Question about Quad Core

Will a quad core system, with 2gig of ram, and a 8800gtx, be powerful enough to negate the performance problems that vista has with games, and be able to play the current crop of games at maximum resolution and detail with a good framerate, barring crysis?

will a regular dual core and a 8800gs be up to the task?

if a quad core speed is 3.30 ghz, that means all cores run at that speed, and theoretically, its total speed would be around 12ghz?

but if a game isn't programmed to take advantage of the extra cores, will it be only using the power of one core so it'll only have 3.30ghz running it?

i want my system to be able to play gp4 at maximum detail, and at least 35fps, also rfactor at max detail, and pro evo 08 with no slow down at all

also are there still any problem regarding vista and gp4?

Thanks





Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/06/2007 08:07PM by ralv585.

ralv585 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Will a quad core system, with 2gig of ram, and a
> 8800gtx, be powerful enough to negate the
> performance problems that vista has with games,
> and be able to play the current crop of games at
> maximum resolution and detail with a good
> framerate, barring crysis?
>
> will a regular dual core and a 8800gs be up to the
> task?
>
> if a quad core speed is 3.30 ghz, that means all
> cores run at that speed, and theoretically, its
> total speed would be around 12ghz?
>
> but if a game isn't programmed to take advantage
> of the extra cores, will it be only using the
> power of one core so it'll only have 3.30ghz
> running it?
>
> i want my system to be able to play gp4 at maximum
> detail, and at least 35fps, also rfactor at max
> detail, and pro evo 08 with no slow down at all

Vista doesn't have any speed problems with games, and there is no quad-core at 3.3GHz at stock speed. Any application which isn't dual-core or multi-core optimised will only run on a single core, whether it's a game or not. Having a quad-core doesn't give even close to '12GHz' performance, even if it's optimised for multi-core.

i use vista and its fine with gp4 with an ati 2600xt 256mb. Using max settings.

That would be plenty as a mate has bought a system with a Q6600 and 8800 320mb and his runs Flight Sim X at full detail with no lag. Although he does have 3gig of ram as Vista was using a whole 1gb to run not leaving him a huge amount for games

SpykerMF1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That would be plenty as a mate has bought a system
> with a Q6600 and 8800 320mb and his runs Flight
> Sim X at full detail with no lag. Although he does
> have 3gig of ram as Vista was using a whole 1gb to
> run not leaving him a huge amount for games

Vista's supposed to use a load of RAM. It's what it's designed to do. It's a pretty poor operating system which doesn't use your RAM - it releases RAM on demand, so having it used until that point is frankly excellent. It learns how you work and makes the OS an absolute delight to use. It's Vista's best feature as things stand. It's something various Unix OS's have adopted for years.

//edit: Frankly, full res and max details depend entirely on what resolution you run at. My PC could run FSX at full res and details if I used an 800x640 monitor. As it happens I run at 1920x1200 so FSX would likely laugh at me (it's horrifically heavy on specs). I seriously doubt there's a consumer system currently for sale which would run FSX on full details (even with only 4xAA and 8xAF) on DX10 with that res giving acceptable frame-rates (say never lower than 40fps) - certainly not a single graphics card.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/31/2007 11:30PM by gav.

so if a game is not multi core designed, i can expect to get the same performance from a dual core system as quad core system, as it'll only use one of those cores anyway, give or take the speed core?

at full res, i guess my maximum would be 1680x1050 as my monitor soesn't support any higher

i'm only really into gaming, no video editing or much photoshop stuff, will dual core be enough as i would ideally like to save the £150-£200 the quad core would cost.

i dont want to future proof my pc per say, 3-5 years without the need to upgrade is what i'm looking for, only add a better graphics card after 1-2 years

i was against getting vista, and sticking to xp, but from what you guys are saying is that most of the early issues vista had with games have now gone, so its vista all the way for me!

but which one? vista basic, premium or ultimate?

whats the difference between the three, and i'll get the 32bit version, not 64 as i've heard there are some compatability problems with it

thanks

but which one? vista basic, premium or ultimate?

Home Premium is the most a normal user will ever need. Ultimate has extra things like Bit Locker and DreamScene, but nothing useful.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com

ralv585 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> so if a game is not multi core designed, i can
> expect to get the same performance from a dual
> core system as quad core system, as it'll only use
> one of those cores anyway, give or take the speed
> core?

The only benefit you'd see would be that any background applications using the CPU would be much less likely to adversely affect the performance of the game. The game itself would so no other benefit in the slightest, whether the PC had 1 core, 2, 4 or 8.

ralv585 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> at full res, i guess my maximum would be 1680x1050
> as my monitor soesn't support any higher

You're well into the graphics card being the bottleneck, and I still maintain any current card couldn't handle FSX (using that as an example) at full detail at that resolution. The performance of Crysis is expected to improve in the final release, but as you said yourself it still won't run at full detail

ralv585 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i'm only really into gaming, no video editing or
> much photoshop stuff, will dual core be enough as
> i would ideally like to save the £150-£200 the
> quad core would cost.

