PENTIUM G620

[paradisiac]

Still not sure I see the logic here, CPU's never go wrong, they only go wrong if the owner bends pins or physically breaks them, once there in the socket and running, something else will fail 1st.

Granted that's becoming a little less the case with the new low nm technology but still you would only be stupid to pump these new chips full of volts, stick inside the specs and you will be fine.

No need to have a spare cpu on the side you may as well keep a new mainboard on the side as well, thats more likely to go wrong.

i do normally keep a spare cheap/2nd hand board too. i like to have spare bits so i can double check before i send anything back. sorry its just the way i am.

 

[paradisiac]

so, here are my benchmarks. unfortunatly my new motherboard wouldnt boot with 2x4GB and 2x2GB so the G620 scores are based on 8GB not 12GB of ram and the onboard video tests are DX10 not DX11.

Cinebench
X2 555

X3 B55 @ 3.7GHz

G620 OBV

G620 2xHD6850

Fritz
X2 555

X3 B55

G620 OBV

G620 2xHD6850

HyperPI
X2 555

X3 B55

G620 OBV

G620 2xHD6850

Performance Test 7
X2 555

X3 B55

G620 OBV

G620 2xHD6850

Heaven 2.5
X2 555

X3 B55

G620 OBV

G620 2xHD6850

Street Fight IV
X2 555

X3 B55

G620 OBV

G620 2xHD6850

STALKER COP
X2 555

X3 B55

G620 OBV

G620 2xHD6850

 

[paradisiac]

well i had a go on BF:BC2 this morning with the same settings i had it on with my tri-core 3.7GHz and i honestly couldnt notice a difference, if anything it was a tad smoother now.
fifa11 also no longer had the 5 minute tantrum it used to with the old chip.
not had a chance to load crysis or GTAIV yet but i imagine this will really show the difference and lag if its going to.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

well i had a go on BF:BC2 this morning with the same settings i had it on with my tri-core 3.7GHz and i honestly couldnt notice a difference, if anything it was a tad smoother now.
fifa11 also no longer had the 5 minute tantrum it used to with the old chip.
not had a chance to load crysis or GTAIV yet but i imagine this will really show the difference and lag if its going to.

With BFBC2 it actually runs worse on dual cores. Your G620 looks slightly faster than an E8400 or E8500. A 3.7GHZ Phenom II X3 is faster in this game than an E8400 or E8500 so I suspect there is some issue with you AMD setup TBH. My 3.1GHZ Core i3 2100 matches a 3.2GHZ to 3.5GHZ Phenom II X4 in BFBC2.

Crysis does not scale well beyond two cores.

Look at this review of a 3.1GHZ Athlon II X3 445 against a 2.8GHZ Pentium G840:

http://en.inpai.com.cn/doc/enshowcont.asp?id=7970&pageid=7921

Athlon II X3 processors have no L3 cache and half the L2 cache of the Phenom II X3 processors. If your 3.7GHZ Phenom II X3 is slower than a 2.6GHZ Pentium G620 in most of the games tested in the review your Phenom II and motherboard have some issue. A 3.1GHZ Athlon II X3 matches a 2.8GHZ Pentium G840 in BFBC2. My 3.1GHZ Core i3 2100 matches a 3.2GHZ to 3.5GHZ Phenom II X4 in BFBC2.

 

[paradisiac]

With BFBC2 it actually runs worse on dual cores. Your G620 looks slightly faster than an E8400 or E8500. A 3.7GHZ Phenom II X3 is faster in this game than an E8400 or E8500 so I suspect there is some issue with you AMD setup TBH. My 3.1GHZ Core i3 2100 matches a 3.2GHZ to 3.5GHZ Phenom II X4 in BFBC2.

Crysis does not scale well beyond two cores.

Look at this review of a 3.1GHZ Athlon II X3 445 against a 2.8GHZ Pentium G840:

http://en.inpai.com.cn/doc/enshowcont.asp?id=7970&pageid=7921

Athlon II X3 processors have no L3 cache and half the L2 cache of the Phenom II X3 processors. If your 3.7GHZ Phenom II X3 is slower than a 2.6GHZ Pentium G620 in most of the games tested in the review your Phenom II and motherboard have some issue. A 3.1GHZ Athlon II X3 matches a 2.8GHZ Pentium G840 in BFBC2. My 3.1GHZ Core i3 2100 matches a 3.2GHZ to 3.5GHZ Phenom II X4 in BFBC2.

it was an X2 with an unlocked core, so there is a possability that maybe the unlocked core wasnt working properly, even though it was prime stable?
i dont know how to explain it, but i honestly cant see any difference in the chips.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

it was an X2 with an unlocked core, so there is a possability that maybe the unlocked core wasnt working properly, even though it was prime stable?
i dont know how to explain it, but i honestly cant see any difference in the chips.

TBH,as long as you are getting a playable average framerates even a relatively slow processor in most cases will do the job. I am still running a midly overclocked Q6600 in my Shuttle SFF PC with an HD5850 1GB and it still runs all my games fine ATM. I will be probably replacing it next year anyway which is not bad as I bought the Shuttle at the end of 2006. My Core i3 2100 is in my other computer and with an HD5670 I can still run many games at lower resolution fine.

 

[paradisiac]

yeh i dont know what fps i am getting, but it all seems smooth and no lagging. and as i have mentioned before (not sure if i did in this thread) i need vsync on in pretty much every game, so 60FPS is the max i can get anyways.

 

[paradisiac]

GTAIV Benchmark

Statistics
Average FPS: 48.25
Duration: 36.95 sec
CPU Usage: 89%
System memory usage: 26%
Video memory usage: 35%

Graphics Settings
Video Mode: 1920 x 1080 (60 Hz)
Texture Quality: High
Shadow Quality: High
Reflection Resolution: High
Water Quality: Very High
Texture Filter Quality: Anisotropic x4
Night Shadows: Off
View Distance: 22
Detail Distance: 11

Hardware
Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium
Service Pack 1
Video Adapter: AMD Radeon HD 6800 Series
Video Driver version: 8.17.10.1083
Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)
Intel(R) Pentium(R) CPU G620 @ 2.60GHz


Dirt 2 Benchmark
av_fps="54.383801" min_fps="34.722050"
File ID: Benchmark.cli