Recently I upgraded my computer with a new graphics card and a processor, and I've noticed something odd; my performance in games has hardly improved, at all.
My specs.
CPU: Intel Core2Quad 8400 Clocked at 2.66
GPU: EVGA 460 GTX 768 Mb
RAM: 4 Gigs 800 MHz
MoBo: EVGA 680i SLi (Old as shit I know)
PSU: Elite Stream 800 Watt Power-supply (Definitely not a power issue)
Even running at lower resolutions and lower settings than my old rig, I rarely see frames that are stable, even at lower resolutions, such as 1600x900, the games are still extremely unreliable. Even games like the gamemode TTT in gMod, where not a lot is going on, just looking out over the larger maps drops my fps to sometimes sub 30. TF2 doesn't run great either, nor does Bad Company 2, regardless of settings. Call of Duty Black ops I get terrible, almost unplayable performance, and it's getting quite ridiculous.
- I have the latest drivers for [B]everything[/B]
- I have cleaned out my system for anything like registry remnants etc with programs like CCleaner and DriverSweeper.
- My temperatures are normal, my CPU idles pretty high but never gets too hot.
- My whole system is defragged and everything.
- I tried overclocking my graphics card (But not my CPU, as I think my temps are too high to try that.) and I got a whopping... 2FPS improvement.
- I've gotten mixed messages from every single place that I've looked, from the Q8400 being the biggest bottleneck in the world to it running perfectly fine, from the card being horrid to it being fantastic, I've pulled way too many hairs trying to figure this out.
- The GPU and CPU I upgraded from were the EVGA 7600 GT 512 and the Intel Core2Due 7300 2.66
- I have considered swapping out my card for a ATi 6850 1 Gig as it's the same price as the current card, yet I wouldn't see the point unless it fixed my problem.
Earlier, the graphics card's old drivers wouldn't let it go past 50% usage, and I thought that was the problem. But the latest drivers allow it to be used fully, and I've noticed only a slight 1-2 FPS boost.
This is incredibly frustrating.
This is my 3DMark11 results, they're atrocious, especially considering that this is on the "basic" setting.
[url]http://3dmark.com/3dm11/508116;jsessionid=BC8994847A7A84EC7C0DB9CDDD876803?show_ads=true&page=%2F3dm11%2F508116%3Fkey%3D2M5QqvcfReEJMqqkMwCQukjmMM5b4Y[/url]
According to your 3DMark11 link you're using 2 of the 4 cores. Go to bios and enable the rest. Also run a CPUID and see if that shit looks right.
[QUOTE=moesislack;27664918]According to your 3DMark11 link you're using 2 of the 4 cores. Go to bios and enable the rest. Also run a CPUID and see if that shit looks right.[/QUOTE]
I'm going to laugh if this is why you've been having so many problems!
[quote]Physical / logical processors 1 / 2
# of cores 2[/quote]
Actually only using 1 core and hyper threading from what it says there.
Maybe the CPU is the problem after all
Try running just the GPU benchmark and compare your score to that of a regular GTX 460
[QUOTE=moesislack;27664962]Actually only using 1 core and hyper threading from what it says there.[/QUOTE]
Well, he has 4... with multithreading.
So he lost one logical and one physical. Still at a 50% loss on CPU processing.
[QUOTE=Richard Simmons;27665050]Well, he has 4... with multithreading.
So he lost one logical and one physical. Still at a 50% loss on CPU processing.[/QUOTE]
It actually doesn't have hyper threading so we're both wrong.
[url]http://hothardware.com/Articles/Intel-Core-2-Quad-Q8400S1/[/url]
Yeah, I should've caught that before. Multithreading wasn't brought back till Nehelem processors (i5, 7).
It should have 4 physical cores. Sounds like a defective CPU made by AMD (AMD whatcha doin at Intel disabling perfectally good cores, don't you have globalfounderies to do that?), or OP turned off some cores through BIOS.
I feel so dumb right now.
Turns out my bios didn't save my settings when I activated two of the cores, I've gotten a performance boost in a few games, but not that much, then again I haven't tried a lot of games. The thing is running a lot faster just in browsing though.
I feel like a moron right now.
Haha, oh wow, I went from barely playing Bad Company 2 on medium to low on a lower resolution on DirectX 9, to playing it at a constant 60 FPS at the highest settings on DirectX 11.
Well, I'm glad it worked out for you.
Ugh, I didn't want to bump this but I felt it necessary. Despite making my cores work properly, I get massive frame drops all over the place in games. Some even become unplayable under circumstances such as:
- Looking over a large map? Loss of 25-40 FPS
- A small amount of NPCs? Loss of 50 FPS
- A group of players in TF2? FPS drops from 90+ to 30 or below FPS
The list goes on and it makes a lot of games unplayable. I haven't even been able to really play TF2 as it stutters and drops FPS like a ton. I've figured it must have something to do with my CPU, a'la the stuttering and the fact that most of the problems I have occur regardless of settings, resolution etc.
I have the latest drivers for most things. I have not reset the bios since installing the CPU however, only activated the 'missing' cores. My 3DMark scores seem to be all over the place.
