FX60 Bottleneck X1900XT? what about DX10 cards???

Damn anyone!?

Where is the question? You say you are torn between keeping your san diego and....

If there were a question to evaluate I'd probably respond but I just don't see one. It seems as more of a statement than a question.

Ok, now we have something to evaluate.

Thats an interesting decision. I would opt for keeping the dual-core if I could. I will be honest, I have never had a dual-core, but from what I hear they are much better if you keep multiple windows open and run programs in the background. Since both chips have OC'd well, I would stick with the dual core, as programs mature you will probably see more benefit. They are both so close in speed, that you might as well opt for keeping the 2nd core around, even if its for shits and giggles lol.

Sorry, Sandiego 4000+ that I have clocked too 2.9ghz stable vs my X2 4800 clocked to 2.7 ghz stable.

I'd take the dual-core. There; I've ansewred your question.


Why would you keep the dual core? what if all I do is game?

Keep it if you want to future proof your rig.

When is the future? I keep hearing how dual core is future proof but im concerned about exactly how far away this future is? is it so far away that my dual core will be a snail by the time it gets here?

Keep it if you want to future proof your rig.

When is the future? I keep hearing how dual core is future proof but im concerned about exactly how far away this future is? is it so far away that my dual core will be a snail by the time it gets here?

The future is anyones guess. Hell, we have quad core coming this fall from Intel and next year form AMD. The problem they are having is that system programmers are not keeping pace with hardware, its a simple fact. Programmers barely scratch the potential of the Xbox 360 and they knew going in 2 years ago it was going to be multicore.

I hate to dis programmers because I have done a decent amount of it and hate it, but they just can't keep up. Its easy to design a chip (reletively) that can process 2+ threads at once but its more difficult to code that. Future-proof is never possible with computers, you can only delay the upgrade. Although, these days its getting harder and harder for companies to convince the masses that they need a new computer every 2 years. Now days people are keeping their computers for 4-6 years. Hell my mom still uses a pentium 3 because all she does is check email and browse the web, and it gets the job done. I've tried to upgrade her and she doesn't want it because new computers heat up her small study too much, so she stick to the P3 and its 3w of heat (exageration I know).

Technology is quick to change, code is slow to adapt. Give it another year and we should start to see some real headway being made in coding for dual core. What sucks is, just as programmers may start getting the hang of dual core, they will have to contend with quad core and maybe even octcore if Intel has its way.

Future proof is a term used by noobs to justify a purchase of a new tech without thinking through the consequences.

OK, just to let you know:
My buddy's build:
939 Venice @2.7GHz (single core)
2GB DDR400 2-3-3-6-1t
eVGA 7800GTX 470/1250(?)

My build:
939 X2 @2.4GHz (dual core)
2GB DDR400 2-3-2-5-1t
eVGA 7800GT 445/1080(?)

My machine n00bz his machine. Answer your question?
All we both do is game. We both built with the horribly coded engine of BF2 in mind. My machine with 2 slower cores pwns his and MCs his chip into the lava any day. l2build :-) Go with the dual core.

Keep it if you want to future proof your rig.

When is the future? I keep hearing how dual core is future proof but im concerned about exactly how far away this future is? is it so far away that my dual core will be a snail by the time it gets here?
The future is when you sell your dual core. I guarantee that as soon as you sell your X2 some game will come at that will kill a single core, its just how things work . Besides who cares when the future is? The fact is you will be ready for it. Why sell newer technology in favour of old technology?

Yea most likely.

As far as i can see its more a % speed difference that will give you a greater increase in performance. For example overclocking a proc from 2.4-2.6 GHz will make little difference compared to an overclock by 200 Mhz on a 1GHz proc. Its also much to do with what the bottleneck in your system is. If your video card sucks, dont expect overclocking your x6800 to 4.5GHz to make a big performance difference in a video card intensive game.

As far as i can see its more a % speed difference that will give you a greater increase in performance. For example overclocking a proc from 2.4-2.6 GHz will make little difference compared to an overclock by 200 Mhz on a 1GHz proc. Its also much to do with what the bottleneck in your system is. If your video card sucks, dont expect overclocking your x6800 to 4.5GHz to make a big performance difference in a video card intensive game.

Its an X1900XT and it seems to me that most if not all of the bottleneck is removed somewhere around 2550ghz, so I know I am straight with a 2.7ghz overclock 8)

Im just really concernd how the DX10 cards are gonna be. Its gonna be interesting to say the least because DX10 and Vista are supposed to be much more efficient for games than XP and DX9 so I think its possible that the DX10 cards might even be less of a bottleneck?
Unless its a crap one

As far as i can see its more a % speed difference that will give you a greater increase in performance. For example overclocking a proc from 2.4-2.6 GHz will make little difference compared to an overclock by 200 Mhz on a 1GHz proc. Its also much to do with what the bottleneck in your system is. If your video card sucks, dont expect overclocking your x6800 to 4.5GHz to make a big performance difference in a video card intensive game.

Its an X1900XT and it seems to me that most if not all of the bottleneck is removed somewhere around 2550ghz, so I know I am straight with a 2.7ghz overclock 8)

Im just really concernd how the DX10 cards are gonna be. Its gonna be interesting to say the least because DX10 and Vista are supposed to be much more efficient for games than XP and DX9 so I think its possible that the DX10 cards might even be less of a bottleneck?
Unless its a crap one

Unless what is a crap one?
Unless the DX10 card is a crap one the a dx9 card would be better.

