If I could upgrade from a 2.8 Ghz P4 Northwood to a 3.4 Ghz Northwood for something like $50 would that be worth it?
You probably wouldn't notice anything.
depends on the application (gaming would benefit if ur vid card is currently processor limited, video encoding, 3d rendering would benefit as well)
I've got a GeForce 7600 GT which I assume is good enough that the CPU is probably the bottleneck. If I play a game like the latest Need for Speed game if I pump up the video quality to the max the game is kind of choppy but 1 setting down from the max it is fine. With that information, can anyone deduce if my CPU is the bottleneck or the video card?
what resolution are you playing at ?
have you tried overclocking the CPU ?
The 2.8C overclocks like a champ..you should be able to get her above 3.2 without even pushing your system....may get towards 3.4 or so and still be stable.
MORNING WOOD Lumber Company
Guinness for Strength!!!
With the latest Need for Speed game you are GPU limited, not CPU limited.
I would overclock the CPU though if you can, those were good overclockers.
"Would you mind not standing on my chest, my hats on fire." - The Doctor
Mark: Resolution was probably reasonable, like 1024 * 768 or maybe a step up from that. I played with the AI overclocking (ASUS P4C800-E motherboard) but that thing sucked. I think I've stepped up the manual overclock in BIOS to 5% overclock before but I turned that off while trying to solve this hard drive issue (where on the 3rd hard drive I've tried my computer reboots every hour or so). Using the Beta BIOS I'm going on 3 days with no problems.
YeOldeStonecat: By the same token couldn't I overclock a 3.4 to 4.0 then! I've actually got one of those massive a Zalman copper heatsinks (CNPS7000B-Cu) that would help with overclocking (2.8 to 3.2 would be about 15% overclock) I'm glad you mentioned a specific number because I really wasn't sure how far I could overclock this puppy. What can I say, it's Canada and summer is short so I've made the most of it which meant this Zalman has sat on the shelf since June!
Brent: Interesting that you think my video card is the bottleneck. I think I paid a reasonable price for it maybe $200 (ie. it wasn't the best card available at the time). I just figured the $500 cards probably give me 20% more power but cost more than twice as much. I built a PC for my dad with a similar video card but it's a Core 2 Duo 2.4 Ghz (E6600 I think) and he can play FarCry with video on Extreme video settings and everything looks amazing. I imagine FarCry is a little older than the newest Need for Speed game.
There have been mixed results in o/cing those processors. Supposedly the malay package chips clock better than the Costa Rican variety, if memory serves.
Hell_Yes
Luck is where preparation meets opportunity - Seneca
"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" - Isaac Asimov
It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book. - Friedrich Nietzsche
I personally do not believe that upgrade would be worth $50...the 2.8 should easily hit 3.2 like cat said without much trouble...add ram or save for a better video card as you are certainly video card limited right now...i think the best AGP card can be had for around $150 is the ATI x1950 pro or a reasonable facsimile thereof.
here's the card you need to max out your system:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...2E16814161071R
Just to be clear, gaming is only 1 of the benchmarks I would use for speed. I like a machine that is overall very quick at opening windows, general navigation, running ad-aware scans etc. The way I see it, 2.8 overclocks to 3.2 and a 3.4 could overclock to 3.8 so I'm still looking at almost 20% gain on some tasks.
That said, it's probably time to start thinking ahead to a new machine that would work well with Vista.
'quickness' could also be obtained through a better hard drive...ie a Raptor.
3.4 was the upper boundary of that particular cpu cycle and socket so don't assume the 3.4 could hit 3.8...just as a 2.8 might hit 3.2-3.4 the 2.4 could hit 3.2-3.4 as well because that chip was designed to go that fast but not much faster...just don't want you to get your hopes up.
If you wanna see a real difference get a new motherboard with a Core2 Duo. Even at lower frequency speeds, they'll be faster than any 3Ghz HT CPU.
No question, the difference is that I need to shell out about $800 for all the parts (memory, PCI-E video card, case etc.) to put together a Core2 Duo whereas the upgrade I'm talking about with a 3.4 Northwood is a $75 or so item on Ebay.
I will buy a new machine soon but it's fun to have a fairly fast second machine around because you can play a few multi player games (probably not the newest games) at my house that way.
Not wanting to start a AMD vs. Intel thread here but any time I have put together an AMD box for somebody (always done it for friends that want lower costs) the machine has failed to live up to the "as fast as Intel" benchmarks and advertisements. I remember a few years back when I built an AMD 2800 machine for my friend and when we played a Command and Conquer game he'd have game speed on about 50 and I'd have it on about 8 and mine would still be faster. Oh and he had a better video card than I did as well. Sorry, I would interpret AMD 3800 as about Intel 3.2 Ghz in real world tests from my past experiences.
//another nudge to just start overclocking her...![]()
MORNING WOOD Lumber Company
Guinness for Strength!!!
http://forums.speedguide.net/showthread.php?t=220993
Possibly a little cheaper today.
Hell_Yes
Luck is where preparation meets opportunity - Seneca
"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'" - Isaac Asimov
It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book. - Friedrich Nietzsche
Bookmarks