CPU Speed Query

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dragon
  • Start date Start date
D

Dragon

Ok guys I am looking at a new pc amd 5000+ dual core but the speed says
2.6ghz, I thought at 5000+ this would be a lot faster as some new games need
2.8ghz minimum does the dual processor double the speed. sorry to ask a
silly question

cheers Dave
 
Dragon said:
Ok guys I am looking at a new pc amd 5000+ dual core but the speed says
2.6ghz, I thought at 5000+ this would be a lot faster as some new games
need 2.8ghz minimum does the dual processor double the speed. sorry to ask
a silly question
Click to expand...


What games state that they need a 2.8GHz processor? Seems unlikely as GHz
means little these days, when you are talking about the speed of a
processor. They might have been referring to Pentium 4, which at 2.8GHz is
a lot slower than an Athlon64 or Core 2 Duo at the same speed.

ss.
 
Dual cores don't double the speed, in most games (most
aren't very well optimized for dual cores if optimized at
all for it) the primary bottleneck is the video card.


What games state that they need a 2.8GHz processor? Seems unlikely as GHz
means little these days, when you are talking about the speed of a
processor. They might have been referring to Pentium 4, which at 2.8GHz is
a lot slower than an Athlon64 or Core 2 Duo at the same speed.
Click to expand...


Exactly, if only a generic speed is given it is of the older
tech P4. An A64 X2 5000+ will be more than sufficient for
any game stating only "2.8GHz", though if one had a high-end
gaming video card it might become a bottleneck.
 
A dual core processor will not quite double the speed, but it will increase speed by 50% or more for multithreaded application, which most games are not.
The speed requirement might be for a Pentium 4. Most newer chips run applications faster than a Pentium 4 at the same clock speed e.g. each core on a Core2 Duo runs about 50% faster than a Pentium 4 at the same clock speed.
 
Dragon said:
Ok guys I am looking at a new pc amd 5000+ dual core but the speed
says 2.6ghz, I thought at 5000+ this would be a lot faster as some
new games need 2.8ghz minimum does the dual processor double the
speed. sorry to ask a silly question
Click to expand...

No question ever appeared here, just the above 2 sentence jumble.
 
Synapse Syndrome said:
What games state that they need a 2.8GHz processor? Seems unlikely as GHz
means little these days, when you are talking about the speed of a
processor. They might have been referring to Pentium 4, which at 2.8GHz
is a lot slower than an Athlon64 or Core 2 Duo at the same speed.

ss.
Click to expand...
looking at bioshock and medal of honor airbourne
 
Dual core CPU's can do TWO tasks equally fast simultaneously. It does NOT
do one task twice as fast.
 
Dragon said:
looking at bioshock
Click to expand...

Bioshock is one of the few games written to take advantage of dual core
processors.
It runs very smoothly on my 2.4GHz core2duo overclocked to 3.2GHz and Radeon
X1950XT graphics card.
and medal of honor airbourne
Click to expand...

Don't know anything about that game but I don't think it takes advantage of
dual cores.
 
Fred said:
Bioshock is one of the few games written to take advantage of dual core
processors.
It runs very smoothly on my 2.4GHz core2duo overclocked to 3.2GHz and
Radeon X1950XT graphics card.


Don't know anything about that game but I don't think it takes advantage
of dual cores.
Click to expand...

Mine is 2.8 GHz and has an 8600gs geforce i think
 
Ok guys I am looking at a new pc amd 5000+ dual core but the speed says
2.6ghz, I thought at 5000+ this would be a lot faster as some new games need
2.8ghz minimum does the dual processor double the speed. sorry to ask a
silly question

cheers Dave
Click to expand...

I don't know about newer ones.
well, in the case of the AMD Athlon XP. If it said like AMD Athlon XP
3000+ . That was not 3Ghz
It may have been like 2.1GHz. It was what AMD called a "Performance
Rating", which meant it was equivalent to a P4 3GHz

I do'nt know if dual core doubles the speed, but even if it does then
it doesn't double the GHz.

I remember 2.8Ghz as a classic P4 speed. I think they went as high as
P4 3GHz. But P4 2.8Ghz was the highest speed northwood core, and
popular. After that the p4 went to prescott core 3GHz which ran hot.

Your game would be fine if it means P4 2.8 or AMD Athlon XP 2800+
These are fairly old processors. Your AMD athlon 64 X2 5000+ would
beat them.


I don't know what the AMD Athlon 64 X2's performance rating rates it
against/equivalent to. Sounds a bit like against it's still against
P4, continuing where AMD Athlon XP left off. Anybody?
 
Fred said:
Bioshock is one of the few games written to take advantage of dual core
processors.
It runs very smoothly on my 2.4GHz core2duo overclocked to 3.2GHz and
Radeon X1950XT graphics card.
Click to expand...

Of course, one core runs the program and the other core runs the rootkit.
Heck, even the DEMO has a rootkit!
 
Mine is 2.8 GHz and has an 8600gs geforce i think
Click to expand...

In that case your video card is more of a bottleneck than
the CPU. 8600gs will probably play many titles at
acceptible framerate today, but in some cases you may need
to turn down eyecandy some (depending on monitor
resolution).
 
I don't know what the AMD Athlon 64 X2's performance rating rates it
against/equivalent to. Sounds a bit like against it's still against
P4, continuing where AMD Athlon XP left off. Anybody?
Click to expand...


There really isn't any appropriate equivalency for AMD's
more recent models of X2. Against their own X2 models, the
improvement isn't quite linear, and against Athlon XP it
definitely isn't linear number-naming scheme, even ignoring
that it's a X2 meaning they are using an estimation of
performance increase from dual cores without consideration
of the specific app, whether that app benefits much if any
from dual core. AMD couldn't possibly know this though, so
basically what AMD did was establish the initial numbering
plan and then after they had determined the max that core
could do, just incrementally ramped up the speed and the
number.

It might be that their original numbering scheme was meant
to contrast performance of the P4, and in this is could be
the most appropriate comparison merely because the numbers
seem in the same ballpark, but it would be more approriate
to just compare based on price instead of number at least
under about the $180 mark.
 
kony said:
In that case your video card is more of a bottleneck than
the CPU. 8600gs will probably play many titles at
acceptible framerate today, but in some cases you may need
to turn down eyecandy some (depending on monitor
resolution).
Click to expand...

could you explain better I am new to all this technology

cheers dave
 
could you explain better I am new to all this technology
Click to expand...


What's left to explain? The factor limiting games from
playing faster than they will, is the video card moreso than
the CPU. That doesn't necessarily mean this combo of video
and CPU you have wouldn't be fast enough, you'll have to try
it and see.
 
kony said:
What's left to explain? The factor limiting games from
playing faster than they will, is the video card moreso than
the CPU. That doesn't necessarily mean this combo of video
and CPU you have wouldn't be fast enough, you'll have to try
it and see.
Click to expand...

i see so maybe in the near future it might be worth getting a better video
card, my current system till my new 5000+ systen turns up is only ati 9600
radeon, 2 gig amd and it handles a few games ok

thanks again

dave
 
Back
Top