Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel Core 2 Duo slow!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 30, 2007 4:50:11 PM

Hi,

i have a Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2x 1.86GHz, 1GB ram, 7600GT GFX etc. and a friend has
the same pc but WITH AMD 3500+ (no dual core) and rainbow six: Vegas(with 1.03 patch) works better on his than on my machine, i looked at his task manager and CPU usage is 100% and game consumes about 450MB of RAM but on my machine cpu usage is about 55% and ONLY about 150MB RAM.

We both have win XP SP2

Can anybody explain it why it is so?!

More about : intel core duo slow

January 30, 2007 5:18:39 PM

What do you have running in the background? Do you have the most recent drivers? Try a degfrag of your HD and see if that makes a difference.
January 30, 2007 5:19:25 PM

Quote:
Hi,

i have a Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2x 1.86GHz, 1GB ram, 7600GT GFX etc. and a friend has
the same pc but WITH AMD 3500+ (no dual core) and rainbow six: Vegas(with 1.03 patch) works better on his than on my machine, i looked at his task manager and CPU usage is 100% and game consumes about 450MB of RAM but on my machine cpu usage is about 55% and ONLY about 150MB RAM.

We both have win XP SP2

Can anybody explain it why it is so?!


Most probably 'cause Vegas is one of the worst coded pieces of crap in the world.

Great game however.
Related resources
January 30, 2007 5:25:32 PM

there are no other programs running in backround. I just cant understand why any game wont use all power of my CPU, its always 50%.

Should i buy 1GB RAM more??? Will then my CPU be fully used.

What about Win XP x64, will it be faster when i install it.
January 30, 2007 5:30:46 PM

Because the game does do much with dual cores so it's mainly using only 1 of the cores so it only takes 50% of the cpu. If you had a quad core it would only take up 25%.
a c 478 à CPUs
a c 117 å Intel
January 30, 2007 5:46:38 PM

Quote:
there are no other programs running in backround. I just cant understand why any game wont use all power of my CPU, its always 50%.



It seems that Rainbow Six Vegas is a single threaded games just like most games out on the market. Therefore it will only use 1 CPU core to run the game. Since the Athlon 64 3500+ is a single core CPU, it is natural that it uses 100% of the CPU. The E6300 is duo core so the game will only use one of the two cores, or 50%. There is no program out there and there is nothing you can do to force a single threaded program to use more than one CPU core.

The amount of RAM seems odd, perhaps your friend has more RAM than you do? Is he running something else in the background? Are the two of you playing the same level?
January 30, 2007 6:00:05 PM

he has the same amount of ram (1GB kingmax 667MHz)
January 30, 2007 6:04:25 PM

Well you know, those C2D's are RAM hogs.

:twisted:
January 30, 2007 6:20:19 PM

Well Rainbow Six Vegas does not take advantage of dual core CPUs, and dual cores may hurt performance in the game if it's really coded as poorly as everyone says. Chances are though, the difference you're noticing comes from the different RAM, or videocards you may each have.
January 30, 2007 6:58:17 PM

I think the problem is that windows is trying to do load balancing among the cores, and since the application was not developed to run on multiple cores, this is slowing it down (context switch etc).
I'd try:
1) set the affinity for your game to only 1 of the cores
2) install this patch (Hotfix for dual cores) in case you don't have it already.
Hope this helps.
January 31, 2007 1:34:27 AM

Quote:
Hi,

i have a Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2x 1.86GHz, 1GB ram, 7600GT GFX etc. and a friend has
the same pc but WITH AMD 3500+ (no dual core) and rainbow six: Vegas(with 1.03 patch) works better on his than on my machine, i looked at his task manager and CPU usage is 100% and game consumes about 450MB of RAM but on my machine cpu usage is about 55% and ONLY about 150MB RAM.

We both have win XP SP2

Can anybody explain it why it is so?!

:?: How much better and in what ie framerates, loading, etc?

Also remember that the AMD 3500+ CPU's are still relatively powerful and built/designed to suit those types of games.

