fleshonbone
06-30-04, 09:59 PM
I don't mean this to be offensive to anyone, I just am confused when it comes to the o/c crowd:

Why do people go out and buy P4 3 Ghz range cpus for the purpose of o/c, (and all the variables, risks, fancy cooling setups, expensive RAM that enables you to successfully o/c), when, for less money, you could go out and buy a 754 A64 without the need to buy all that extra stuff. Especially when o/c does not guarantee anything.

Is it just the fun factor? Ie you guys enjoy tweeking everything out? I mean, I understand, I'm not being critical, as I do the same thing with a lot of things, but, I guess I just don't understand why so many people would pass up more efficient performance for certainly a lot more hassle, more money, no guarantees of performance increases, potential problems, voiding of warranty's, shorter cpu/mobo/ps/component life, etc etc...

Helanic Frost
06-30-04, 10:06 PM
I don't mean this to be offensive to anyone, I just am confused when it comes to the o/c crowd:

Why do people go out and buy P4 3 Ghz range cpus for the purpose of o/c, and all the variables, risks, fancy cooling setups, expensive RAM, etc., when, for less money, you could go out and buy a 754 A64 without the need to buy all that extra stuff. Especially when o/c does not guarantee anything.

Is it just the fun factor? Ie you guys enjoy tweeking everything out? I mean, I understand, I'm not being critical, as I do the same thing, but, I guess I just don't understand why so many people would pass up more efficient performance for certainly a lot more hassle, more money, and no guarantees of performance increases, potential problems, voiding of warranty's etc....

Well i'm not a serious OC'er, i like to squeeze an extra 5-10 mhz out of my FSB, 50-100mhz out of my CPU, and 10-25% more out of my video card. It's actually very easy to keep a low OC cool and you gain significant performance gains. Reason alot of the guys buy intel is the some of the athlon 64s hvae their clock mulitpliers locked from my understanding and many of them just trust what they know. Building an AMD system is a whole other ball of wax entirely and many of them just don't want to deal with it.

nvnews-reader
06-30-04, 10:11 PM
I doubt you could tell a diff in 2.8gz vs 3.0gz unless you smoke your processor :firedevil

Blacklash
07-01-04, 12:04 AM
Much of it is a game and 'fun' to some. No offense taken.

My rig has a range from default 3.4/200@2.5-2-2 to 3.9/234@2.5-2-3 currently. I like having the range to choose from. I do not know of a 400dollar athlon CPU that will out do my rig at 3.9. Also in the same price range ,400 and less, Intel is very good outside of areas other than gaming as well. A default Northwood 3.4 will lose in UT2004 to a similiar priced Athlon(3400 also 400dollars) and win in Aquamark/RtCW. All the other areas ,save number crunching, which the Athlon edges it out on, belong to the intel.

Here's a review that has a Athlon 64 3400 head to head vs default Northwoods and EEs.

I guess I am saying I like the range of performance the Intel has across all applications.



http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-208-1.htm



I don't mean this to be offensive to anyone, I just am confused when it comes to the o/c crowd:

Why do people go out and buy P4 3 Ghz range cpus for the purpose of o/c, (and all the variables, risks, fancy cooling setups, expensive RAM that enables you to successfully o/c), when, for less money, you could go out and buy a 754 A64 without the need to buy all that extra stuff. Especially when o/c does not guarantee anything.

Is it just the fun factor? Ie you guys enjoy tweeking everything out? I mean, I understand, I'm not being critical, as I do the same thing with a lot of things, but, I guess I just don't understand why so many people would pass up more efficient performance for certainly a lot more hassle, more money, no guarantees of performance increases, potential problems, voiding of warranty's, shorter cpu/mobo/ps/component life, etc etc...

fleshonbone
07-01-04, 12:20 AM
Well i'm not a serious OC'er, i like to squeeze an extra 5-10 mhz out of my FSB, 50-100mhz out of my CPU, and 10-25% more out of my video card. It's actually very easy to keep a low OC cool and you gain significant performance gains. Reason alot of the guys buy intel is the some of the athlon 64s hvae their clock mulitpliers locked from my understanding and many of them just trust what they know. Building an AMD system is a whole other ball of wax entirely and many of them just don't want to deal with it.

No disrespect meant, but I'm not saying there aren't some advantages to oc, I am running my x800pro oc and am enjoying some good success with the results.

What I am saying is that why would someone want to buy the said p4 setup when you could buy the amd64 setup and have equal or better performance without all the baggage that comes with oc.

I understand if you already are on an Intel platform and you are simply upgrading a chip or something, I guess I should've clarified that I don't understand why someone would go out and put together an Intel system for the purpose of oc it when they could put together the AMD64 system for less money. By the time you get done buying the high-grade ram, top of the line case fans, cpu fans, heatsinks, in some cases liquid cooling, etc., it all adds up. I constantly see people mentioning that they say the AMD64's (not FX series) are too expensive, that they can get the same performance by buying a (supposedly cheaper) P4 3Ghz and oc it. But after you add all the extra stuff up, it's actually more expensive -

Maybe the part I'm missing is that the oc P4 completely outperforms for ex. a 3400+ 64chip? As far as I've seen that's not the case at all - if anything, I very rarely see many people disappointed with the perf. of their 3200 and above AMD64's (I will agree there were initial problems with the 2800+ and 3000+ 512K L2 based chips) - and you don't have to risk your warranty or put a cadillac radiator in your case to be able to achieve that performance.

I mean, is the difference in performance (I'm talking stable and consistent performance) really worth all your computer sounding like a helicopter? It's certainly not cheaper.