Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Upgrade from 1055t to....?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 3, 2012 10:18:17 PM

Hi all, i currently have a 1055T and was thinking about upgrading but not quite sure which path to take. Plz dont tell me to get a 2500k, i have an AMD board, and dont feel like changing it. yes im aware the 2500k is much better. I am only able to OC the 1055t to 3.5ghz and its really irritating me. the 8150 seems to overpriced for what you get. so I was thinking maybe a 980BE? or 1100T? Computer is used mainly for gaming (bf3, LoL, SC2 etc..) and video encoding. My problem is all 6 cores look to be bottlenecking the two 6970s in crossfire while playing bf3. Any thoughts greatly appreciated :) 

More about : upgrade 1055t

a c 851 à CPUs
April 4, 2012 12:27:49 AM

Upgrading a 3.5GHz X6 just to get a little higher overclock does not make financial sense but the X4 980 would be your best bet because of higher clocks. Just don't expect any miracles.
m
0
l
April 4, 2012 12:33:29 AM

Yes i figured that. i would like to just make sure im not bottlenecking the GPUs seeing as i spent alot of money on them.. During BF3, cpu usage is around 85-90%, while gpu is about 80% also...
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
April 4, 2012 12:40:27 AM

Hi :) 

1100T EVERY TIME...

I run them in my gaming machines...

All the best Brett :) 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 4, 2012 12:48:41 AM

Yeah the 1100T's would be the choice. Your really limited with that platform. AMD kind of left you guy's high and dry.
m
0
l

Best solution

a b à CPUs
April 4, 2012 12:50:27 AM

IMO you won't get a huge increase in performance with only 300-500mhz increase. At least not worth the cost of a whole new CPU (I'd buy a whole new board if you're going to buy a new CPU). However if you must...

+1 1100T.

I know you said no, but anything from AMD is going to bottleneck 2 6970s. It's the sad truth. :( 

Are you unhappy with your current performance?
Share
April 4, 2012 1:36:25 AM

its playing bf3 max on 1920x1080, just using 2x aa instead of 4.
Actually whats really bugging me is the gameplay isnt smooth even at 80-90fps. Like, i move the mouse up and down and i can see vertical lines across the screen, like its not refreshing quick enough or something. I just built my brother a 2500k with single 6950 and it doesnt do that, its unbelievably smooth. If i Alt+Tab out of the game i look at the cpu usage and all 6 cores are approx 90% usage, while the gpus are 70-80% so its kind of irritating.
m
0
l
April 4, 2012 1:37:27 AM

I know everyone hates the fx chips, but you dont think a 4170 or 8150 OC'd to 4.5-5ghz would make any difference?
m
0
l
April 4, 2012 1:40:03 AM

Tried disabling V-sync? it might just be artifacts for your monitor being only 60hz
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 4, 2012 1:42:28 AM

drmcstroks said:
I know everyone hates the fx chips, but you dont think a 4170 or 8150 OC'd to 4.5-5ghz would make any difference?


No not really man, I traded in my FX-4100 to go back to a phenom.
Current rig with the FX @ 4.5Ghz was pulling about 65-75 FPS
Current rig with Phenom II @ 4.25 is pulling 85-100 FPS
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 4, 2012 1:55:53 AM

Have you tried enabling Vsync?

What happens when you crank up the AA? AA should be GPU dependent, not CPU.

Does it still stutter with crossfire disabled? Your crossfire setup could just be micro-stuttering.

90 FPS in BF3 in busy multiplayer should be killer performance.

Using latest video drivers?

I couldn't see a 3.5ghz Thuban having trouble giving playable frames on most if not any game.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 4, 2012 2:03:41 AM

drmcstroks said:
I know everyone hates the fx chips, but you dont think a 4170 or 8150 OC'd to 4.5-5ghz would make any difference?