I do do video editing and I'm not rushing out to buy a quad-core, I'll put it that way. :P (I'm waiting on Nehalem (which will be Intel's first native quad-core) at the earliest, unless AMD's Phenom springs a surprise).

ralv585 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i dont want to future proof my pc per say, 3-5
> years without the need to upgrade is what i'm
> looking for, only add a better graphics card after
> 1-2 years

I'm not convinced the rest of the system will last 5 years before becoming more than a very low-end PC (5 years ago the AMD Athlon XP had just come along, which even being conservative is now around 5 generations old), but there's not much we can do about that. It's up to you to guesstimate, as none of us know better than anyone else just how quickly things will move forwards.

ralv585 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i was against getting vista, and sticking to xp,
> but from what you guys are saying is that most of
> the early issues vista had with games have now
> gone, so its vista all the way for me!

Safe bet is still XP, but every system I've set up recently has had Vista as it's primary OS - I've installed both XP and Vista, so people can fall back to XP if needs be, but none have reported any problems. Get the latest patches and drivers, and it's very rare to have problems. Only program which puts me off of using Vista at work is Sony Vegas 7, which isn't particularly stable on Vista (I assume Vegas 8 has solved this though).

ralv585 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> but which one? vista basic, premium or ultimate?
>
> whats the difference between the three, and i'll
> get the 32bit version, not 64 as i've heard there
> are some compatability problems with it

It was the 64-bit version I was using when testing it at work, and as above, very few issues. If you're 'future-proofing' (as much as you can in the IT world) then the x64 is the way to go, especially if you'll be upping that 2gb of RAM to 4gb before the end of the PC's life (which I suspect you will - you should be considering it anyway given that good 2gb RAM is only ~£50 at the moment).

Of the 3, discount Basic. It really is that. You lose a whole host of features and it looks @#$%& without Aero. Home Premium is more than enough for 99% of home users, while Ultimate has everything Home Premium and Business has, plus it has 'Ultimate Extra's', a selection of free addons for the OS, of which I only use DreamScene at the moment (you can set movies as desktop backgrounds, which doesn't use any CPU resources if that movie is HD and you use an ATi HDxxxx card - with nV you need to purchase PureVideo for hardware accelerated HD playback). So long as you don't set 'busy' videos as the background, DreamScene rocks, in my experience. It's hardly worth the extra over Home Premium though.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/01/2007 12:06AM by gav.

ok guys, this is what i plan to get from scan.co.uk:

Coolermaster Centurion RC-534 Black Tower Case
Intel Core 2 Duo E6850, S775, 3.0 GHz, 1333MHz FSB, Conroe Core, 4MB Cache
3XS Sytems Liquid Cooling Unit (1xCPU - 120mm FanUnit)
2Gb (2X1Gb) CorsairTwinX XMS2, DDR2 PC6400 (800), 240 Pins, Non-ECC Unbuffered, CAS 5-5-5-12
512MB XFX 8800GT PCI-E (x16), Mem 1800 MHz, GDDR3, GPU 600 MHz, 2x Dual Link DVI-I/HDTV, HDCP, Fan
320 Gb Seagate ST3320620AS Barracuda 7200.10, SATA300, 7200 rpm, 16MB Cache, 8.5 ms, NCQ
Optiarc (Sony/NEC) AD-7170A-0B 18x DVD±R, 8x DVD±DL, DVD+RW x8/-RW x6, DVD-RAM x12, IDE, Black, OEM
Creative SoundBlaster X-Fi Xtreme Gamer Sound Card UK Retail
Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium 32Bit
and
600W Tagan TG-600-U35XL Easycon XL Modular, SLi, PCI-Ex6, SATA, Molex, EPS 12V, 80% eff
though i can't change the PSU

all for £993.79 inc VAT

is that a decent rig, what about the PSU?

I know we've just said that multi-core has limited uses and all that, but if that's the system I'm looking at, the quad-core Q6600 is only 80p more. I'd be sorely tempted to go for that. MHz won't make that much difference, the 2 extra cores will give more benefit in the long run, and if you wanted, given the water cooling, you could easily and safely overclock the Q6600 to the speed of the 3.0GHz speed of the E6850.

PSU would be fine - Tagan went through a bit of a sticky patch this time last year, but they're still one of the better manufacturers.

I'd never buy the hard drive. I've had 2 7200.10s die on me (out of 2, and both within 3 months), but that's up to you. All I'll say is that I'd back things up regularly. In terms of speed they are excellent value.

Guess who have the most problems with Vista... Creative. Their drivers for Vista simply suck, and I mean suck. That particular model is crap anyway. I'd rather use the onboard sound...

what about this hard drive?

150 Gb Western Digital WD1500ADFD Raptor Enterprise, SATA150, 10000 rpm, 16MB Cache, NCQ, 4.6 ms

about to confirm the details and purchase soon

also go the quad core and the silver trimmed case, done some research on the creative drivers, doesn't look good, on board for the time being

EDIT

ok, i bought the rig, opted for the quad core, no onboard sound, and the western digital hard drive

expected arrival monday morning i hope but most likely tue or wed, buts its coming

just over £1000, would only need to add another 8800gt and 2gig more ram over the next few years i guess

really chuffed, but another impulse buy

on another more delicate note, how would i go about transfering my **cough** sensitive **cough* material from my current drive to the new one?

also what about rfactor? how will i go about getting it on my new rig as well?