I'd just get a new motherboard if you're still having these problems, I don't know?
Psu could be sucky (I dont know that brand) and not support the gpu when it asks for alot of power.
Also Disable V-sync.
The PSU is fine, I bought a new one solely to replace the older one I had, it is definitely not an issue. It is actually far more powerful than I actually need for it.
This isn't a game settings issue, regardless of settings, my games stutter a ton and have incredibly large FPS drops over everything, making a lot of games unplayable.
Possibly try updating the BIOS, I think that's a higher end C2Q and maybe it isn't properly supported by the BIOS. Have you tried reinstalling windows? At least try it on another HDD to see if it works better.
[editline]23rd March 2011[/editline]
And you mentioned high temperatures on the CPU, what are they at? It could be throttling I suppose.
I have not updated the BIOs, as the motherboard's bios settings don't [I]completely[/I] support the CPU, though from what I've heard it is not the sort of thing that would cause such a problem. I've been wrong before though.
Idling my CPU is at a blistering 61C
[QUOTE=Zeos;28762891]I have not updated the BIOs, as the motherboard's bios settings don't [I]completely[/I] support the CPU, though from what I've heard it is not the sort of thing that would cause such a problem. I've been wrong before though.
Idling my CPU is at a blistering 61C[/QUOTE]
[img_thumb]http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT7e1vCS0gFk7ZDpu_c4KNfSbdPxHWZUcxmCH0aehFeao9swpPo[/img_thumb]
"Well there's your problem."
(Temperature)
I think that is the greatest use of that picture ever.
Yes I could actually get the picture directly from the episode where he said it in the first place it's Salsa Escape where they try to escape a jail using nothing but the acid in the salsa.
Ugh, I wish I had a way to know if this is my exact problem, Core2Quads are supposed to be able to support much higher heats, and I have no other way to test if it is a driver/software/etc issue with anything else on my computer.
[QUOTE=Zeos;28793137]Ugh, I wish I had a way to know if this is my exact problem, Core2Quads are supposed to be able to support much higher heats, and I have no other way to test if it is a driver/software/etc issue with anything else on my computer.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't matter in the slightest weather they can withstand higher temps or not they won't let themselves get to fail point because they slow down to lower heat.
[QUOTE=Zeos;28762891]I have not updated the BIOs, as the motherboard's bios settings don't [I]completely[/I] support the CPU, though from what I've heard it is not the sort of thing that would cause such a problem. I've been wrong before though.
Idling my CPU is at a blistering 61C[/QUOTE]
First, using an improperly supported CPU is a bad idea. If the BIOS doesn't know how to handle a model of CPU properly, it can feed it improper voltages, multipliers and bus speeds and cause severe damage to it. This is especially so if it's feeding it improper voltages. Other things will probably fail to work also (like speed step so the CPU runs full bore all the time and generates maximum heat and power consumption.)
The above problem could be causing the alarmingly high idle temperature, or it could be that you don't have the heatsink mounted properly. LGA775 heatsinks are a pain to get to mount flush on the CPU properly.
Ah god damn it, I had no choice, received it as a gift and which is why I installed it, it was much better than my old one. There is really no point in even attempting to get a compatible board as it would just be a waste of money.
I really need some better fans for my CPU, the standard one doesn't even come with paste, just a pre-coated chunk of it that, according to the manual, melts when the computer is turned on. Really reliable there Intel.
Comparing the two processors, the E7300 is actually better, especially since your motherboard can't use the Q8400 properly.
The E7300 has more cache per core (1.5 MB vs 1 MB), runs at the same clock speed and is based on the same architecture at the Q8400. The only minus is the bus speed of 1066 MHz vs. 1333 MHz, but again the E7300 wins because the Q8400 has 4 cores sharing the same bus which chokes the cores for bandwidth under heavy loads.
Buying a new board to support the Q8400 isn't a waste of money, especially since the 775 is nearing EOL. Retailers are itching to dump their 775 stock and replace it with more up-to-date inventory, and there are quite a number of deals for cheap and good quality boards for sale now. I've seen G41 boards for $50 or so that were loaded with features.
It doesn't cost that much money.
Well either get a Mobo with support for the CPU, or get a CPU that is supported by the Mobo. Because due to the incompatibility it is killing your performance. Yeah kinda like tying to shove a 1155 i5 into a 1156 cpu socket.
[QUOTE=bohb;28798778]Comparing the two processors, the E7300 is actually better, especially since your motherboard can't use the Q8400 properly.
The E7300 has more cache per core (1.5 MB vs 1 MB), runs at the same clock speed and is based on the same architecture at the Q8400. The only minus is the bus speed of 1066 MHz vs. 1333 MHz, but again the E7300 wins because the Q8400 has 4 cores sharing the same bus which chokes the cores for bandwidth under heavy loads.
.[/QUOTE]
Ugh, there is no possible way that the E7300 could be more powerful, I got terrible performance with it through three rigs and reasonable temperatures. I have gotten much better performance with my Q8400 but I still have problems.
I may as well just save up for a whole new setup of MoBo and CPU, getting the cheap one that supports it is just improving on mediocrity.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.