PDA

View Full Version : Everquest II Tanking CPU


Pages : [1] 2

Tzen
02-28-05, 08:41 AM
Just bought the Gigabye SLI board (GA-K8NXP-SLI) that uses the PCI-Express video cards. (Bought only one for now) I put the following

- AMD Socket 939 Athlon64 (3000)
- 1 Gig of the stores "high end stuff"
- GeForce 6600 GT PCI-Express (single card)
- Windows XP Pro (Fresh build with the firewall disabled)
- SATA 3 drives striped in RAID 0
- EQII

... and the CPU is MAXED at a constant 100%. Any thoughts, or possible tweeks ?? Does anyone know if the SLi dual vidoe card will improve this ??

Zelda_fan
02-28-05, 08:49 AM
From what I hear, this is normal behavior w/ EQII.

|MaguS|
02-28-05, 12:07 PM
EQ2 is very CPU bond, OC your CPU more to get better performance or lower the game settings.

Sorrow
02-28-05, 12:41 PM
Don't expect to run anything over balanced unless you're running with a a64 3200 or higher and a 9700 pro, yea I said it, 9700 pro, something with the 9700 pros that let you run at HQ with better performance than a 6800x card and a fx-57

Tzen
02-28-05, 12:51 PM
Thanks for the feedback.

So, If I bought the other 6600 GT and run SLi it would not make that much of a difference ? I should upgrade the CPU to a Athlon64 3800 you think ?

Here is somehting interesting. Decided to build a P4 3 GHz machine & strip it accross 2 drives, running the GForce 6800, and WOW what a difference in performance! I find that very odd, a P4 out performing a A64 3000????

|MaguS|
02-28-05, 01:03 PM
the AMD64 3000 is only 1.8ghz... of course a 3GHZ P4 will beat it. If you OC your CPU to atleast 2.2 or so you should see a huge boost.

SLi is practically useless in EQ2 currently, drivers barely support it and the 6600GT is just slightly faster then a 6800GT, Just get a 6800GT and OC it to Ultra and play the game smooth.

I would recommend a X800 series card for EQ2 though, they seem to be handling the game better currently till Nvidia gets off thier asses and make good drivers...

Ghosthunter
02-28-05, 01:28 PM
CPU is always 100%...it was like this in EQ1 and same in EQ2

btw i have the 6800GT and it runs EQ2 great.

|MaguS|
02-28-05, 01:36 PM
Mine does also but MANY people have reported problems with the 6x00 series in EQ2. It's mainly driver side, main reason I recommended the ATI Series, they always seemed to run EQ games better.

Sorrow
02-28-05, 01:37 PM
the AMD64 3000 is only 1.8ghz... of course a 3GHZ P4 will beat it. If you OC your CPU to atleast 2.2 or so you should see a huge boost.


No...a64 is 2ghz if you get the Newcastle core....and no, a 3ghz p4 WON'T beat it because it's only 32 bit and doesn't run at full speed. a64 3000+ runs at full speed therefore acting like a 3ghz processor, while at the same time running in 64 bit as compared to 32 bit.

|MaguS|
02-28-05, 01:47 PM
The AMD64 doesn't run at 64bit unless the software and the OS are 64bit which neither EQ2 and Windows (yes thier is a beta but without EQ2 being 64bit it wouldnt help) are...

Were both right about the AMD64 :p He never stated which core he has, hehe...

J-Mag
02-28-05, 02:07 PM
No...a64 is 2ghz if you get the Newcastle core....and no, a 3ghz p4 WON'T beat it because it's only 32 bit and doesn't run at full speed. a64 3000+ runs at full speed therefore acting like a 3ghz processor, while at the same time running in 64 bit as compared to 32 bit.

Corrections:

NewCastles are 2.2ghz (3500+) and 2.4ghz (3800+) in 939 pin...

Either Newcastle will completely smoke a p4 3ghz in any Game and has NOTHING to do with 32bit / 64bit b/c there is only one game I know of that is even coded to use 64bit registers and even then you have to be running the RC of Win XP 64bit version. Also, both processors (Intel and AMD) will run at full speed unless overheating or not under load.

The main reasons why a64's beat out intel chips is a more efficient pipeline and an ondie memory controller.

Sorrow
02-28-05, 02:32 PM
Corrections:

NewCastles are 2.2ghz (3500+) and 2.4ghz (3800+) in 939 pin...

Either Newcastle will completely smoke a p4 3ghz in any Game and has NOTHING to do with 32bit / 64bit b/c there is only one game I know of that is even coded to use 64bit registers and even then you have to be running the RC of Win XP 64bit version. Also, both processors (Intel and AMD) will run at full speed unless overheating or not under load.

The main reasons why a64's beat out intel chips is a more efficient pipeline and an ondie memory controller.

Plus a64's run at full speed whereas p4's run at maybe half ( i think that's what they run at) meaning a64 will make more passes like he said.

Tr1cK
02-28-05, 03:00 PM
Any game should take 100% of your cpu, unless its solitaire.

