Anyone has anything good in mind or should I wait for the bulldozers? I feel like my shitty CPU is being bottlenecked by my GPU :(
I need an AM3 socket one.
GPU: AMD 6950 2GB
CPU: AMD 955 3.2 GHZ Black Edition Quad Core.
Cheers ;D
Quote from: DreadStunlock on August 18, 2011, 02:36:38 PM
Anyone has anything good in mind or should I wait for the bulldozers? I feel like my shitty CPU is being bottlenecked by my GPU :(
I need an AM3 socket one.
GPU: AMD 6950 2GB
CPU: AMD 955 3.2 GHZ Black Edition Quad Core.
Cheers ;D
buy a 6 core =/ , the reason being is you don't want to be on a cpu thats becoming the standard of something ie. Quadcore is now the new breed of dual core... dual core now is a dinosaur or slowly coming to that.
Agent, as far as people told me, no game that was made, never uses 6 cores. If you can prove me otherwise appreciated.
It's not completely about games. More cores usually means more multitasking. Multi core
cpu's usually change affinity for the cores depending on what's happening. Your game runs
on one core (or two), your pron process is on another etc. That way you have many
programs running but not bogging down one CPU or core. This is how I understand it but
I may be incorrect. Feel free to correct me if I am mistaken.
I thought RAM was in charge of that crap? :D
I doubt your CPU is bottlenecking anything really, but what ever floats your boat.
Random Access Memory is only used for fast momentary storaging of bits of data, it doesn't do any processing of its own.
Anyway, different programs running on different cores based on what's being used and done is how it would ideally work. Chances are it won't be utilized fully but atleast part-way, so at times you'll be having a core or two not really doing anything.
I myself would get the hexacore at the moment. It's easily overclocked and it's still pretty fast. My friend has one and it hasn't ran into a game that didn't run on max together with his 6000 series GPU. And it's atleast a tad more future-proof than a quadcore is.
Also I hardly doubt you will be ONLY gaming all the time, and especially optimizing everything so that nothing unnecessary for gaming is running on the background. I myself am constantly alt+tabbing out of games, browsing with 40+ tabs (Yes I kinda tend to let them bottle up until I mass close them), converting video files or audio files or something else at the same time. I also tend to watch movies or series on my other monitor when I'm playing something that doesn't require 100% focus.
Well, I tried playing Crysis 2 DX11 with High-res textures, and I can't really think that my GPU isn't capable of running it with good framerate? So I am betting that it's my CPU :|
This may give you a clue on what you might be looking for.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/crysis-2-dx11-vga-and-cpu-performance-benchmarks/5 (http://www.guru3d.com/article/crysis-2-dx11-vga-and-cpu-performance-benchmarks/5)
My one isn't listed :( Fuck.
I'll do a quick Crysis 2 DX11 benchmark on my PC tomorrow, I have it all installed, just never tested it.
Please do x)
I'd just wait for the bulldozers if I were you. It would kind of suck if you spent like $200 on a on a CPU and then new ones come out a week later.
How I think I heard the whole #core ordeal going down is that while a newer CPU with with a bajillion cores will probably run programs faster, but that's just because the CPU is probably (if you're buying a new one) faster than your old one. The program, or game, you're using is just as much at fault for slowness as your hardware is. Just because you've got 18 cores in your CPU doesn't mean that the program/game knows to use them all. Leading to what Shadow said about just having some cores hanging out not doing anything.
Dual core became a "Standard", so everyone started building their programs around people potentially having two cores and them being able to use them efficiently. You just have to find the NEW Dual Core and you'll have a smart investment! (Or just buy a hexacore processor. If 4 cores becomes popular then you'll be ready, but if they skip 4 and go to 6 then you'll ALSO be ready! ...unless they skip both and just go with Octocore ;))
Quote from: SteveTheCookie on August 19, 2011, 08:16:25 AM
I'd just wait for the bulldozers if I were you. It would kind of suck if you spent like $200 on a on a CPU and then new ones come out a week later.
Apparantely, Bulldozers are out of the question, they only go on AM3+ socket, and are not compatible with AM3.
So I will need to buy an Intel motherboard and get one of the top AWESOME Intel CPU's.
Quote from: SteveTheCookie on August 19, 2011, 08:16:25 AM
I'd just wait for the bulldozers if I were you. It would kind of suck if you spent like $200 on a on a CPU and then new ones come out a week later.
That's a problem for pretty much all computer components, no matter when you buy, nowadays. If it's not something better, it's something cheaper. :(
I really need to upgrade my computer. My socket type is so archaic that I can't even go up to an i5. Problem is I'll have to save up quite a bit of dosh as I'll be needing DDR3 to go with my new motherboard... and processor.
Dammit, student debt.
Quote from: Tidenburg on August 19, 2011, 07:55:46 PM
Quote from: SteveTheCookie on August 19, 2011, 08:16:25 AM
I'd just wait for the bulldozers if I were you. It would kind of suck if you spent like $200 on a on a CPU and then new ones come out a week later.
That's a problem for pretty much all computer components, no matter when you buy, nowadays. If it's not something better, it's something cheaper. :(
I really need to upgrade my computer. My socket type is so archaic that I can't even go up to an i5. Problem is I'll have to save up quite a bit of dosh as I'll be needing DDR3 to go with my new motherboard... and processor.
Dammit, student debt.
At least you have an intel...thanks to STEVE! I got the shitty AMD one -.-