Don't get discouraged. The people on this site will solve your problem (if it can be solved). OC'ing really isn't my thing - but you've got some real experts this board. Good luck to you.
m
0
l
April 4, 2012 2:05:46 AM

I believe you have to disable V-Sync unless you on a 60hz+ monitor, then you should enable it...whats your monitor refresh rate?
If you having higher then 60FPS on a 60hz monitor V-Sync is not doing anything on and can cause problems like the one your discribing.
m
0
l
April 4, 2012 3:48:04 AM

v-sync is disabled. if i max AA then fps drops to about 50avg. moniter refresh is 60hz. Using the latest 12.3 drivers.
m
0
l
April 4, 2012 3:49:40 AM

cmi86 said:
No not really man, I traded in my FX-4100 to go back to a phenom.
Current rig with the FX @ 4.5Ghz was pulling about 65-75 FPS
Current rig with Phenom II @ 4.25 is pulling 85-100 FPS


thats interesting. did you have all the latest windows updates that were made for the fx series chips?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 4, 2012 5:39:43 AM

Brett928S2 said:
Hi :) 

1100T EVERY TIME...

I run them in my gaming machines...

All the best Brett :) 


I agree but the question is will he be able to find one.
m
0
l
April 4, 2012 5:45:29 AM

if it will make that much of a difference, ill find one trust me haha
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 4, 2012 5:55:58 AM

Do a google search and see if you come up with anything. If not you could try Ebay but you're taking a chance.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 4, 2012 10:14:07 AM

drmcstroks said:
v-sync is disabled. if i max AA then fps drops to about 50avg. moniter refresh is 60hz. Using the latest 12.3 drivers.


Did you try enabling vsync (with crossfire enabled)? That cured my micro-stutter with 4890 crossfire in BFBC2 back in the (not too distant) day. :) 

Does stuttering persist with crossfire disabled?

drmcstroks said:
thats interesting. did you have all the latest windows updates that were made for the fx series chips?


The FX series has a lesser IPC compared to Phenom II. This is mostly due to them using 1 FPU calculation per 2 cores. Their cores are setup as say... modules now. 2 interger calculations and one FPU per 2 cores. Thus performance in lower core count applications (such as games, since that's relevant) has met utter failure. Their 8 core (4 module) is a decent value if you can efficiently utilize the 8 cores/threads (which games do not), however the overclocking headroom doesn't quite match up to the IPC lost per core (compared to Phenom II). It's there with the right chip maybe, but most of us are quite disappointed.
m
0
l
April 4, 2012 4:44:41 PM

with vsync enabled i was only getting 40-50fps and it was still shuttering, thats why i disabled it to begin with. with crossfire disabled, i would enable vsync and that would eliminate the shutter, but id have only 50fps average, and it would dip down to low 40s during large fights. I kno games only use 2-4 cores for the most part, but every time i alt+tab out of bf3, all 6 cores on this chip are reading approx 90% usage... im guessing this is because bf3 is highly threaded?
m
0
l
April 4, 2012 6:27:39 PM

ok checked this out a little more...

ultra settings on all...

60-80fps no AA or vsync

60fps with AA enabled

45-60fps with AA and Vsync enabled.

most setups ive seen with xfire 6970s are hitting 100-120fps.....
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 4, 2012 9:59:28 PM

drmcstroks said:
thats interesting. did you have all the latest windows updates that were made for the fx series chips?


The windows updates we designed to "help" resolve task assignment issues with the 8X FX's. The updates don't have any effect on the 4X performance.
m
0
l
April 6, 2012 7:16:59 AM

" alt="" class="imgLz frmImg " />

pic is with cpu at 3.4ghz.... at 3.8ghz, gpu load on both cards is stable at about 95%. problem is system is not stable at 3.8ghz.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 6, 2012 7:51:21 AM

They dip down at the end? How are your CPU temps?
m
0
l
April 6, 2012 9:46:30 AM

that dip was when i alt+tab'd. temps steady 57c
m
0
l
April 13, 2012 6:46:15 AM

Best answer selected by drmcstroks.
m
0
l
!