PDA

View Full Version : 81.84 and Dual Core CPU's


Pages : [1] 2

ViN86
10-06-05, 11:41 PM
the release notes for the 81.84's say that there are enhancements for dual core cpu's, however, all i notice now is that games seem to be multi-threaded, but they arent written multithreaded.

for example, return to castle wolfenstein obviously isnt multithreaded, and with the 77.77's, my cpu ran at 50% (either one full core or half of both cores used). now the game takes up 100% (all of both CPU's) when i play it.

is this the 81.84's? is it better to run the game with both CPU's at 100% or the other way? does everyone else experience the same thing?

any light that you could shine on this issue would help greatly, as im very confused by this issue.

OWA
10-06-05, 11:54 PM
You don't notice increased performance also? So far, my biggest jumps from the dual-core support have been with Doom 3 and 3DMark05. FEAR was a little higher using dual-core instead of single-core. I haven't tried anything else. I also haven't tried watching the usage so I guess I'll play around with all that this weekend.

How do you monitor it? Play it in a window?

ViN86
10-07-05, 08:21 AM
well i have a program that minimizes the game. then i hit CTL+ALT+DEL and go to processes, where it says wolfmp.exe is using 99% of the cpu and the graphs for both cores are full.

ill check out doom3 later today. i didnt really get an increase in 3dmark. still only 5k. probably because the benchmark is so GPU limited in my case, i could run a 10GHz cpu and it wouldnt make much difference.

dannyai
10-07-05, 09:21 AM
i rather let it use 1 core at 100% then both cores at 100%,

its just wasting it for 10fps......when i could do more in the background

J-Mag
10-07-05, 11:33 AM
So far, my biggest jumps from the dual-core support have been with Doom 3 and 3DMark05.

I wonder if this is application specific or Open GL related...

OWA
10-07-05, 12:11 PM
I'm not sure but I've been wondering the same kinds of things. That is, is the dual-core support something they tweak for specific games or apps to help in performance like they tune the SLI parameters for specific games. Or, is it a general change to the driver as a whole so that any game or app should benefit from it. That is, the capability is there but they really don't have control over how much it helps or doesn't help, it just depends on the how the game was programmed (edit: or the API as you suggested).

Edit 2: Maybe once they're officially released, they'll provide more details on the enhancements.

ViN86
10-07-05, 12:45 PM
yea, i was considering that its just an opengl issue but i really dont know.

there really isnt much notation on what they did to better support dual core CPU's. wish it said more...

lduguay
10-07-05, 01:34 PM
i rather let it use 1 core at 100% then both cores at 100%,

its just wasting it for 10fps......when i could do more in the background

Bah, this is one silly comment. :confused:

mcbacker
10-07-05, 02:39 PM
What about Intel P4 HyperThreading? Does it get benefits too?

MC

mcbacker
10-07-05, 02:40 PM
What about Intel P4 HyperThreading? Does it get befenits too?

MC

pingu2
10-07-05, 04:35 PM
/boggle

Slammin
10-07-05, 05:27 PM
Bah, this is one silly comment. :confused:


Nothing like playing Doom3 while completing an important spreadsheet for your boss that's due the next day!

Really, I'm in agreement. If this driver can devote every ounce of CPU I have available to whatever game I'm playing, I'm all for it.

Only a non dual core user would make such a crazy statement :D

trinibwoy
10-07-05, 07:15 PM
http://www.tweaktown.com/document.php?dType=review&dId=819&dPage=1

sniggle
10-07-05, 09:09 PM
Bah, this is one silly comment. :confused:

why is that such a silly comment? some people actually buy dual core cpu's to *gasp* do two things at once! what if you do a lot of video encoding or dvd ripping? you'll want that second core available to encode while you play a game in the mean time. if using these drivers considerably hinders that process, then it should definitely be optional.

nothing silly at all.

Rakeesh
10-07-05, 10:02 PM
Well heres an uneducated question on my part. Does the CPU make up for in software what the video card can't accomplish in hardware?

E.g. say the graphics capabilities of a certain card are maxed out, and there are extra CPU cycles available which could be used supplement the graphics processing to speed it up beyond the video cards limits. Does this happen? Or does that extra CPU time go unused?

If the prior happens, then the dual core goodness could be used to that end couldn't it? I mean the game would run in one thread, and the post processing could be done by the driver in another thread.

ViN86
10-08-05, 12:02 AM
i believe the extra cpu time goes unused. although the GPU is totally stressed, the CPU wont help alieve this stress. so, no matter how much CPU power you have, it wont help the maxed out GPU.

Rakeesh
10-08-05, 12:26 AM
what about post processing though? e.g. FSAA?

garikfox
10-08-05, 01:06 AM
YES the DUAL cores are way better !!

PLZ people Do NOT be DUMB here, 2 CPUS is better then one its common sense !!

Merefield
10-08-05, 02:43 AM
why is that such a silly comment? some people actually buy dual core cpu's to *gasp* do two things at once! what if you do a lot of video encoding or dvd ripping? you'll want that second core available to encode while you play a game in the mean time. if using these drivers considerably hinders that process, then it should definitely be optional.

nothing silly at all.

It is silly because the O/S is almost always in the best position to decide how to distribute load on a multi-core setup. By multi-threading the video drivers you are just giving the despatcher more options and increasing overall efficiency.

TierMann
10-08-05, 05:39 AM
One thing I forgot to test was setting affinity to one cpu with a game when I had the 80 drivers installed. Did anyone try that and see if it actually stops it from using up both cores? If it works then there's your answer for you guys who "bought your dual core cpu's to do two things at once!" :P. For me, if I'm gaming, I'm gaming. Only time that I need both cores free is for encoding or compiling. Each of those uses up atleast half of my ram so gaming ontop of it would leave me paging/swapping anyway.

Rakeesh
10-08-05, 01:06 PM
YES the DUAL cores are way better !!

PLZ people Do NOT be DUMB here, 2 CPUS is better then one its common sense !!

Not necessarily. In almost all games, one core gets used while the other does nothing at all. And since both cores by themselves perform worse than equally priced single core CPUs, it isn't always advantageous.

jolle
10-08-05, 01:44 PM
I guess thats why they are making the drivers Dual Core aware, since the driver issuing calls to the API is pretty CPU heavy, atleast according to Sweeney, the idea is prolly to hide that overhead on the unused core.. atleast until games start using it..

Demon_82
10-10-05, 12:18 PM
Anyone with an Pentium IV HT around? I think my 'half second core' is also working more now... well, it's working :eek:

NemesisChild
10-10-05, 09:08 PM
What about Intel P4 HyperThreading? Does it get befenits too?

MC

Yes, Hyper Threading is a dual core (P4) cpu.
This is why I'm I'm really interested in this new driver.
I have two gaming rigs that have HT Technology.
Basically, I was waiting for the XG version of this driver to be released before trying it.
It was released today, but since I'm out of town, I can't install it until later in the week.
I'll report back once I've had a chance to play around with this new driver!

garikfox
10-11-05, 01:39 AM
Well too whom it may concern I enjoy my x2 DUALIE way to much, If I had a Option to go back I wouldnt even DARE !

Kinda like once ya do RAID-0 u never go back !, heheee