Sorrow
02-28-05, 03:01 PM
Only the more CPU-dependent games will. Doom 3 didn't and neither did Hl2.

saturnotaku
02-28-05, 03:04 PM
Plus a64's run at full speed whereas p4's run at maybe half ( i think that's what they run at) meaning a64 will make more passes like he said.

What the hell are you talking about? Both processors run at their full rated speeds. The Athlon 64 is more efficient because of the on-die memory controller and shorter stage pipeline compared to the P4.

|MaguS|
02-28-05, 03:05 PM
Only the more CPU-dependent games will. Doom 3 didn't and neither did Hl2.

Yeah they did if you played at High Settings...

-=DVS=-
02-28-05, 03:11 PM
Plus a64's run at full speed whereas p4's run at maybe half ( i think that's what they run at) meaning a64 will make more passes like he said.

Hmm your confuseing something here , only thing that can run at half speed or full is Cache and that got nothing to do with passes ?
Its called Operations Per Cycle , AMD CPUs always done more work per cycle thats becouse of different architecture shorter pipes ect , Intel P4s do less work per cycle but they got 20-stage pipeline and Prescott got even longer (that why they get slower then same clock NorthWood),but can reach (higher clock MHz ), Now back to Cache in old days Pentium 2 512 cache ran at half speed celeron 256 had full speed cache , but todays all CPU im pretty sure Internal Cache run at same speed the Core runs at , unleas its external Cache. ;)

Anyway why AMD64 beats Pentium 4 with higher MHz is becouse of whole Package not of single feature , AMD Athlons 64 got integrated memory controler , do more operations per clock got support for future 64bit OS thats the main plus realy :D

Edit: oh wow i been typeing long Saturn got to him :p

Sorrow
02-28-05, 03:32 PM
Yeah they did if you played at High Settings...


Look at my specs, you think I didn't play on high settings? Your cpu usage is divided more amongst your RAM / card in both games.

Elderblaze
02-28-05, 03:42 PM
EQ2 runs like **** on a stick... nothing to see here, move along. Take whatever egbtmagus says with a grain of salt he's the biggest soe fanboy ive ever seen.

Regards,
Mike

Sorrow
02-28-05, 03:44 PM
EQ2 runs like **** on a stick... nothing to see here, move along. Take whatever egbtmagus says with a grain of salt he's the biggest soe fanboy ive ever seen.

Regards,
Mike

well I'll agree with the **** on a stick part, but I <3 ebtmagus

|MaguS|
02-28-05, 03:49 PM
Heres a pic of HL2 running at 1280x1024 @ 4xAA/8xAF (AA Doesnt work in windowed mode PLUS the game is paused when not in focus).

We have almost the same PC except Im running higher GPU Clocks and possible faster ram (timings).

EDIT: Elderblaze, I don't even know you nor do I care to. I will never deny that I have a biasness to Sony (I don't let it blind me like some other members, I will admit a failing or problems) but not SOE. Trust me they pissed me off plenty of times, Just choose to enjoy EQ more then other MMORPGs, wish L2 turned out better, had high hopes for it.

wshadow
02-28-05, 06:36 PM
sorrow what dimension do you live in? cause it sure as hell isnt ours! Go back to driverheaven or something, please learn things before pulling crap out of your butt and trying to look intelligent

Sorrow
02-28-05, 06:39 PM
sorrow what dimension do you live in? cause it sure as hell isnt ours! Go back to driverheaven or something, please learn things before pulling crap out of your butt and trying to look intelligent

I never said I was a processor guru, and how did your post relate to anything in this thread? And what's driverheaven?

|MaguS|
02-28-05, 06:57 PM
sorrow what dimension do you live in? cause it sure as hell isnt ours! Go back to driverheaven or something, please learn things before pulling crap out of your butt and trying to look intelligent

Your entire post is uncalled for and irrevalent to this thread. While Sarrow might not be the most knowledged in CPU, he atleast doesn't crap and flame people he doesn't know.

MustangSVT
02-28-05, 07:02 PM
A64 is faster because of the whole arhitecture than a P4 depending on the comparison and situation, not because it runs at "full speed" or anything like that. A64 only runs in 32-bit in any current game and Windows is 32-bit so whoever says A64 is faster than P4 cause it's "64-bit" is a dumbass.

Secondly, what crack is the guy who said 9700 Pro is better than a 6600GT smoking?

Thirdly, the guy who said that his CPU is only 1.8GHz has a point. Your 3000+ isn't any marvel. It's a good proc, but the rating of 3000+ is a bit overestimated from AMD. The percentage difference b/t 1.8GHz and 2.0GHz is HIGHER than the difference between 3000+ and 3200+ as numbers. The point is that the 1.8GHz 3000+ compared to the 2.0GHz 3200+ or other S939 proc's has a relative rating smaller than 3000+, more like 2800+. You should probably OC your CPU to around 2.3-2.4GHz if you want to make better use of it.

Lastly, ANY game that I know of for the past 10 years has been using 100% CPU cycle. Now whether you overclock the CPU will increase speed dramatically in EQ2 is another story. Any modern game like Doom3 that you're playing should be using 100% CPU at all times unless maybe you're scrolling through options or similar. Only playing a game like Solitaire won't use CPU at 100%.