Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Purchase another 3870x2 but fears of cpu limitations

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 15, 2008 10:50:03 AM

hey hey folks i want another 3870x2 but i only have a 22" monitor (1680x1050). if i go and get another one is my 6000+ (oc'ed 3.4) gonna be limiting the 2 3870x2's??? or would i be better off spending the $550AUD on a 24" or any other suggestions. not going to intel from a few bad experiences. or if i get another 3870x2 would i be better of sticking in my phenom that i can get to 2.65 stable in???

links to any good articles that show cpu limiting at resolutions i googled but couldn't find anything detailed or i just wasn't searching the right words

Thank you
March 15, 2008 12:02:47 PM

I would spend the money on a 24" or bigger before you go to 2 3870X2's. They're going to not be doing a lot at 1680x1050! :) 
March 15, 2008 12:07:13 PM

so im more resolution limited then cpu???
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2008 1:10:54 PM

Are you experiencing any FPS drop in games to justify adding another, already powerful, card? If everything is already smooth (30+ FPS) running at 1680x1050, you will not see much of a difference and if you do, I'm sure it won't be worth the extra 400$ you spent.
March 15, 2008 1:30:40 PM

i do get random drops below playable frames in all games
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2008 1:42:39 PM

I wouldn't buy another 3870x2. You have to rely on Quad Xfire support, and at 16x10 res you will be CPU limited in most games. No need to buy a bigger monitor either, if you aren't happy with your 16x10 performance, you won't be happy with your 19x12 performance.
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2008 3:46:42 PM

Wait til June, the 4xxx series comes out
a b U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2008 4:09:43 PM

If the drops are truly random (ie: not happening on specific events in games like explosions) AND you get them in every games (which games BTW?), then it might be a CPU bottleneck; a random windows task starting in the backgound and sipping CPU time from you game.
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2008 4:22:16 PM

So, a 2.8Ghz C2D will bottleneck a 3870X2 at 16x10?
March 15, 2008 4:40:08 PM

Last time I read the OP's post, he had an AMD processor not a C2D. Not that it means the AMD is slower or anything, I'm just wondering what in the world your post means jaydeejohn.
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2008 4:49:17 PM


As its random drops im inclined to agree that its more likley to be a software issue than a hardware issue.
Where this is concerned "so im more resolution limited then cpu???" The two in effect are the same thing, the end result is the CPU gets restricted but i dont think it will be a problem for you. Your set up isnt badly balanced and realistically wherever the system restriction might be in your system (every system has one component that in effect slows every thing else down somewhere or other) It really shouldnt be noticable to the point of affecting game play, that is unless you are forcing it to become a problem by trying to run the latest games at maximum settings ?
If you are then try turning some of the details down and see if its still a problem.
Mactronix
March 15, 2008 5:02:31 PM

bmadd said:
i do get random drops below playable frames in all games

That should not be happening. Check for spyware and make sure you aren't running a lot of background applications before you start throwing GPUs at it :) 
a b U Graphics card
March 15, 2008 5:22:16 PM

What Im saying is, that a AMD at 3.4 is approx equal in gaming performance of a C2D at around 2.8. And like was said, and its why I did this, its more likely a software issue. When you mention a C2D at 2.8 Ghz bottlenecking something, ppl tend to go whoooa, but being as he was using an equivalent AMD at 3.4 then its ok to assume that, which in my opinion only is wrong
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2008 5:52:36 PM


Have to agree with you there jaydeejohn people in general do tend to estimate the C2D as a lot better compared to the AMD chips. We have seen benchmarks before that show that in gaming the differance isnt as much as it is in general.
Mactronix
March 15, 2008 6:05:41 PM

mactronix said:
Have to agree with you there jaydeejohn people in general do tend to estimate the C2D as a lot better compared to the AMD chips. We have seen benchmarks before that show that in gaming the differance isnt as much as it is in general.
Mactronix

No, it's generally people blinded by 3DMark scores!
My system scores nothing like the same system with an C2D or C2Q, but in game, you'd never know! :D 
March 15, 2008 6:18:27 PM

I'd consider further optimization of your current setup before spending that kind of money on another x2 and depending on scaling of quad GPU. There are articles showing that the returns for multi GPU scaling are the highest at 3 GPUs. I think with your current setup you should be able to get acceptable performance at 16x10. Make sure your OS is running as lean as possible and that you are using the latest BIOS for your board, as well as the latest motherboard and video card drivers.

Also, there is a lot to be said for fine tuning your video card settings in CCC or ATI Tray tools. As well, tweaking settings in your games can have HUGE returns on performance. Too often people put every possible setting to the maximum possible value (16x MSAA and 32x AF will cripple any card or cards). You need have the patience and initiative to play with each and every setting. Find a baseline, like every setting the same (ie every setting medium, or every setting high). Keep a record of your frame rates over a period of time, through different situations (sitting still w/ little action, or running around in mayhem). Once you've established a baseline to compare against, begin playing with one setting at a time. Increase or decrease the setting and note its effect on your framerate vs. its effect on visual quality. You want to find what has the highest effect on framerate with the smallest effect on visual quality. A lot of times there are settings that have huge effects on framerates between on or two increments and little to no effect on visual quality.

As I've said, this will take time and is an arduous process, but the reward is well worth it. Fully tweaking every setting can give you performance you never thought possible while retaining spectacular visual quality. It's all a question of motivation and patience.
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2008 7:39:27 PM


@ mtyermom

Spot on I have 10 dedicated profiles in ATI Tray tools as well as the default options that are already there.
As you said it takes time and patience but its definatly worth it :D 
Mactronix
March 15, 2008 9:55:07 PM

There is no way that ur cpu bottlenecking u...check something else.
March 15, 2008 10:10:08 PM

@ mtyermom. thats fair enough i generally dont go crazy and smash the sliders all the way TO THE MAX! and spend some time tweaking but not a large amount of time tweaking. as for ati tray tools i loved it back in my X850XT days but i can not get it to work with vista 64.
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b à CPUs
March 15, 2008 10:36:00 PM


Yes ATT has been having issues playing nice with both Vista and the laters gen of cards, I did here they were working on it but dont have any dates as to when they expect to fix it. Im currantly running version 1.3.6.1067 which is a bete version.
Mactronix
!