• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Gaming on multicore CPUs

what about... FOOTBALL MANAGER?

a well multi threaded edition of that game has the potential to run very quickly, and is more limited by the memory and cpu than the gpu.

glad i went dual core, i wouldnt go back now.
 
mikeo said:
Have been trying to decide whether to move from my single core AMD 4000 to an Opteron 180 (available for slightly less than £100 if you shop around)... or to finally buy myself a decent 19in LCD monitor. I think the comments here have made my mind up. So the new monitor it is ...
Click to expand...
Sounds like a good plan, although making your mind up between a decent 19" or a slightly large 'widescreen' LCD may prove a harder choice! :D
 
well Alan wake will require @ least a dual core (HT on intel P4 chips run it but it must be on and u have to turn fetures off)

it is optimised for quad

I here valve are doing quad/dual and crysis will do quad as well
 
Big.Wayne

You are correct. I'm now having a "Crysis" trying to decide which TFT to buy (see my thread on the "monitors" forum).
 
Lanz said:
None will... ever with dual/quad core, as it's all about GPU nowadays. You can run all of todays games on a 2Ghz Northwood P4 if you had a good enough graphics card.
Click to expand...

I really doubt that.
 
dovey said:
I really doubt that.
Click to expand...

Well you technically could if you had a powerful enough graphics card, but it would have to be a lot more powerful than the current top of the range.
 
dovey said:
I really doubt that.
Click to expand...

If you crank up graphics to max the g card will become the bottle neck way before the cpu even with an old northwood. Though obviously something like a 1ghz p3 would hold you back. its about finding the right balance.
 
manveruppd said:
Good discussion, it's rare to find a thread that isn't AMD vs Intel in here nowadays! Have some stars! :)
Click to expand...


yeah so anyway the INtel dual/quad > AMD ... ;)

ill be going quad i think, i dont plan on upgradng my CPU for a few years, games like alan wake and crysis support 4 and tbh with a GTX/GTS i wouldnt realy notice the diff
 
BAMBI said:
If you crank up graphics to max the g card will become the bottle neck way before the cpu even with an old northwood. Though obviously something like a 1ghz p3 would hold you back. its about finding the right balance.
Click to expand...
Also min fps would be very bad, if you did use a 2ghz p4.
 
BAMBI said:
If you crank up graphics to max the g card will become the bottle neck way before the cpu even with an old northwood. Though obviously something like a 1ghz p3 would hold you back. its about finding the right balance.
Click to expand...

Not entirely true. BF2 should be able to run on pretty much the highest settings with a 6800 Ultra considering it was the top of the line card at the time.
I have an Athlon 2100+ (OC'd to 2300+), 2GB PC3200 and the 6800 ultra and I can only get to medium settings. Any higher and it turns into a slideshow. When I had put the same card into my friends computer which had an Athlon 3500+ and 1GB PC3200, could run on the highest settings fine.
 
Tripnologist said:
Not entirely true. BF2 should be able to run on pretty much the highest settings with a 6800 Ultra considering it was the top of the line card at the time.
I have an Athlon 2100+ (OC'd to 2300+), 2GB PC3200 and the 6800 ultra and I can only get to medium settings. Any higher and it turns into a slideshow. When I had put the same card into my friends computer which had an Athlon 3500+ and 1GB PC3200, could run on the highest settings fine.
Click to expand...

Your story has a flaw, 1gb RAM will never run bf2 smooth unless your ram usage in os is below 100mb, wich is near impossible on xp. Bf2 on high textures needs at least 1.25 gb of ram to have no stutter on tweaked pc's, at least 1.5 gig on normall pc's with normall background apps running, escpecially on larger maps...



a 2ghz northwood/ athlon equiv enough to play all modern games if good enogh gfx card, hahahaha, thats a good one, try rts games, perhaps supcom, tell me if you get any more than 1 fps when playing with 7 ai's, even if you have 8800ultra sli or whatever ;) .
 
Lanz said:
None will... ever with dual/quad core, as it's all about GPU nowadays. You can run all of todays games on a 2Ghz Northwood P4 if you had a good enough graphics card.
Click to expand...

A lot of the next generation games that require dual core machines WILL get significant speed ups than if they were to use a single core. To say that it will never happen is rather short-sighted; a secondary core could be used for something like physics that would be much quicker than farming it out to an external component like the PhysX cards, perhaps even A.I.. Multi-threading isn't easy but it's the only option at the moment, Intel and AMD are finding it harder and harder to create speed increases through technological means alone, multi-cores are stopping us from hitting a ceiling at this point in time so developers will have to make it work.
 
snowdog said:
Your story has a flaw, 1gb RAM will never run bf2 smooth unless your ram usage in os is below 100mb, wich is near impossible on xp. Bf2 on high textures needs at least 1.25 gb of ram to have no stutter on tweaked pc's, at least 1.5 gig on normall pc's with normall background apps running, escpecially on larger maps...
Click to expand...

Believe what you will. It ran perfectly smooth on his computer and he only had 1GB of ram.
 
Going from a stock 3000+ to a 3700+ @ 2.8 gave me a good 50-100% increase in fps whilst playing cs, all other games run better too now. Thats with an x800xtpe, goes to show the cpu will make a lot of difference
 
Tripnologist said:
Not entirely true. BF2 should be able to run on pretty much the highest settings with a 6800 Ultra considering it was the top of the line card at the time.
I have an Athlon 2100+ (OC'd to 2300+), 2GB PC3200 and the 6800 ultra and I can only get to medium settings. Any higher and it turns into a slideshow. When I had put the same card into my friends computer which had an Athlon 3500+ and 1GB PC3200, could run on the highest settings fine.
Click to expand...

BF2 used to run like a pig on the highest settings, I should know its the only game I play! 2GB makes a huge difference. ;)
 
[PTG]shogun said:
yeah so anyway the INtel dual/quad > AMD ... ;)

ill be going quad i think, i dont plan on upgradng my CPU for a few years, games like alan wake and crysis support 4 and tbh with a GTX/GTS i wouldnt realy notice the diff
Click to expand...


No matter how good your pc is nick... ill still own your ass :P hehe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom