Athlon X2 Performance

[flashstar]

About 20 days ago I upgraded about half of my system. I went from a Athlon 64 3200+ to a 3800+ X2. I then swapped out my 7800gtx with a 2900 pro with XT bios. I then replaced my Fortron Source Blue Storm with a Cooler Master Real Power 750 and my budget Viewsonic 17" LCD with a Samsung 206BW 1680 x 1050 lcd.

Anyway, I immediately overclocked my 3800+ to 2.52 ghz. I can't get it to go any faster without better cooling since I have 1.6 volts going through it and that heats up even with my XP-120. My 2900xt has been overclocked to 820/970 as well with stock cooling.

My question is simply, how fast is your X2 in games? If you could list your clock speed, revision, etc. that would help me a ton. I'm trying to figure out if upgrading to a Yorkfield later will be worth it in games like UT3, COD4, and CS:S.

This is what I get @ 1680 x 1050:

CS:S- 140 fps on source speed test (max details, dips into 40's in real life)
UT3- Average of 40 fps at max details (dips into 20's often)
COD4- Steady 45-50 fps at max details (rarely goes below 30)
Oblivion- Hovers around 40 fps with max details and HDR

I'll try to post some screenshots soon.

Btw, please list your video card as well. It's hard to compare without it.

Thanks. :rockout:

[nick_1992]

I run at 1440 x 900
cod4= 36fps
ut2004= 140fps

i too have a 3800X2 but at the stock 2.0ghz
<==== rest you can cheak at my system specs

[Easy Rhino]

that is a weird question since it depends a lot on what GPU you use. i have the athlon 3800+ X2 at 2.5ghz and a x1800xt and my COD4 performance is below 30fps at max.

[trog100]

at the resolution u mention its all about the grafix card dude.. your cpu wont make a deal of difference.. the whole lot is grafix card limited.. as it should be at gaming resolutions..

trog

[ShadowFold]

My X2, I cant OC it yet but it does at least 30FPS on all the games I play at 1440x900. I get like 60+FPS on most games at 1920x1080 tho.

[flashstar]

If everyone could please list his/her video card as well, that would help a ton. :laugh:

These games should be video card limited, but I only get 40 fps in CS:S in populated servers with my 2900xt and X2 @ 2.5ghz... My friend with a slower 8800gts g80 gets an average of 120- 150 fps at the same resolution and details as me. He also gets a solid 60 fps in UT3 vs. my 35 fps. The only difference is that he has a Core 2 Duo at 3.5 ghz. That would explain the slowness that I am experiencing. What I think would be cool is to try to find out how much an X2 is bottenecking vs. a Core 2 Duo in real life games. If the cpu cannot process data from the video card fast enough, then you might not see a performance gain with a new video card unless you switch to a new cpu or overclock your X2 much more (3ghz).

Thanks for the input.

[trog100]

the higher the frame rates the more the cpu will bottleneck frame rates..

basically it all depends where u are coming from.. a faster cpu will turn high frame rates into even higher ones.. as in most published gaming benchmarks..

but at lower frame rates or higher resolutions it wont help at all.. its not as simple as u think it is..

at high resolutions low frame rates its the grafix card.. at lower resolutions and higher frame rates the cpu speed play a big part..

u did mention 1680 x 1050.. 1024 x 768 for example will paint totally a different picture

trog

[flashstar]

No matter what the resolution, if the video card can handle it then the cpu will make a huge difference in terms of average frame rate. It seems like for me at least that getting this new video card has made next to no difference in any game except Cod4 because practially every other game is cpu limited. It could be that UT3 is a very cpu-intensive game as well as a gpu intensive game. I just want to see what people are getting with different combinations.

[trog100]

he he he.. say no more.. :rolleyes:

trog