Go Back   nV News Forums > Software Forums > Gaming Central > Crysis

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-16-08, 08:38 PM   #1
bobmitch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 28
Default You may think I'm nuts, but processor upgrade to new .45 Quad makes a major differenc

I upgraded the processor on my Asus P5E motherboard from the E6750 to the new Q9450 (both 2.66 GHZ, but two extra cores to work with). My old Crysis benchmark for fps at 1680 x 1050 was 22 fps on average. With the Quad core...ran the same benchmark and averaged over 36 fps. There is obviously a tweak in Crysis for Quad core. The only other change is that I am running Nvidia Forceware 175.16.

P5E with 2 GB of Crucial Ballistix Tracers PC8500
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450
Two WD 74 GB Raptors in RAID 0
Soundblaster X-Fi Fatality Pro
Thermaltake Toughpower 750 W PSU
bobmitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-08, 08:42 PM   #2
SH64
MAXIMUM TECH
 
SH64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Indiana
Posts: 12,202
Default Re: You may think I'm nuts, but processor upgrade to new .45 Quad makes a major differenc

You are NUTS!!!

ok j/k i believe something else has changed that affected your score besides the CPU. i have a quad-core & never seen any usage beyond the single or at best the second core.

also which benchmark you are talking about ? the CPU or the GPU one ?
__________________


- "My name is RAM and my tank is full"

http://warhawk64nv.mybrute.com/ <-- pupils go thaarrr! Or,
http://silenthunter64.mybrute.com
SH64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-08, 08:53 PM   #3
bobmitch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 28
Default Re: You may think I'm nuts, but processor upgrade to new .45 Quad makes a major differenc

GPU benchmark tool. I was dumbfounded. Let me explain something else that may help. With the Core 2 E6750, my processor usage was always up around 40% idle for some reason. With some research, I found that when running RAID of any kind on ICH8 or ICH9...that Vista had overhead. In XP...CPU usage never exceeded 3% idle. Now...with the Quad core processor...I am seeing 22% CPU usage (under normal circumstances the System and System Idle processes are to blame. Rather than keep every single item seperate and accountable, I am seeing a lot of different services run under one umbrella. Hard to check what ones are the biggest violators. Anyways...now that I have more CPU process left...things seem snappier. Perhaps something was holding Crysis back...not sure...but I know my fps are up and the game is smooth. Thinking of deleting all my saves and starting all over again...worth it...

Bob
bobmitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-08, 09:00 PM   #4
SH64
MAXIMUM TECH
 
SH64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Indiana
Posts: 12,202
Default Re: You may think I'm nuts, but processor upgrade to new .45 Quad makes a major differenc

Yep that could be the reason. most likely you were held back by some apps in the background with the E6750 & now with the more cores you are running as you should.

i did a test myself for the CPU test on a E6700(2.66Ghz) , recoreded the score & then installed the Q6600(2.4Ghz) the score was a little less due to frequency difference then to make sure i ran Prime95 on 1 core & Toast on the second core & let the other 2 cores to handle Crysis CPU benchmark. guess what ? same score .. nothing changed.
__________________


- "My name is RAM and my tank is full"

http://warhawk64nv.mybrute.com/ <-- pupils go thaarrr! Or,
http://silenthunter64.mybrute.com
SH64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-08, 10:23 PM   #5
Soetdjuret
Teh lazy swede
 
Soetdjuret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Svea
Posts: 1,982
Default Re: You may think I'm nuts, but processor upgrade to new .45 Quad makes a major differenc

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobmitch
I upgraded the processor on my Asus P5E motherboard from the E6750 to the new Q9450 (both 2.66 GHZ, but two extra cores to work with). My old Crysis benchmark for fps at 1680 x 1050 was 22 fps on average. With the Quad core...ran the same benchmark and averaged over 36 fps.
Soetdjuret is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-15-08, 09:31 PM   #6
FastRedPonyCar
Resident Tire Destroyer
 
FastRedPonyCar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Montgomery, AL
Posts: 3,012
Send a message via AIM to FastRedPonyCar
Default Re: You may think I'm nuts, but processor upgrade to new .45 Quad makes a major diffe

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soetdjuret View Post
+1 something in your settings is different becuase I just went from an E6600 @ 3.1ghz to a E8400 @ 3.9ghz and I'm benchmarking 32 fps with the identical settings/cvars/autoexe file where as previously I was getting an average of 27~28.
__________________
- Desktop -
4770k @ 4.45 ghz - ASUS Gryphon Mobo - 16 gigs Corsair Vengeance Pro 1866 RAM - XSPC Rasa 750 RS240 H2o Cooling - EVGA GTX 680 @1325mhz - 128 gig Crucial RealSSD C300 - 150 gig Velociraptor +2.75 Terrabytes of WD Sata 3.0 storage - 910 watt PC P&C PSU - Corsair Obsidian 650D case

- Server -
Core I7 D0 revision 920 @ 3.75 ghz - ASUS P6T Deluxe - 12 Gigs Mushkin DDR3 1600 - Corsair HX 620 PSU - Noctua NH-U9B cooler - Coolermaster WaveMaster Case

- Laptop -
MSI 16F2-012
- i7 2630QM - GTX570m @ 750Mhz - 8 gigs HyperX 1866 - 120 gig OCZ Vertex 3 SSD- 750 gig Scorpio Black - BluRay - 95% Gamut Screen - IC Diamond goop
FastRedPonyCar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.