PDA

View Full Version : 939 to Core2Duo 'Upgrade ' Gives ZERO Performance Boost!!!



ytareh
10-13-2007, 02:30 AM
I got the 'sweet deal' pc I posted about yesterday.Nice Coolermaster tower with 6300/7950GX2 2 Gig Crucial Ltd Ed RAM (800MHz) ,Tagan 580W and the Achilles Heel an ECS 965 T-A motherboard....
Surprisingly it also came with a denuine copy of Vista Ultimate 32 bit with disc and serial number.This lot cost me 400 euro (GB£ 275-US$550)
Id bought a motherboard from the private seller before from a kind of local Ebay site...He assured me that if I installed the Vista and NVidia driver I would be good to go.It was clear however that he had done some 'pruning' of the pc before he sold me it .I knew he was taking his Raptor hard drive but a dvd player too!
Even if the Vista wasnt on a DVD I was never gonna plug n play the system after installation as there was no cable connecting the cd player to the motherboard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Vista isnt quite the hideous monster I was expecting.It sure is 'purdy' to look at.But in no way whatsoever is this setup an improvement on my old skt 939 Opteron at 3.0GHz with ONE gig of OCZs finest RAM.And yes the image quality on the X1900XT is FAR superior.Black Death track ,Everest memory and most tellingly SuperPi benchmarks are all inferior......
I assumed that a bottom of the range Core2Duo system would comfortably beat a top of the range 939 one.Wrong I guess -at least with the further of Vista vs XP factored in .

So do I sell the whole lot or buy a new motherboard.I had an ECS before that overclocked quite well but this has no overclocking options whatsoever in BIOS.....

Advice appreciated asap!!

BaronUnderpants
10-13-2007, 03:46 AM
Originally posted by ytareh:
I got the 'sweet deal' pc I posted about yesterday.Nice Coolermaster tower with 6300/7950GX2 2 Gig Crucial Ltd Ed RAM (800MHz) ,Tagan 580W and the Achilles Heel an ECS 965 T-A motherboard....
Surprisingly it also came with a denuine copy of Vista Ultimate 32 bit with disc and serial number.This lot cost me 400 euro (GB£ 275-US$550)
Id bought a motherboard from the private seller before from a kind of local Ebay site...He assured me that if I installed the Vista and NVidia driver I would be good to go.It was clear however that he had done some 'pruning' of the pc before he sold me it .I knew he was taking his Raptor hard drive but a dvd player too!
Even if the Vista wasnt on a DVD I was never gonna plug n play the system after installation as there was no cable connecting the cd player to the motherboard!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Vista isnt quite the hideous monster I was expecting.It sure is 'purdy' to look at.But in no way whatsoever is this setup an improvement on my old skt 939 Opteron at 3.0GHz with ONE gig of OCZs finest RAM.And yes the image quality on the X1900XT is FAR superior.Black Death track ,Everest memory and most tellingly SuperPi benchmarks are all inferior......
I assumed that a bottom of the range Core2Duo system would comfortably beat a top of the range 939 one.Wrong I guess -at least with the further of Vista vs XP factored in .

So do I sell the whole lot or buy a new motherboard.I had an ECS before that overclocked quite well but this has no overclocking options whatsoever in BIOS.....

Advice appreciated asap!!


Im by no means an pc expert but only yesterday i looked at Toms Hardware discussing the new Crysis game. EA games system specs for that game differs depending on if u use XP or Vista.

U need more pc if u run a game with Vista installed. Something like 2.8 GHz for XP while Vista require 3.4 GHz ( or something like that ) to run a game at equal speed.

As for the Core2 Duo my understanding is that if u have say 1.9 GHz Duo, that would be worse than a 2.2 GHz singel since u only use one core in the duo setup when playing a game anyways. Now if u wanna run Photoshop while playing IL2 at the same time then Core2 duo is your choise.

Might be wrong though.

x6BL_Brando
10-13-2007, 04:32 AM
My understanding is that Vista requires a lot more RAM than XP to function well, due to more background processes in operation.

Motherboard-wise, I always try to get the best that I can afford.

B

Urufu_Shinjiro
10-13-2007, 05:47 AM
As far as mobo, I don't know what you have now so I cannot advise. As for performance, what are your bios settings, what are your ram timings? You can oc that Core 2 just a little and get that performance difference back, that the cool thing about the C2D's, while an opteron may oc to 3-3.2 and be very fast but even the 6300 should be able to hit 3.0-3.6 and smoke that opty.

ytareh
10-13-2007, 07:57 AM
Hi Urufu,motherboard is ECS 965 T-A a dog of an overclocker...it just wont!

XyZspineZyX
10-13-2007, 08:24 AM
Originally posted by x6BL_Brando:
My understanding is that Vista requires a lot more RAM than XP to function well, due to more background processes in operation.


B

This is my experience. Most of my software does not support both cores of my 4400+ 64x2 proc. so I don't see a mind-boggling increase in performance

But the PC does anything I need it to do, and the cost of RAM and a new vid card for my old PC was about the cost of this new one. I do hope for some Vista upgrades that customise it's performance for the needs of various users

ploughman
10-13-2007, 11:36 AM
can you specifiy which chip a program uses at all? One for OS one for Il-2 sort of thing?

