Thread: QX9650 +?
View Single Post
Old 11-19-07, 10:47 AM   #188
Amuro
Newtype Ace
 
Amuro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 3,206
Default Re: QX9650 +?

Quote:
Originally Posted by varrius
Sigh, sometimes I wonder where people get their education.

Okay, since you're unaware of Processor performance and what it entails, I will give you a lesson. Also, please do not make assumptions based on what I "only" play, when I've never made any claim to "only" play MMORPGs.
First, under your theory, there is no reason why you'd need an X6800 and a Pentium III or 4 would net the SAME EXACT results as your processor. If this is untrue, you are incorrect. It indeed is. Infact, processor clock will net you higher frames in even FPSs!!! This has been consistent since the beginning of PC Gaming. You learn something new every day.

Hm, lets look at hard evidence to support this.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2208253,00.asp

Okay! Now, we can CLEARLY see that the QX9650 clocked at 3.6 ghz over its stock 3.0ghz setting netted OVER THIRTY MORE FRAMES!!!!!!! In Quake Wars. NOTE: QUAKE WARS IS AN FIRST PERSON SHOOTER. IT IS NOT an MMORPG, RTS, NOR IS IT A FLIGHT SIMULATION GAME.

Moving on, just for reference, this test was done using an 8800 video card. I wonder why Prey, with the SAME video card managed to net 341 FPS on a QX9650 which is ALSO clocked at 3.0ghz. Then, for some reason, some "DEFYING REASON" ( LOL ) the QX6850 got over 40+ frames LESS than the EQUALLY clocked QX9650???????? WOW. This MUST mean that EVEN in first person shooters, there is an INCREASE ( This means a greater amount ) in performance based on clock speed and processor architecture!!

Btw, Dependant*
LAMO, you're trying to give me lesson while you yourself have no clues?
Did you even read your own link? At low detail, 800x600 rez, the QX6850 got 40+ less FPS, but at high detail the different is 1-2 FPS, that's evidence the CPU is being bottlenecked.

Quote from your extremetech article:
Quote:
Also, the differences in test results in the FPS high resolution scores were pretty minimal, but that's not a big surprise. Usually when you crank up the feature set in a first person shooter, the game rapidly becomes graphics bound. In the low resolution test, we can see that the CPU does have some impact.

On the other hand, the RTS game benchmarks saw gains across the board for the overclocked Yorkfield, but minimal gains at high resolutions for the QX6850 versus QX9650. Of course, you do see bigger differences when you dial down the graphics settings.
Oh, dependant is veriant of dependent! Look it up in the dictionary first before correcting peopple, if I were you.

What an idiot!
__________________
Lian Li Armorsuit PC-P80 Black | Intel Core i7-3960X @4.3Ghz | Asus Rampage IV Extreme | G.SKILL Ripjaws X 4 x 4GB @1866Mhz CL9 |eVGA GTX 690 Hydro Copper | Cruscial M4 512GB SATA III SSD | WD VelociRaptor 300GB | Samsung Spinpoint F1 HD103UJ 1TB | Pioneer BDR-205BK 12x Blu-ray Burner | Creative x-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Sound Card | Corsair A1200 1200W PSU

Water cooled by Koolance ERM-3K3UC Cooling System
Amuro is offline   Reply With Quote