CPU or GPU for AH?

[Skuzzy]

Ok MANDO, you typed your post before I got the one above in.

To meet your requirements with that video card would probably require a 3Ghz CPU, or better.

[eagl]

I've been getting very high framerates with my system with most of the details turned almost all the way up, and 1024 textures at 1280x1024 resolution and 2xQ FSAA.  It's very smooth most of the time.  If I was into mud moving and base attack I'd probably reduce or adjust some of the detail settings to try to get max framerate at smokey airfields, but my system just doesn't chug badly enough for me to want to do that.  It's not perfect, but I only spent about $1000 on the critical components of memory, cpu, vid card, and mobo.  

I have no hard evidence that an intel system would be better or worse, but the athlon 64 roundly stomps the intel cpus in pretty much every single game review I've ever read online.  Even though they didn't use AH2 for the benchmarks, the cross section of games used was wide enough that it's reasonable to extrapolate that dollar for dollar, the AMD cpus are better for games than the intel cpus, and the fastest AMD cpu is better for games than the fastest intel cpu.

[MANDO]

Thanks Skuzzy.

eagl, I agree with you about intel and AMD. I find intel as the very worst inversion "near-future wise", but I dont find current athlons 64 enough safe "near-future wise" inversion neither.

If PCIe SLI configurations demostrate to be far more powerful than any single AGP card, then even AGP bus and AGP cards may be already obsolete. But in this case, the inversion (or waste) would be much less than 1000$.

[Skuzzy]

Quite right eagl.  But are those comparisons made at stock clocks and with the Intel Prescott?  I am asking out of curiosity more than anything else.

The AMD64 should kick any Intel CPU's butt.  I have to figure my system is a fluke as it seems to perform just as well, according to a good friend of mine who is about as bias towards AMD as anyone I have ever known.

All I know is, everything I do just works, without fail.  He has not been able to say that, yet.

I plunged big into my system as I figure it will have to last me a good 5 years.  I will not touch a Prescott CPU and I will not own a VIA based motherboard.  
From my perspective, I see the market getting really shaky over the next couple of years before settling back down.

For those tempted to say something positive about VIA, don't bother.  I deal with support issues everyday, and the lion share of problems happen to have a VIA based motherboard involved in them, or an Intel video chip.

[38ruk]

this is an interesting discussion , let me lay out what ive done.  upgraded a xp3200+ to a amd64 3400+ , kept the 9800pro , and noticed a nice performance increase. lets say 8 to 10 fps in a furball , up high doesnt matter cause the old system hit vsync cap. Now ive gone and bought a x800pro and upgraded the 9800 pro. To be honest the im not seeing much of a difference. i can bump Anti Aliasing to 4x instead of 2x, but thats about it.  so i guess im at a cpu limit? kinda expensive to keep playing the upgrade game, guess ill just ride along here for awhile     38

BTW skuzzy im on a nforce chipset not VIA hehe

[humble]

Originally posted by 38ruk
this is an interesting discussion , let me lay out what ive done.  upgraded a xp3200+ to a amd64 3400+ , kept the 9800pro , and noticed a nice performance increase. lets say 8 to 10 fps in a furball , up high doesnt matter cause the old system hit vsync cap. Now ive gone and bought a x800pro and upgraded the 9800 pro. To be honest the im not seeing much of a difference. i can bump Anti Aliasing to 4x instead of 2x, but thats about it.  so i guess im at a cpu limit? kinda expensive to keep playing the upgrade game, guess ill just ride along here for awhile     38

BTW skuzzy im on a nforce chipset not VIA hehe

What are you getting....I'm 27/29 in tower and about the same if the ground clutter clicks in...and quickly go to 75 once I get any air with similiar (3200+ AMD 64) with 1 gig pc3200 on DFI board.

[Wolf14]

Skuzzy you mentioned you wouldnt touch a prescott. Why?

From the initial looks the Prescotts have larger caches than the Northwoods and seem to be a little cheaper. I'm looking at buying a new cpu but cant decide if I want to go with the Prescott or Northwood. Price is telling me to go with Prescott and I also dont intend on any overclocking at this time.

[Skuzzy]

It needs that larger cache to try and help its performance.  Clock for clock, the Prescott is slower than the Northwood.

The Prescott needs over 50% more power at the same clock rate as Northwood, which is a direct coorelation to how much more heat it will generate, from a smaller package as well.

At 3.4Ghz, the Northwood has a maximum amp rating of 71.6A.  That is how much current it can draw.

The Prescott, at the same speed, is rated at 119A.


If the thing was big enough you could fry eggs in a few seconds on it.

[Curval]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
an ATIX800XT video card.  

hehe

Doubt you recall this Skuzzy, but I asked about the 700XT card when you were online a couple of weeks ago.  I was going to buy one based on a recommendation from someone.

Your response was "Middle of the road card"...I asked "Seriously Skuzzy?" and you replied "Yes".

I then got the ATIX800XT with the system I bought based on those comments.

Sure glad I asked.  It rocks my world.

[38ruk]

What are you getting....I'm 27/29 in tower and about the same if the ground clutter clicks in

set in ah at default levels, with 2x aa 1280x its at the monitor cap of 75fps..... if its a field getting pounded with lots of con it drops aslow as 60 or so .  ive just reinstalled the os and wiped it clean. ill test it later tonight and see if any change .  ive clocked the card as high as 540 on the core and 670 on the memory so ill see if it makes any difference . im thinking that the cpu is the bottle neck 64 3400 its stock a 2400mhz i turned it up to 2517 to see how that works aswell <>    38

[Toad]

Skuzzy, clearly VIA is your "Not" chipset.

Which ones do you like?