It sounds like a ram problem to me.

The faster machine has more info loaded in ram, this has to be better in my opinion.

Still, I would have thought the E6300 would make up for this.
January 31, 2007 9:43:38 AM

We both have the same GFX, same ram (kingmax 1GB 667MHz) but different CPUs. On his machine it doesnt work much better, but a just little bit, so i asked myself why it is so. I know that my CPU is much better because it works with 50% CPU usage and his 100% on R6: Vegas.

I hope that a game developer will make a game with multi core support.

And is my windows using both cores? Well i have 2 CPU usage graphs

January 31, 2007 1:05:05 PM

you also have a mismatch in your ram,
too keep everything smooth in your pc core 2 duo needs ddr2 800 to match the FSB so there is no bottleneck, that would certainly bring performance up a bit
January 31, 2007 1:30:24 PM

There is not RAM mismatch.
The CPU is a 6300 which runs with a FSB of 1066 by default.
This requires DDR2-533 RAM.

His DDR2-667 RAM is more than sufficient and would actually down-shift to 533 when he boots his system. DDR2-800 would add nothing except cost and simply downshift to 533 as well.

The DD2-800 may even be slower if the memory timings are not as tight since the defaults may be more conservative to allow the RAM to reach higher FSB speeds.
January 31, 2007 1:34:30 PM

Might wanna let you know that the 3500+ doesn't support DDR2, and so your RAM is NOT the same.
January 31, 2007 1:38:50 PM

Quote:


Most probably 'cause Vegas is one of the worst coded pieces of crap in the world.

Great game however.


QFT!!
January 31, 2007 1:48:10 PM

Yup thanks, just looked it up myself and saw your post when I was going to edit mine because I DID in fact remember AM2 after I posted it. I obviously suck and you are great.

Anyway.

I'd get the dual-core patches for XP and see how that works.
January 31, 2007 1:56:26 PM

since your processor is the slowest core 2 duo it might just be that the 3500+ slightly outperforms it in that application, you might consider overclocking it to maximize performance because the 6300 is a bit weak for gaming.
January 31, 2007 4:57:48 PM

So is that true that my CPU is running only @ 1.86 GHz. If its so than its not bad becasue the 3500+ is running @ 2.2 GHz or something and still mine is not slower (i think only with rainbow six: vegas is his a little bit faster). And my CPU is faster with WINRAR than his and usage is only 50% and on his its 100%. So i hope that in near future my CPU will be fully used.

Loading on Warcraft 3 is faster on mine for about 1 sec than on his, and W3 doesnt use both cores.
January 31, 2007 5:26:47 PM

Quote:
So is that true that my CPU is running only @ 1.86 GHz. If its so than its not bad becasue the 3500+ is running @ 2.2 GHz or something and still mine is not slower (i think only with rainbow six: vegas is his a little bit faster). And my CPU is faster with WINRAR than his and usage is only 50% and on his its 100%. So i hope that in near future my CPU will be fully used.

Loading on Warcraft 3 is faster on mine for about 1 sec than on his, and W3 doesnt use both cores.


the 3500 is a great single core cpu so it could just be faster in that app but if you do a slight and safe oc say to 2.6ghz then you will notice some major improvments

good luck
January 31, 2007 5:55:28 PM

Quote:
since your processor is the slowest core 2 duo it might just be that the 3500+ slightly outperforms it in that application, you might consider overclocking it to maximize performance because the 6300 is a bit weak for gaming.

Uh, no. It's true that the E6300 is the slowest Core 2 Duo but it is nevertheless very fast and should perform better than the 3500+. There is no real need to overclock.
Scarface: Clock speed isn't the sole factor in determining performance. The Core 2 architecture is more efficient, so performs better, even at lower clockspeeds, than Pentium 4 and K8.
EDIT: That said, the 3500+ is, as said above, a great single-core CPU. My opinion, however, is that the E6300 is superior.
January 31, 2007 6:07:21 PM

Quote:
Hi,

i have a Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2x 1.86GHz, 1GB ram, 7600GT GFX etc. and a friend has
the same pc but WITH AMD 3500+ (no dual core) and rainbow six: Vegas(with 1.03 patch) works better on his than on my machine, i looked at his task manager and CPU usage is 100% and game consumes about 450MB of RAM but on my machine cpu usage is about 55% and ONLY about 150MB RAM.

