X2 3600+ to Phenom 9600 Black Edition

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: harpoon84
Wow, the CPU makes a lot more difference than I thought in Crysis, then again you are using a GTX 280...

With the previous generation of GPUs Crysis was definitely more GPU limited especially at high res.

Btw, Guru3D has an article on CPU scaling in games, they compare everything from a 2.5GHz X2 all the way up to a 3.2GHz QX9770. Some interesting results there, in some games the X2 2.5GHz manages to keep up with the fastest Core 2s due to GPU limitation, but in others it lags behind terribly.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/...quad-core-processors/1

Wow, good article! Other then World in Conflict (which even then is still playable on an A64 dual core @ 2.5, though certainly suffers compared to the faster processors) you can see that a middle of the road CPU offers plenty of power. Obviously a faster processor in a lot of situations can only help, but you can still easily game on an A64 dual core @ 2.7GHz.

A faster CPU is great and future proofs you to some degree, but as I've said many times over on these forums, you simply do not need a 4GHz C2D to game. You can get by on much, much less. The CPU is important, no doubt about that. But you can game pretty comfortably in 99% of the games out there on any middle of the road dual core on up.

A 4850 is a bit faster then the GPU used in the review above, but it's still a pretty good comparrison.

*edit - What actually suprised me most about that article was how far ahead the Phenom was then the A64 @ near the same speed in some games. I always thought that the Phenom was pretty comprable to an A64 dual core of the same speed in gaming, I guess it does have a little extra to offer. So maybe a Phenom would be a good upgrade?

 

[RallyMaster]

Wow. That was an interesting read...too bad it didn't include an X2 from the Socket 939 era with DDR400 or I'd be able to compare my new system to my older one.

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Extelleron, those benchmarks are excellent and informative, however largely irrelevant to most people. Your GPU is twice as fast as what most people game with, and Crysis is really one of the few games out there that can use a modern CPU.

Out of curiousity, is there any way you could check your CPU usage using task manager while running Crysis? On my rig, I never use more than say 70% of either of the cores in my Opteron 165 while playing Crysis at 1920x1080, with most settings on 'high' (shaders and objects on medium).

If I'm not maxing out my CPUs in task manager during games, does that mean I'm not CPU limited?

With the Crysis Harbor bench @ VH, I am getting between 55-70% utilization on average, closer to the 70% towards the end when you see normal gameplay / interactions with the AI characters.

Crysis just doesn't efficiently use multi-core CPUs, so no, it doesn't mean that you're not CPU limited. If it did, then my Phenom would have done a lot better because it has 4 cores. Really the whole multi-core hype about Crysis was 100% BS, just like the "64-bit improved performance by 15% per thread" crap. Crysis barely makes use of more than a single core, which is unfortunate because it is one of the few games where additional cores would prove useful.

I don't think my situation is entirely irrelevant... there are plenty of people out there considering cards like the HD 4870 which are almost as fast. From what I see, anyone with an overclocked C2D will be fine in Crysis, and any game for that matter. But people on A64 X2 / Phenom and certainly Pentium D systems are going to run into a serious bottleneck if they buy a modern GPU and try to use it with their old CPU. If you have a Phenom, you'll probably be fine at ~3GHz or more, but unfortunately only the newer BE CPUs are really capable of that. Of course if you don't care about games like Crysis / WiC then that's another story, because games like CoD4 appear to be fine with just about any CPU. That article is interesting, but they should try redoing it with the newer GPUs.... 8800 Ultra is really outdated at this point with GTX 280 / R700 coming out.

 

[heyheybooboo]

http://www.guru3d.com/article/...quad-core-processors/1

great article! impressive/informative graphics as usual

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
http://www.guru3d.com/article/...quad-core-processors/1

great article! impressive/informative graphics as usual

Sorry, this article ios not yet on-line. Or you reached an URL that does not exsist. We switched to new software & URLs.
Please click here to load the landing page and select the article you like to read.

I can't read it....

 

[harpoon84]

He didn't link it properly...
http://www.guru3d.com/article/...quad-core-processors/1

 

[x2 3600 rules sazakky]

ok
already read it
i'm really confused now.
should i get intel quad core or dual

or should i get 4850
far out

 

[Markfw]

Get Intel. Get quad if budget allows, otherwise dual is fine for most games...

Simple enough ?