Not sure if rubbish CPU or faulty GPU. - Hardware & Software

I have a bit of a problem. I have a Sapphire HD 6950 Dirt 3 Edition (2 GB, DDR5) and an i7 920 @2.67Ghz. So, in theory, I am quite good. The problem is, this is far, far from the truth. GTA IV runs absolutely horrible, even on mid-low settings with only textures on High, if there's no fog in-game. If I force fog using a trainer, it becomes playable. And the reason I come for you, /g/, is because my friend argues that this is because GTA IV is a CPU-heavy game and 2.67GHz is absolutely rubbish. I always had my doubts about the goodness of my CPU, however, I also have always suspected that my GPU is faulty. Dirt 3 doesn't run smoothly on maximum settings. Crysis 2 is only really playable on Medium, becomes absolutely horrible if tessellation is on unless I'm indoors or something. To be honest my prime suspect is faulty GPU. Is there a benchmark tool of some sort that will tell me if my CPU is inherently bad or if my GPU is not working like it should? Or maybe there's an option C, faulty CPU. I just have no idea.

You have an i7 clocked at 2.67 Ghz, an i7 has 8 threads.. Your friend clearly doesn't know what he's talking about. Your GPU seems like it should run GTA4 without much issue, but yea, GTA4 is a very bad optimized game for PC. Bad port from consoles, you have to buy a beast Graphic card to run it at max, just because the GPU struggles so much with the game. First, is your driver up to date? if so, how much RAM does your pc have?

[QUOTE=Senna_vh;39488192] First, is your driver up to date? if so, how much RAM does your pc have?[/QUOTE] I think it is up to date. 6 GB DDR3.

I'd turn hyperthreading off in your BIOS and see if that helps.

[QUOTE=Shadaez;39490460]I'd turn hyperthreading off in your BIOS and see if that helps.[/QUOTE] Trying that resulted in bricking the computer and having to reset the BIOS. On a side note, is it possible for the CPU to go from room temperature to 80ºC in the short time that it takes for the computer to boot? I think my CPU temperature sensor may be broken, unless it's possible for the CPU to run without flaw at ~90ºC for a year.

[QUOTE=*Freezorg*;39495475]On a side note, is it possible for the CPU to go from room temperature to 80ºC in the short time that it takes for the computer to boot? I think my CPU temperature sensor may be broken, unless it's possible for the CPU to run without flaw at ~90ºC for a year.[/QUOTE] LGA1366 CPUs all have a 130W TDP and run very hot. If you have a shitty heatsink (OEM Intel stock heatsink is) or the heatsink is mounted improperly, then that's why the CPU is running so hot. Broken thermal sensors on Intel CPUs is rare.

[QUOTE=bohb;39497862]LGA1366 CPUs all have a 130W TDP and run very hot. If you have a shitty heatsink (OEM Intel stock heatsink is) or the heatsink is mounted improperly, then that's why the CPU is running so hot. Broken thermal sensors on Intel CPUs is rare.[/QUOTE] Someone told me updating the BIOS may fix the bad temperature reading.

[QUOTE=bohb;39497862] Broken thermal sensors on Intel CPUs is rare.[/QUOTE] The thermal sensor is on the motherboard though, isn't it? I asked a friend of mine who works at a PC repair store and that's what he said, at least.

[QUOTE=*Freezorg*;39509713]The thermal sensor is on the motherboard though, isn't it? I asked a friend of mine who works at a PC repair store and that's what he said, at least.[/QUOTE] It depends on the era of the CPU and motherboard. Really old CPUs (decade or more ago) didn't have internal thermal sensors. Some motherboards during that time used a laminated thermal sensor tab under the CPU to get the CPU temperature, but this wasn't very accurate because of bad sensor quality and it only measured ambient air temperature and not the die itself. Later CPUs starting with the Pentium 4 and Athlon line started integrating more reliable sensors into the CPU die to get more accurate readings. Motherboards did away with under the socket sensors, but started to add various sensors to detect heatsink exhaust temperatures and the north bridge temperatures. When multi-core CPUs started coming out, each die had a thermal sensor, plus an additional thermal sensor for the housing for the cores.

[QUOTE=*Freezorg*;39489097]I think it is up to date. [/QUOTE] -You might wanna be sure about this before you do anything else. -Also Download HW monitor and check your temperatures while playing Crysis. -lastly is annything eating up your RAM/CPU speed when your system is supposed to be idle?

Updating the BIOS did not improve the situation. This most likely means my CPU is actually running at ~90ºC. How has it not been damaged yet? It's been running like this for, I believe, well over a year.

[QUOTE=*Freezorg*;39552978]This most likely means my CPU is actually running at ~90ºC. How has it not been damaged yet? It's been running like this for, I believe, well over a year.[/QUOTE] The CPU doesn't have to stop functioning to be damaged. An example would be that some of the last and highest clocked Pentium 4s. The 3.73 and 3.80 GHz P4s had such bad substrate leakage that no form of cooling could adequately cool the die under full load. Toms Hardware discovered that if you ran successive sets of benchmarks on those CPUs, the scores would progressively get worse over time. Normally there is a margin of error, but they recorded like a 0.05% reduction in performance every time their benchmarks completed. If you benchmarked your CPU that's been severely overheating for a year, it would most likely have the same issue of not performing the same as an equivalent model CPU of the same age that hasn't been subject to overheating. In any case, you should rectify the cooling situation on your CPU sooner rather than later, especially since LGA1366 CPUs are no longer in the mainstream retail channel.

[QUOTE=bohb;39559405] In any case, you should rectify the cooling situation on your CPU sooner rather than later, especially since LGA1366 CPUs are no longer in the mainstream retail channel.[/QUOTE] Shit. It's true. How come?

How come they aren't in production anymore? Because they've been replaced with LGA2011 as the high end consumer grade socket, and somewhat LGA1155 I guess.

[QUOTE=Del91;39582498]How come they aren't in production anymore? Because they've been replaced with LGA2011 as the high end consumer grade socket, and somewhat LGA1155 I guess.[/QUOTE] The fastest LGA1155 parts run circles around most LGA1366 parts. There was really no reason to get an LGA1366 CPU over the much cheaper LGA1156 parts, other than for dick waving for the triple channel RAM. The triple channel RAM was mostly a gimmick and only performed better in some tests. There's absolutely no point in getting an LGA2011 build. There are only four CPUs for the socket, which are between $600-1200 (not counting the even more expensive Xeon parts.) They're still based on the older Sandy Bridge tech (SB-E). Ivy-Bridge-E, which was supposed to be released in Q2 of last year has still not materialized, and likely never will. Even if they did, Haswell is right around the corner and will have all of the features IB-E was supposed to have and more.

[QUOTE=bohb;39584284]The fastest LGA1155 parts run circles around most LGA1366 parts. There was really no reason to get an LGA1366 CPU over the much cheaper LGA1156 parts, other than for dick waving for the triple channel RAM. [/QUOTE] ...And the fact that when I chose this mobo and CPU I had no idea what I was doing.