I cant belive my Venice 3000+ is already obsolete!

[Overclocker550]

I had that cpu for less than a year, back then it was quite good, about a third below the top of the line fx57. Now im more than 3x slower than a high end conroe! If a 2.13(266x8) conroe with 2mb cache can match a 2.8GHz fx62, my 3000+ Venice(1.8GHz stock) would be half the performance of a 2.8GHz fx62 because its single core, less cache, lower fsb(?) and slower ram(not ddr2) so therefore I would be at half the performance of that 2.13GHz conroe as well. I would need almost twice the MHz to match Conroe(2mb cache verson). If we take a 2.4GHz conroe with 4mb cache and overclock it to 3.6GHz(from 266 to 400fsb) it would be 2x as fast clock for clock as my venice. Therefore a 3.6GHz conroe 4mb cache is as good as a 7.2GHz 512k cache Venice. This means its 4x faster than my stock venice at 1.8GHz and 3x faster than it at 2.4GHz(cpu will do that, but ondie controller has trouble running ddr533MHz) It feels like I have a 486 now! Once games take full advantage of dual core, the performance gap between single core and dual core will widen much more! I am going to build a shiny new Conroe system from the ground up and probably give this obsolete a64 to my mom so she can surf the net faster, something her emachine 1GHz celeron is too slow to even do! I will get triple+ the fps with Conroe+x850xt video card. Cpu is gonna cost about $300(2.4GHz 4mb cache conroe) and video card about $150(x850xt pci-e) Ill run games at 1600x1200 or 2048x1536 resolution with all the eyecandy jacked up

 

[>HyperlogiK<]

er... does it not work anymore then? does Oblivion or Prey not play?

 

[infinitevalence]

looks like you may need to change your avatar then

 

[Overclocker550]

looks like you may need to change your avatar then

I still hate the pentium4 but I guess ill change it to a Conroe avator


"er... does it not work anymore then? does Oblivion or Prey not play?"


Todays games will run, but slowly on an old cpu like mine.

 

[CalsonicGTR]

Might want to look at something stronger than an X850XT if you want max eye candy and decent fps.

 

[Overclocker550]

Might want to look at something stronger than an X850XT if you want max eye candy and decent fps.

Whats wrong with x850xt? Its 16 pipes and has high clocks and should be alot stronger than my 9700pro. Theres 7800gt with 20 pipes thats a bit better, theres 7800gtx but its expensive. Theres x1900xt but its only 16 pipes. Besides, with a Conroe, ill have more than enough cpu power to muscle thru games.

 

[DahVid]

If you overclock that to 2.4ghz or a reasonable amount it should be just fine if you ask me.

The 1900xt has 16 pipelines, but 48 pipelines for rendering shading.

If your looking for a video card, I'm still on a 6600GT.. but the 7900GT ($260-300) is great. I've hooked it in a few of my buddies computers.

Just overclock it a bit more.. It's not that obsolete really. I played Oblivion, maxed out, on a 3000+ Winchester OC'd to 2.45ghz, with a 7900GT and 2gb of RAM. (1024x768).
I seriously doubt your CPU is the one bottlenecking your system.

 

[CalsonicGTR]

Nothing wrong with an X850XT, its just that you said you wanted "Max eye-candy @ 1600x1200", and the X850XT wont be able to do it with decent framerates as well other vid cards that dont cost much more (i.e. used 7800GT).

 

[Dan0512]

You can't compare single core to dual core in terms of obsolence. They aren't twice as fast as well, and I bet the single cores will run games just as fast as the dual cores do, since only a pair take advantage of the extra core. And in the end, the graphic card will set the limit as well. So I'd worry about getting a recent graphics card than a new CPU. BTW, I doubt you'll be able to run any newer games on an x850xt @ 2048*1536, that unless you like stuff @ 15fps.

Don't worry, your CPU is still strong.

dan

 

[Overclocker550]

I guess as long as my cpu can run games at 30+ fps im sticking with it and will let Conroe prices drop and clocks ramp up. Video prices will drop as well. I cant run todays games at 1600x1200 though, have to back down to 1024x768 with medium-high eyecandy so im feeling a bit bottlenecked. I bet I barely meet the minimum cpu requirements for some recent games. I can get 2.4GHz but running the ram async negates the performance benefits. I believe 2.25GHz with ram sync at 250MHz is stable, if not then 2.16GHz with 240fsb is.

 

[infinitevalence]

with the A64 there is no such thing as runing the ram Sync even if the ratio is "1:1" it is till running Async from the CPU. There are no performance hits other than loss of bandwidth from the lower speed to running a divider.

 

[CalsonicGTR]

Running your RAM async on the A64 platform doesnt bring about a performance hit like it might on some other platforms. I run my RAM async so that I can get my CPU to 2.75GHz and keep my RAM at 250MHz.

 

[jivetrky]

I'd say that an extra 150Mhz for your CPU would certainly outweigh the miniscule performance decrease from RAM dividers.

 

[Overclocker550]

"There are no performance hits other than loss of bandwidth from the lower speed to running a divider."


I lose too much bandwith to make a divider worth it unless I could get my cpu to like 2.6GHz

 

[greenmaji]

I lose too much bandwith to make a divider worth it unless I could get my cpu to like 2.6GHz

Is there a benchmark that proves this to you?
If so could you put up some screenshots?

It sounds to me like your FPS problems are comming from your 9700 rather then your CPU.
I say build a new computer once your graphics card is CPU bottlenecked and you can't upgrade to any CPU for your platform that will undo that nasty occurance in digital life

 

[Overclocker550]

http://www.behardware.com/articles/623-15/intel-core-2-duo-test.html


faster cpu=double the fps



http://www.behardware.com/medias/photos_news/00/17/IMG0017197.gif


faster gpu=small increase(17%) in fps

 

[hrhrhrFOOT]

yer links got butchered

 

[greenmaji]

Your second link doesnt work..

And in those articals what GFX card were they using? your 9700? I seriously doubt it. If your going to put your $$$ down on hardware to improve your FPS, you might as well put it were it counts first then deside if your CPU is holding you back.
FPS isnt my consern sooo I consider other things

 

[RAMMAN]

I bet I barely meet the minimum cpu requirements for some recent games.

actually your cpu barely meets the minimum cpu requirements for crysis yet mine meets it easy lol.

http://www.crysis-online.com/Information/System Requirements/

 

[Steel23]

lol obsolete?..you serious?....the 3000+ has been out for how many years?...wth you expect?