We both have win XP SP2

Can anybody explain it why it is so?!


A 2.2 GHz Athon 64 has an 17% advantage in GHz compared to to C2D 6300.
Also clock 4 clock in gaming 4MB cache core 2 duos are up to 10-30% faster than Athlons.

Taking into considerations that the game is single threaded the 3500+ might easily be faster without the game being poorly written.

So Core 2 Duo can be slower than Athlon 3500+ in single threaded applications? Definitely !!! and it is in allot of them!
January 31, 2007 6:11:59 PM

OK thank all of you for your replies.

Iam happy now, because i thought i have bought a crappy CPU. Iam happy that it is not so.

I will buy 1GB of ram more.
January 31, 2007 6:24:11 PM

Quote:
OK thank all of you for your replies.

Iam happy now, because i thought i have bought a crappy CPU. Iam happy that it is not so.

I will buy 1GB of ram more.


It's not crappy. The games uses half of it that's why it can be beaten by an 3500+. Add the overclocking potential and you got yourself a very good deal.

Your CPU competes at 50% of it's potential and still can match a higher clocked single core AMD CPU, that ain't bad.

If you were expecting orders of magnitude performance over other processors ... well...welcome to the real world.
November 30, 2008 5:05:26 PM

Hi everyone

anyone have pbm with the computer?

okay My Inf about Pc

My pc ---- intel (R) Core 2 Duo 1.86Ghz 1066Mhz = 85%
4x4= 8GB Ram = 100% with powerful GGC
1TB HDD = 100%
4GB Graphice Card NVIDIA 100%
Windows Vista U
Motherborad MSI
Supply power 700W = 100%

what i have the software on CD but if lost CD Use by Download on net (Driver Detective) Pay fully ver £40

Update Motherboard with CPU.
update Vista.
update norton 360.
Ant-vrius Norton 360.
update B.I.O.S on M.B.
Registry Mechanic this software Best pcworld £30 i thinks maybe.
software Intel(R) Processor Identification Utility and much more software.


This is real Good 100% turst me becusae i am one fix the computer on TCG
so there about like what.....this is qiue Powerful better then overclocking potential !!!!
Why..i tell u if u been Hit the potential overcloking u could be Ruin the intel..for examlpe when u have 3.00Ghz rite but u been hit the P.O.C that mean u will be could be 2.50Ghz this mean can made of week pc ! if never hit on P.O.C 3.00Ghz it will be safe and powerful but need update of CPU then what happan it will made real fast ! first must sure u know how to made like 85% but i am only T.C mean i know well about computer over 96% of the right drive On HDD + Ram + Motherboard + Supply Power + G.C Aslo software fully...

So anyway if your pc is low something u can tell me and i will help u fully 90% that made ur pc Better or u want pc 100% well it take to long bit so u choise what u want better or 100%.... 100% well like Give help right of the software plus need something on pc few but not too much just take easy be fully right ! DONT BE RUSH ! could be Damger On MB.. any where!

And I dont care of they have 3.00Ghz or 3.33Ghz but only if u know how to make of 100% right safe the software but my pc is more then 3.00Ghz ! easy and better plus save money so i knew people feel of bad luck wast money and dont undstand how to right or maybe people too rush can could Ruin anythings on your pc! ( NEED HELP MAKE BETTER PC) ask me anythings what wrong with ur pc.


I only Help people who have Only Intel like Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Q, and much more but Sorry I am not Help AMD cause AMD have been fail the software and will cost.. sorry I hate AMD I like Intel Better then AMD 100%

Any qus? Ask me

!