Would a P4 3.2GHz bottleneck with a 7900GT? - Page 3 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 03-12-2006, 11:42 AM   #21 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,453
Send a message via AIM to FghtinIrshNvrDi Send a message via Yahoo to FghtinIrshNvrDi
Default

There's 2 different 3800's. There's a single core clocked at 2.4 with 512mb of cache. He's saying don't buy THAT one.

The dual core runs at 2ghz with 2 sets of 512mb of L2 cache.

Ryan
__________________

__________________

<b>I'm an unhyphenated American.</b>
System Specs:
Intel Q6600 @ 3200 1.4v
Abit IP35 Pro "The Snake"
2x2gb A-Data @ 800
Diamond HD 3870 512mb


Great FORD TRUCK resource: http://www.fordtruckfanatics.com
FghtinIrshNvrDi is offline  
Old 03-12-2006, 12:31 PM   #22 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

A processor does not bottleneck a video card as there is not direct communication between the two...all P4s would rely on either an 800 or 1066MHz bus to communicate with the video card and other components, and all amd64s would rely on the 2000MHz HTT bus for point to point communication. The bus speed doesn't change regardless of whether the internal operating frequency of the core does so I have no idea where you guys get off saying there is any sort of bottleneck present

Now obviously people are going to come in here and tell me an FX-57 will get x number of frames more than a 3000+, but that's because you're changing the instruction cycle period on the CPU meaning it's getting ITS workload done a little bit faster, but that isn't going to have any bearing on how the GPU performs. Adding a faster CPU and calling that fixing a bottleneck would be no different than having a 6800GT with an FX-57 and adding a 7800GT and calling that fixing a bottleneck...all you're doing is adding a faster INDEPENDANT component to your machine
__________________

__________________
Intel C2D E6320 / AMD Athlon X2 3800+
Gigabyte 965P DS3 / DFI nF4 Ultra-D
2GB OCZ Gold PC2-6400 / 2GB OCZ Gold PC4000
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB / eVGA 6800GS 256MB
150GB Raptor / 74GB Raptor
2x500GB / 320GB
OCZ GameXStreme 850w / OCZ StealthXStream 600w
gaara is offline  
Old 03-12-2006, 12:39 PM   #23 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
HAVOC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Milford, Connecticut
Posts: 4,218
Send a message via AIM to HAVOC Send a message via Yahoo to HAVOC
Default

Thank you gaara. It's so funny how people are always shouting "CPU Bottleneck" with relation to GPU > Rendering.Display

If people are worried about bottlenecks, they should first look at their software, which is the #1 bottleneck in systems today.

The Second, hardware bottleneck is currrent Harddrives. Compared to other components like CPU & RAM, HDD's are slower then molasses in January. (Even SCSI HDD's)

"Will my WD Raptor 10K 150G HDD bottleneck my OCZ PC6400?"

The answer is absolutely. Even PC2100 will be bottlenecked.
HAVOC is offline  
Old 03-12-2006, 12:46 PM   #24 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 640
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Spartan666
umm...no, ur wrong. the X2 3800+ is 2.0Ghz has 2*512kb L2 cache, and what are your reasons for not recommending it??
Quote:
Originally posted by john3
yeah seriously maybe u should do a lil research......the 2.4GHz is the 4400+, right? and i think the 3800+ is a good CPU, u can OC it 2 about 2.5, right? if you no wat ur doing.
Yea, you're telling ME to do my research? You're the idiot for calling it a 3800+. There is a pretty big difference between the 3800+ and X2 3800+ you dip****. Learn to type and go do your research.

Quote:
Originally posted by gaara
A processor does not bottleneck a video card as there is not direct communication between the two...all P4s would rely on either an 800 or 1066MHz bus to communicate with the video card and other components, and all amd64s would rely on the 2000MHz HTT bus for point to point communication. The bus speed doesn't change regardless of whether the internal operating frequency of the core does so I have no idea where you guys get off saying there is any sort of bottleneck present

Now obviously people are going to come in here and tell me an FX-57 will get x number of frames more than a 3000+, but that's because you're changing the instruction cycle period on the CPU meaning it's getting ITS workload done a little bit faster, but that isn't going to have any bearing on how the GPU performs. Adding a faster CPU and calling that fixing a bottleneck would be no different than having a 6800GT with an FX-57 and adding a 7800GT and calling that fixing a bottleneck...all you're doing is adding a faster INDEPENDANT component to your machine
Thanks for clearing that up. Nubius also tried to explain it, but I get it now. I won't say that a GPU bottlenecks the CPU, but how do you explain crappy processors holding back video cards?

Quote:
Originally posted by HAVOC2k5
Thank you gaara. It's so funny how people are always shouting "CPU Bottleneck" with relation to GPU > Rendering.Display

If people are worried about bottlenecks, they should first look at their software, which is the #1 bottleneck in systems today.

The Second, hardware bottleneck is currrent Harddrives. Compared to other components like CPU & RAM, HDD's are slower then molasses in January. (Even SCSI HDD's)

"Will my WD Raptor 10K 150G HDD bottleneck my OCZ PC6400?"

The answer is absolutely. Even PC2100 will be bottlenecked.
That, however, made no sense. You've got to take into account real-life performance. How do you explain the increase in performance going from PC2100 memory to PC6400 memory? Nope, not a bottleneck there. And not the software either. You've got do back up your stuff like Gaara did, man.
Green Radience is offline  
Old 03-12-2006, 01:00 PM   #25 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,453
Send a message via AIM to FghtinIrshNvrDi Send a message via Yahoo to FghtinIrshNvrDi
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Green Radience
Yea, you're telling ME to do my research? You're the idiot for calling it a 3800+. There is a pretty big difference between the 3800+ and X2 3800+ you dip****. Learn to type and go do your research.
You're already hanging yourself dude... I'd tone it down fast. I hope you know exatly what I'm saying.

Ryan

Rearrange the underlined letters to spell the secret word...
__________________

<b>I'm an unhyphenated American.</b>
System Specs:
Intel Q6600 @ 3200 1.4v
Abit IP35 Pro "The Snake"
2x2gb A-Data @ 800
Diamond HD 3870 512mb


Great FORD TRUCK resource: http://www.fordtruckfanatics.com
FghtinIrshNvrDi is offline  
Old 03-12-2006, 01:43 PM   #26 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,130
Default

well i didnt really say i was getting the 3800 single core, so w/e.

lol.

Flanker?

oh, my bad.
john3 is offline  
Old 03-12-2006, 02:26 PM   #27 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

Quote:
I won't say that a GPU bottlenecks the CPU, but how do you explain crappy processors holding back video cards?
They aren't and that was my point, a GPU is an independant component hence why it has it's own core and dedicated memory, therefore no other component has any bearing on how fast it operates.

I'll try expressing it as a formula. The number of instructions a GPU executes per cycle can be represented by x and the number of instructions executed per cycle by the CPU can be represented by y.

Framerate = x + y

It's that simple, and you can see that they're seperate. A CPU and GPU are both responsible for their own processes when you're playing a game, and the only time you they communicate with another is to assemble the data together which of course is reliant on your bus speed which as I mentioned doesn't change regardless of internal frequencies. You can see that a GPU will always continue to render x number of instruction sets and the CPU will always continue to process y number of instruction sets, and you add them together to get your framerate

So a crappy CPU doesn't hold back the GPU, it only holds itself back in that sense considering it's independantly responsible for its own set of tasks

Quote:
That, however, made no sense. You've got to take into account real-life performance. How do you explain the increase in performance going from PC2100 memory to PC6400 memory? Nope, not a bottleneck there. And not the software either. You've got do back up your stuff like Gaara did, man.
I believe he's talking about the page file or just pulling data from the hard drive into your memory in general...in which case he's right considering hard drive bandwidth is probably limited to about 70mb/sec on most average 7200RPM drives, comparing to 6400mb/sec memory bandwidth
__________________
Intel C2D E6320 / AMD Athlon X2 3800+
Gigabyte 965P DS3 / DFI nF4 Ultra-D
2GB OCZ Gold PC2-6400 / 2GB OCZ Gold PC4000
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB / eVGA 6800GS 256MB
150GB Raptor / 74GB Raptor
2x500GB / 320GB
OCZ GameXStreme 850w / OCZ StealthXStream 600w
gaara is offline  
Old 03-12-2006, 02:33 PM   #28 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 80
Default

They aren't and that was my point, a GPU is an independant component hence why it has it's own core and dedicated memory, therefore no other component has any bearing on how fast it operates.

I'll try expressing it as a formula. The number of instructions a GPU executes per cycle can be represented by x and the number of instructions executed per cycle by the CPU can be represented by y.

Framerate = x + y

It's that simple, and you can see that they're seperate. A CPU and GPU are both responsible for their own processes when you're playing a game, and the only time you they communicate with another is to assemble the data together which of course is reliant on your bus speed which as I mentioned doesn't change regardless of internal frequencies. You can see that a GPU will always continue to render x number of instruction sets and the CPU will always continue to process y number of instruction sets, and you add them together to get your framerate

So a crappy CPU doesn't hold back the GPU, it only holds itself back in that sense considering it's independantly responsible for its own set of tasks

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you, that makes perfect sense and seem very logical, now I understand that I was wrong to ask the topic question in the first place
Solid Runner is offline  
Old 03-12-2006, 02:47 PM   #29 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 240
Default

Nice explanation Gaara. That was good.
__________________
In The Mail!!!!- Athlon 64 3500 @Stock/Abit K9N SLi sAM2/2GB G.Skill DDR2 800 @Stock /XFX G7900GT XXX 520/1500Mhz/74GB Raptor w/ 16mbcache/300GB 16mbcache SATA HD/NEC DVD-RAM Burner/OCZ ModStream 520watt psu/ThermalTake Armor Jr./Logitech EX110 mouse/keyboard
Mk97 is offline  
Old 03-13-2006, 04:34 AM   #30 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
HAVOC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Milford, Connecticut
Posts: 4,218
Send a message via AIM to HAVOC Send a message via Yahoo to HAVOC
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by gaara
I believe he's talking about the page file or just pulling data from the hard drive into your memory in general...in which case he's right considering hard drive bandwidth is probably limited to about 70mb/sec on most average 7200RPM drives, comparing to 6400mb/sec memory bandwidth
wow. I thought that was common knowledge and didn't have to explain it like gaara did. I guess for now on i'll have to list every last detail with bullets and put things into a neat little outline.

gaara may feel like teaching you guys, But I certainly don't.
__________________

HAVOC is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.