Im sure they will but I was talking about the low end ones, I doubt they will beat a high end dx9 card.

As far as i can see its more a % speed difference that will give you a greater increase in performance. For example overclocking a proc from 2.4-2.6 GHz will make little difference compared to an overclock by 200 Mhz on a 1GHz proc. Its also much to do with what the bottleneck in your system is. If your video card sucks, dont expect overclocking your x6800 to 4.5GHz to make a big performance difference in a video card intensive game.

Its an X1900XT and it seems to me that most if not all of the bottleneck is removed somewhere around 2550ghz, so I know I am straight with a 2.7ghz overclock 8)

Im just really concernd how the DX10 cards are gonna be. Its gonna be interesting to say the least because DX10 and Vista are supposed to be much more efficient for games than XP and DX9 so I think its possible that the DX10 cards might even be less of a bottleneck?

depending on most games you play now a days they will more than likely be bottlenecked by the gpu not the cpu so the fact that you think that at 2.7ghz your straight its more than likely just your mind thinking that its faster...if anything why dont you benchmark the game you play with the proc clocked at stock vs 2.7 and i'm sure you only see a 1-5 fps increase...which if your playing bf2 on a x1900xt it will not matter cause it can run bf2 on high at max resolution anyway so you'll never need the extra power...

as for right now multi threaded programs do not dominate the software segment so they don't utilize both cores but with multiple programs open in the backround and with programs all planning to be optimized with 2 or more cores i would go with dual core as it will provide the longest lifespan...

NWN2?

I'm not sure why you're worried about how DX10 cards are going to perform. Do you honestly think that someone on these forums has an answer and if you just keep asking enough, someone will break and let you in on the secret of how they will perform?

Anyway, I still contest that my dual core setup running slower than my friend's single core is a better performer than his. Also keep in mind something else: Your single core will have to be a bit faster to not bottleneck the video card than your dual core will. The dual core can do more stuff concurrently, such as running your game, Windows, and the drivers, than your single core can. IcY18 has good thoughts, as well as ZOldDude (to mention some I'm seeing right now).

Again, no one knows the answer to how DX10 cards will perform for sure. They're likely to be more powerful than the current cards; but also, nVidia is planning on releasing a hybrid card first, not fully DX10 compliant. Google may provide more details, or perhaps old Toms' articles. The new architechture may begin life by causing many headaches trying to figure out how to efficiently work it. This could slow it down.

Don't worry about DX10 yet. You have a monster video card now. You have two monster CPU's. Most of us are suggesting you go dual core from our own experiences. I know I certainly recommend it without a doubt and will not go back to single core now.

Oh, forgot to detail, realize my friend whose system mine beats has a faster video card than I do. My dual core's ability to not get bogged down by everything coming at it allows my system to step above his for the performance crown.

Cheers!

Theres a big differance between Crysis and current games. Crysis is programmed to take advantage of DX10. Why does this matter? Well DX9 is great but not very multicore freindly. Currently to find a game that takes good advantage of dual core you'll have to look back to OpenGL. I forget the games name, I think is was quake 4 or UT3, but with only a patch it got over a 30% performance boost.

Crysis isn't comming out till next year and will require a lot of resources so I would wait until kentsfield or K8L for a CPU upgrade. Kentsfield and the 4X4 mobo is set for release shortly after November if you can hold off till then.
http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/ [...] 038345.htm

DX10 GPU's will be faster and will up your gamming performance in none CPU intensive games. DX10 GPU's are set for release this month til the end of the year. Intel's DX10 GPU's have started releasing now but I would wait as they may not be stable yet. Nvidia's GPU's are set for lunch sometime between next month and November. ATI's GPU's should come the end of November to December.
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Nvi [...] 8763.shtml

Theres a big differance between Crysis and current games. Crysis is programmed to take advantage of DX10. Why does this matter? Well DX9 is great but not very multicore freindly. Currently to find a game that takes good advantage of dual core you'll have to look back to OpenGL. I forget the games name, I think is was UT3, but with only a patch it got over a 30% performance boost.

Crysis isn't comming out till next year and will require a lot of resources so I would wait until kentsfield or K8L for a CPU upgrade.

Well as mentioned above I just purchased a X2 4800 and overclocked it too 2.7ghz. I built this socket 939 system just this past April and Im not gonna give it up until summer of 08 at the earliest.


X2 4800 should do just fine in crysis, especially overclocked past FX 60 speeds.
Thats a good plan as Crysis should be more GPU intensive than CPU. That was a quick reply as I added more to my post but o'well.

LOL I cant believe I started this thread I have come a long ways in a short amount of time and if I knew then what I know now I would not have started it

I left the AMD-ATI camp and my current set up is:


E6400@3.5ghz 24/7 safe stable OC with Tuniq Tower
4gigs DDR2667 running at DDR2 1000mhz 4 4 4 5
Asus P5b delux
8800GTX 630core 2040mem
Soundblaster Audigy 4


22inch monitor on the way!

Nice rig friend! I wanted to tell you that, especially now with your new monitor, things will get gpu limited. 8800 gts is a little beast but still above 1600x1200 it will hold you back in modern games. Your cpu will last much longer even when dx10 is around. So as long as you upgrade your graphics card theres no need for faster then 4800+ or your mighty new Conroe!

Well I hope you kept the old rig around as a server or backup Nice specs. I wish I had the money to go Intel now; but in all honesty the way I upgrade, mine should last me until Core 2 hits 3.5Ghz retail. (Or until K8L becomes a reality and not a bad joke)