EDIT 2: just read the rfactor email, should be no problem, got 5 activations left

Thanks





Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/01/2007 09:35PM by ralv585.

Nice rig. Good choice on the hard drive, those Raptors are quick! You'd do well to add a 500 GB one from Samsung too, for extra capacity.

---

Everyone knows that million-to-one chances happen 9 times out of 10; indeed, it's a common requirement in fairy tales. If the human didn't have to overcome huge odds, what would be the point? Terry Pratchett - The Science Of Discworld

GPGSL S5 Race driver for IED.

ralv585 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> what about this hard drive?
>
> 150 Gb Western Digital WD1500ADFD Raptor
> Enterprise, SATA150, 10000 rpm, 16MB Cache, NCQ,
> 4.6 ms

Raptors? Oh, they're @#$%&. I don't own 6. No no, not at all.

ralv585 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> on another more delicate note, how would i go
> about transfering my **cough** sensitive **cough*
> material from my current drive to the new one?

Plug old hard drive into new PC, go to My Computer, the new drive, right click on Girls Gone Wild - Lesbian House Party.avi, then copy, go to the new hard drive, and the Pictures\Others\Others\Movies folder, right click and paste. Sorted.

If you want to make it easy, phone/email Scan and get them to add an external enclosure (matching it to whether your old hard drive was PATA or SATA), and you can just stick your old hard drive into it, connecting it up via USB, Firewire or eSATA (external SATA) as you wish.

ralv585 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> just over £1000, would only need to add another
> 8800gt and 2gig more ram over the next few years i
> guess

Unless the system comes with an nVIDIA-based motherboard (specifically a 650SLi or 680SLi) then you'll not be adding another graphics card. If it's the system I think you have, then it looks like it's got a 650SLi, and you'll be all right, but you ought to be aware you'll not be using 2 graphics card otherwise.

so my new hard drive will basically just plug in and the pc will pick it up?

its my other drive, no os is installed on it, just games, shows, misc downloads, would i need to go into the bios to make sure its recognised, thats what i had to do last time

about the hard drive, i read some reviews and most say that it was a solid drive, a bit noisy while searching, but a good peice of kit anyway.

my current drive, the one i want to transfer some stuff on is a western digital drive too, can't remember which one, but its been perfect from day one

EDIT: here mis the motherboard; Asus P5N-E SLI, NF650i SLi, S 775, PCI-E (x16), DDR2 533/667/800, SATA II, SATA RAID, ATX

its SLi enabled, so i haven't understood what you meant by i wont be using 2 graphics cards otherwise?
will there not be enough space or the PSU good enough for 2 8800gt's?





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/01/2007 11:14PM by ralv585.

ralv585 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> so my new hard drive will basically just plug in
> and the pc will pick it up?
>
> its my other drive, no os is installed on it, just
> games, shows, misc downloads, would i need to go
> into the bios to make sure its recognised, thats
> what i had to do last time
>
> about the hard drive, i read some reviews and most
> say that it was a solid drive, a bit noisy while
> searching, but a good peice of kit anyway.
>
> my current drive, the one i want to transfer some
> stuff on is a western digital drive too, can't
> remember which one, but its been perfect from day
> one

Raptors are noisy, but you have to keep in mind that they are the only 10,000rpm drives out there for the average user. You take the good with the bad. The speed obviously has drawbacks, or everyone would have them. I'm not buying anything other than WDs now. 100% failure rate with Seagate 7200.10s and Maxtors fail before they get to you. Samsung SpinPoints aren't bad either, but I've yet to have a WD fail... it's hard not to buy them.

Any other drive should slot in and work, yeah. If it's picked up before your new drive, then you might need to go into the BIOS and set your new drive as the boot drive again though (which takes about 5 seconds).

mate, you're confusing

when i ask about the drive, you said..."Raptors? Oh, they're @#$%&. I don't own 6. No no, not at all."
made me think, oh crap, but now you're saying you won't buy anything other than western digital?
is it just the raptor range that sucks?

i've just checked the website as well, everything is in stock apart from the graphics card, hope they get it on the weekend, because i would like to have it on monday or tues, as those are my only days off during the week





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/01/2007 11:29PM by ralv585.

ralv585 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> mate, you're confusing
>
> when i ask about the drive, you said..."Raptors?
> Oh, they're @#$%&. I don't own 6. No no, not at
> all."
> made me think, oh crap, but now you're saying you
> won't buy anything other than western digital?
> is it just the raptor range that sucks?

[en.wikipedia.org]

Raptors rock. Like I said, I've bought 6 over time (all still working, naturally). I wouldn't buy 6 if they were awful, would I?

its the whole "they're @#$%&"

if you said, "raptors? they're the @#$%&" then i would understand!

its all in the "the"

No, I said "oh they're sh!t"... didn't they teach you sarcasm at school? Thought it was kinda obvious...

not really, not to guy about to spend a grand on a new rig!

but thanks for all the help, really eased my mind that i wont be getting a dud system