R_Target
10-13-2007, 11:38 AM
I went from a X2 3800+ @ 3.0Ghz to an E6600 @ 3.2Ghz and got a 15-20% FPS increase. This is with Windows XP though.

SeaFireLIV
10-13-2007, 12:04 PM
Seems to me that Vista isn`t helping anyone if you need so much Ram just to get IL2 work wheras XP will do a better job on half that!

Neither do I relish getting a new PC with 1 gig uptodate expensive Ram then having to fork out twice as much for more ram because Vista`s making IL2 performance worse!

Seems to me, it`s either pay £800-£1000 for everything then you`ll be fine, but try and do it in affordable parts (like I do) and you won`t get any better performance in IL2 than with the old 3 year old XP Pc for years.

crazyivan1970
10-13-2007, 12:04 PM
Went from FX53 (2.7ghz) to 6850 (3.6ghz).... Night and day... probably 100% boost on low frames easy, if not more. Lets put it this way.. i can fly over Berlin and Kiev with no problems http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif, same video card. Use to be like 10-12 fps...now 40s on higher video settings too. WinXP64.

Bearcat99
10-13-2007, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Went from FX53 (2.7ghz) to 6850 (3.6ghz).... Night and day... probably 100% boost on low frames easy, if not more. Lets put it this way.. i can fly over Berlin and Kiev with no problems http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif, same video card. Use to be like 10-12 fps...now 40s on higher video settings too. WinXP64.

Ivan did you ever get your profiling software for the MS stick to work in XP-64?

heywooood
10-13-2007, 01:13 PM
"IvBan"...heheheh good one

mortoma
10-13-2007, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by x6BL_Brando:
My understanding is that Vista requires a lot more RAM than XP to function well, due to more background processes in operation.

Motherboard-wise, I always try to get the best that I can afford.

B Holy Carp!!! Vista has even more background clutter than XP does??? I didn't think there could be more background stuff than XP had!!

slipBall
10-13-2007, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by BaronUnderpants:

Im by no means an pc expert but only yesterday i looked at Toms Hardware discussing the new Crysis game. EA games system specs for that game differs depending on if u use XP or Vista.

U need more pc if u run a game with Vista installed. Something like 2.8 GHz for XP while Vista require 3.4 GHz ( or something like that ) to run a game at equal speed.

As for the Core2 Duo my understanding is that if u have say 1.9 GHz Duo, that would be worse than a 2.2 GHz singel since u only use one core in the duo setup when playing a game anyways. Now if u wanna run Photoshop while playing IL2 at the same time then Core2 duo is your choise.

Might be wrong though.


You are right

crazyivan1970
10-13-2007, 07:23 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Went from FX53 (2.7ghz) to 6850 (3.6ghz).... Night and day... probably 100% boost on low frames easy, if not more. Lets put it this way.. i can fly over Berlin and Kiev with no problems http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif, same video card. Use to be like 10-12 fps...now 40s on higher video settings too. WinXP64.

I never really tried BC.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Ivan did you ever get your profiling software for the MS stick to work in XP-64? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ytareh
10-14-2007, 07:45 AM
Bump....I could really do with some sound advice here....Sell on or keep and get new motherboard?

Xiolablu3
10-14-2007, 12:39 PM
It all depends what you want to do with it.

The motherboard wont be slowing your system down if its running at the rated speed.

Do you want to overclock?> If you do and this board wont let you, then sure, get a new one.

If it has all the features you want, and its stable at stock speeds, then keep it.

Are you sure its running the chip at the correct speed? Sometimes when I have put a new chip onto a motherboard, I have to set the FSB and multipler manually as otherwise the auto setup sets it up wrong.

Download CPU-Z to ID everything and make sure its all running at the correct speed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I would expect a 3 ghz Opteron and a Core2Duo to run IL2 at the highest settings when coupled with a good GFX card. OPterons are suppsed to be damn good chips and the 6300 is the very slowest Core2Duo (I think) so maybe they are about the same speed?

R_Target
10-14-2007, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
OPterons are suppsed to be damn good chips and the 6300 is the very slowest Core2Duo (I think) so maybe they are about the same speed?

Sounds about right. The 6300's a little guy until you crank it up. I would get another motherboard and start overclocking. I would guess the 6300 @ 2.6Ghz+ would start pulling away from a 3Ghz Opteron.

Urufu_Shinjiro
10-14-2007, 05:06 PM
Originally posted by R_Target:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
OPterons are suppsed to be damn good chips and the 6300 is the very slowest Core2Duo (I think) so maybe they are about the same speed?

Sounds about right. The 6300's a little guy until you crank it up. I would get another motherboard and start overclocking. I would guess the 6300 @ 2.6Ghz+ would start pulling away from a 3Ghz Opteron. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Definately get a new mobo, an Asus P5K Deluxe for single card, the new Asus Maximus X38 if going crossfire is your thing, or one of the many 680i boards if SLI is on your mind.

ytareh
10-16-2007, 04:50 PM
I take it all back!Just got this humble set up up to 2.4 OCCT stable using ClockGen which is ok considering how BAD this motherboard is supposed to be at Overclocking.Compared with my 'old' 939 3GHz XP pro system SuperPi 1M has dropped to 23 secs from 29 secondsand the Black Death track fps gone up by about 10-using 7950GX2 on Vista vs X1900XT on old pc.....
I will probably change the XP Pro and X1900XT over to my new system