Ingram Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 hello, at the moment i am using a AMD 64 3500+, im looking at buying AMD 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+, I do loads of gaming and occasionally some video editing/encoding. Anyway since i bought my new monitor, games have been crisper and clearer but i haven't had as much fps (obviously bigger monitor more strain on the graphics card) some games like c+c 3 was pretty jerky, anyway i have a ax800xl graphics card and i wanted to know if i bought a new processor would that speed things up a bit on my games? Thanks alot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greetings Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 I can't see the monitor influencing game performance as long as you run the same resolution. I'm not an expert so wait for another opinion, but it's probably better if you get a new graphics card. I've got the same processor as you and video editing is fairly easy to do on it. This leads me to the conclusion that you don't need higher performance in video editing but in games which means a new processor won't be as beneficial as a new graphics card. If you decide to go for the processor, get an X2 6000+. I'm guessing the prices in the uk are similar to those here, and this end the 6000+ is only ~30 pounds more expensive than the X2 4200+. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram Posted June 29, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 yes, i went from a 16" monitor to a 22" widescreen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomm Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 The 4200+ won't be THAT much faster than what you've got at the moment. Maybe for multiple threaded applications (not many). If you want your games to run smoother, you need to turn the detail down, run a lower resolution or buy a better graphics card. Simple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poopipe Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 You will only see a major performance improvement if the game is multi-threaded and games generally aren't multi-threaded.but.Having a dual core processer will allow the game to run on one core while the other core runs Windows etc. so if you've got the usual pile of shite (google toolbar ,spyware detectors, virus scanners etc.) eating up resources things will almost certainly improve. what you ought to do depends a lot on the game - bf2142 tends to see bottlenecks in CPU and network whereas other games might suffer from bottlenecks in the graphics card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krisboats Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 hello, at the moment i am using a AMD 64 3500+, im looking at buying AMD 64 X2 Dual Core 4200+, I do loads of gaming and occasionally some video editing/encoding. Anyway since i bought my new monitor, games have been crisper and clearer but i haven't had as much fps (obviously bigger monitor more strain on the graphics card) some games like c+c 3 was pretty jerky, anyway i have a ax800xl graphics card and i wanted to know if i bought a new processor would that speed things up a bit on my games? Thanks alot.I think everyones covered most of the angles, but yes... bigger screen is more strain on the graphics card. Upgrading the CPU will do little except for releiving slowdown you may get when you have lots of units in C&C 3 so the gameplay should be smoother, but like i say... if its jumpy when you first start a mission with 2-3 units its your graphics card thats lagging.... or RAM.Besides, for the performance gain you'd see from buying a 4200+ you'd be better off spending to money on a new graphics card. For the same price an nvidia 7600/7800 or ati x1800/x1950 would be a much better option with regards to speeding up your gaming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si-man Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 I just bought a 4400 for £100, doesnt seem to bad, everything runs rate good and that. You need a better graphics card by the sounds of it, maybe some more ram aswell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingram Posted June 29, 2007 Author Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 Besides, for the performance gain you'd see from buying a 4200+ you'd be better off spending to money on a new graphics card. For the same price an nvidia 7600/7800 or ati x1800/x1950 would be a much better option with regards to speeding up your gaming.are those cards better than the one i have at the moment then?! i remeber paying something like £300 for my one couple years ago i think?! how do you know what series cards are better than others?> thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krisboats Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 are those cards better than the one i have at the moment then?! i remeber paying something like £300 for my one couple years ago i think?! how do you know what series cards are better than others?> thanksThey are a lot better yes. generally... the bigger the number and more expensive the card is, the better it is.The 7600/x1800 will be a bit better and should be able to play your new resolution fine. However they "may" not play it at full settings. The 7800 or x1950 will be a shitload better than your current card and will play it well at full settings at your screen size.If i were you i'd be getting an x1950... I do love my 7600gt, but the x1950's are just such good value for money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si-man Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 Whats the difference between ATI and Nvidia??Ive always liked Nvidia but been looking at ATI lately.After an Nvidia 8800GTS 640mb Superclocked, but at nearly £300, dunno Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poopipe Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 Whats the difference between ATI and Nvidia??ATI make marginally faster cards on paper but can't write drivers for shit so the cards either don't run at their full potential or don't work properly depending on what you're doing - crossfire is also a jokeNvidia can write drivers so 9 times out of 10 upgrading drivers means everything works better - also, SLI is not a joke, it genuinely worksin short - buy nvidia, it won't make you angryFor gaming don't buy anything that ends in a number lower than 600 (eg 7600) if it says GT, GTX or Ultra on the end it will be noticeably faster than the ones that don't say GT, GTX or Ultra on the end. If you have a choice between a new 8600 and an old 7900 - get the 7900, it's a much more powerful card.on the 8800...People will talk about needing directX 10 support but no games will use the new features properly for a couple of years so there is no need to pay the premium for an 8800 - you're a lot better off with a 768mb 7950gx2 than a 640mb 8800. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greetings Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 you can get really cheap cards with DX10 support now but what's the point if any DX10 games that will be released in the future will require a much faster card i've got a 8600GT and i hate it, it messes up video playback. couldn't be bothered to send it back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si-man Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 ah sweet, i have a sli mobo so might purchase 2 for the hell of it when i find out how much they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krisboats Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 ah sweet, i have a sli mobo so might purchase 2 for the hell of it when i find out how much they are.I know someone who purchased 28600gt's and stuck them in sli. Performed slightly better than the 8800gts version and just slightly under the 8800gtx version. Though cheaper than both Poopipe, you seen crysis? That already looks a lot better in dx10 compared to dx9. The directx9 version has less objects on screen, the effects aren't as realistic and a few of the features are completely missing, like motion blur depth of field etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reece B Posted June 29, 2007 Report Share Posted June 29, 2007 (edited) i would wait, the second batch of the 8 series are soon to be out. either july or august the cards will be called 8900 **** which will include a die shrink from 90nm to 80nm which will allow higher clocks speeds and les power hungryand also the added support of GDDR 4 running at 2000 mhz,also the 8900 gts will have the same amount fo stream processors as the gtx.and should cost around £250 so either wait for for them to come out and get a cheap 8800 gts or get on of the new bad boys.. Edited June 30, 2007 by Reecerazor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si-man Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 £250...The ones out now are £400... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reece B Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 thats the gtx and ultra versions.the gts are £250 and the new 8900 gts which will replace the current 8800 gts will be the same price..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.