• 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.

will i get more frames per second?

Trilogy

Trilogy

Trilogy

Associate
Joined
4 Jun 2006
Posts
222
just bought a q6600 from ocuk just want to know if i'm going to see much of a difference compared to my old e6600. i tend to play scfa and cod4
 
If they both run at the same speed then no for COD4. The game is Gfx Card intensive as are all FPS, the Res you run at will also have an effect as will the amount of AA/AF.
 
sc:fa - Definately, although, more so in vanilla sc, fa added a lot more gfx features into the mix. Google a program called core optimiser for sc+fa, it does help =)

CoD4, doubt you'll notice an ounce of difference tbh.
 
nope, i highly doubt, those games dont utilise 4 chips yet, only way you could possible get higher FPS is overclocking, i would have upgraded the GFX card rather than a new cpu for better FPS

Kenny
 
Jimbo Mahoney said:
+1

There are many people on this forum spending too much money on the CPU and not enough on the GPU (for gaming anyway).

e.g. £100 CPU + £200 gfx card >>> £200 CPU and £100 gfx card
Click to expand...

Agreed. Another thing is people making pointless upgrades that are only slightly or even no better than they had before and expecting miracles to happen. They are just wasting their money.
 
Wow no offense to OP but going from an E6600 to a Q6600 is a waste of money, could have sold the E6600 and put the rest to a Q9xxx quad.
 
;)
pegasus1 said:
If they both run at the same speed then no for COD4. The game is Gfx Card intensive as are all FPS, the Res you run at will also have an effect as will the amount of AA/AF.
Click to expand...

Thats wrong bud, i noticed a hoooooge frame rate loss when i went dfrom a quad @ 3.0ghz to a e8500 @ 4ghz . The quad is enabled for cod 4 and cod 4 is coded yto use 4 cores
 
Paradiso said:
Doesnt COD4 use the quake engine which is multithreaded?
Click to expand...

The quake engine isn't multithreaded - it has render threading but its horribly broken...

However yes COD4 uses the quake 3 engine and yes COD4 is multithreaded - with a quad core you _should_ see a substantial boost over dual core, especially in single player as it uses worker threads when it can for things like rendering.

Tho thats not the whole story - if you have a dual core at 3+gig or a quad at 3+gig you probably won't notice much difference in performance unless your running a 4870X2 or 280GTX SLI - but if your running an E6600 at stock in the game against a Q6600 at stock (2.4gig) then you will notice a difference - clock them both up tho and the gap closes - unless your running a high end GPU solution.
 
Last edited:
Mr Kingston said:
well that reviews noty the best lets be honest, it shows all cpus doing the same fps, thats bull, and i was talking about oced chips not stock. Do your research ;)
Click to expand...

?

It is not bull, it is indicative of a GPU bottleneck. In other words the article depicts the same frame rate with all CPUs (quads and duals) at all but the lowest res.

This indicates that the GPU is the bottleneck in all configurations. It has nothing whatsoever to do with dual-threaded support or otherwise. The only games that utilise all 4 cores that I am aware of are FSX and SupCom.

It clearly indicates that a budget Athlon can compete on fps terms with its much faster 45nm Intel brethren, with a given GPU.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom