ejanvi 0 Posted March 12, 2007 Guys, I am currently stuck with a 3 Gigahertz Intel. It is now clear that this is not enough. Which Intel processor runs best with AA? I hear that multi-core is not really supported by Armed Assault. Does that mean that I won't see any improvement over my 3 GHz single CPU? Do I need to go for the fatest Single Core CPU around? What's the community's advice? Thanks, Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sickboy 13 Posted March 12, 2007 I'm running Intel Core 2 Duo 3333mhz... Supposedly outperforms a Intel Pentium 4D even above 4000mhz.... And it frigging Rox for ArmA... Usually I dont even use 1 full cpu for the game ;D PS, having a dualcore cpu can especially help with Nvidia Videocards because the Shader Compiliations can be done on the other cpu.... Aswell as background tasks etc. (But if this really makes % difference in ingame performance.... G knows..) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ejanvi 0 Posted March 12, 2007 Interesting. I must say, I have a 31" LCD display. Something like 1900 - 1600 resolution. Got an NVidia 8600: used to be the shit two years ago, but probably a bit limited now. Brings everything to a crawl as soon as it gets thick (grass plus cities, essentially)... Hence the thoughts about upgrading... I don't quite understand how software handles multiple CPUs, I think. I thought that it had to be written to handle multi-threaded tasks, and I see nothing in the posts that suggests anything like that.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bonko the sane 2 Posted March 12, 2007 Interesting. I must say, I have a 31" LCD display. Something like 1900 - 1600 resolution. Got an NVidia 8600: used to be the shit two years ago, but probably a bit limited now. Brings everything to a crawl as soon as it gets thick (grass plus cities, essentially)... Hence the thoughts about upgrading... I don't quite understand how software handles multiple CPUs, I think. I thought that it had to be written to handle multi-threaded tasks, and I see nothing in the posts that suggests anything like that.... you mean 6800 right? the 8600 is due sometime this year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Monkwarrior 0 Posted March 12, 2007 PS, having a dualcore cpu can especially help with Nvidia Videocards because the Shader Compiliations can be done on the other cpu.... Aswell as background tasks etc. (But if this really makes % difference in ingame performance.... G knows..) I have a similar system. Do you have to tweak some things to make the second core help the nvidia card (a 7950GTX in my case) or is that automatic behaviour ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dirtylarrygb 0 Posted March 13, 2007 A duo core PC has no massive effect on ARMA, almost no games actually work x2 faster on any dual core system. Duo core motherboards work better with the lastest GPU's 8800, have very fast ram (800mhz) so make a better partner for a new video card. This year some games will truly start to perfrom 70% faster on a dual core system. Supreme Commander is the first BIG game. If you are upgarding an E6300 is a very cheap CPU and often when only slightly overcloaked produces 3d mark 06 scores that kill even the fastest single cores AMD 4000 etc ever made. Installing a Duo core now is knowing many games will go dual threading in next 12-24 months and knowing that XP and Vista won't mind you running an antivirus programme, a software firewall, a web browser and a new 3d game at the same time! A duo means you can encode a MPEG/MP3 and still use the PC for the web etc. Single cores can't do it as well. What I will say is an 8800 runs just fine on a AMD 4000 single core, I do get a performance loss not currently it's not a big problem. AMD single core chips are VERY cheap now ;} Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dirtylarrygb 0 Posted March 13, 2007 PS, having a dualcore cpu can especially help with Nvidia Videocards because the Shader Compiliations can be done on the other cpu.... Aswell as background tasks etc. (But if this really makes % difference in ingame performance.... G knows..) I have a similar system. Do you have to tweak some things to make the second core help the nvidia card (a 7950GTX in my case) or is that automatic behaviour ? Yep, theres stuff on the intel site, I'm building an E6600 this week I shall add links. The EVGA BB's are full of tips as a few games (mainly older ones) hate the duo chips. It's mainly to do with the speed step settings though from what i have read. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dirtylarrygb 0 Posted March 13, 2007 Interesting. I must say, I have a 31" LCD display. Something like 1900 - 1600 resolution. Got an NVidia 8600: used to be the shit two years ago, but probably a bit limited now. Brings everything to a crawl as soon as it gets thick (grass plus cities, essentially)... Hence the thoughts about upgrading... I don't quite understand how software handles multiple CPUs, I think. I thought that it had to be written to handle multi-threaded tasks, and I see nothing in the posts that suggests anything like that.... 6800, well a 7900 is x2 faster and a 8800 is x2 faster than a 7900. So in CPU terms thats like going 1GZ to 4GZ in 2 years in the most simple terms ;} The proof being if you look at the FPS benchmarks on the web in the most modern games at the same screen res and in-game settings a 6800 with score 10 FPS, a 7900 20 and an 8800 40 fps at high res with eye candy turned on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ejanvi 0 Posted March 13, 2007 Right. I meant 6800. So the natural thing would be to upgrade the graphic card first. But I'd need to switch to a PCI Express Mobo, I suppose. And if I do, I might just as well get a new CPU... Nothing is ever simple... Thanks for the advice, anyway. The main conclusion I get is that it's time to spend a few weekends building a new PC and reinstalling bloody windows and everything... I hate it... E. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
