If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Will a processor by itself make a difference in video game resolution?
I installed an Nvidia GTX 460 video card to boost the gaming
experience. Looked far better than the 8600 GT I'd been using. Then I went from an E8400 Core2 Duo processor to a Q9550 Core2 Quad processor. I don't know if it's some placebo effect but it seems like the graphics is even better after installing the Quad processor. Is there any basis for this to be true? I.e. is there any reason for an already fairly stout video card running under one CPU to look better just because it's running under an even stronger CPU? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Will a processor by itself make a difference in video game resolution?
On Nov 1, 9:55 am, Doc wrote:
I installed an Nvidia GTX 460 video card to boost the gaming experience. Looked far better than the 8600 GT I'd been using. Then I went from an E8400 Core2 Duo processor to a Q9550 Core2 Quad processor. I don't know if it's some placebo effect but it seems like the graphics is even better after installing the Quad processor. Is there any basis for this to be true? I.e. is there any reason for an already fairly stout video card running under one CPU to look better just because it's running under an even stronger CPU? Yes. It's all about relative bottlenecks in determining The Final Limit. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Will a processor by itself make a difference in video game resolution?
Doc wrote:
I installed an Nvidia GTX 460 video card to boost the gaming experience. Looked far better than the 8600 GT I'd been using. Then I went from an E8400 Core2 Duo processor to a Q9550 Core2 Quad processor. I don't know if it's some placebo effect but it seems like the graphics is even better after installing the Quad processor. Is there any basis for this to be true? I.e. is there any reason for an already fairly stout video card running under one CPU to look better just because it's running under an even stronger CPU? The visual look of a game, is determined by the render path. Both the GPU and CPU performance play a part, in making a particular render path practical. The CPU sets up the data, that the GPU will be rendering. There's no point having an infinite amount of detail, if the frame rate is one per second (a slide show). The game can detect your hardware, and get the machine in the relatively correct ballpark (low, medium, high). If you don't like the speed versus level/quality of detail, you can always adjust the game preferences as you like. There's an article here, if you're having trouble sleeping at night. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Direct3D In the past, having a game auto-set some of these things, actually ruins your enjoyment. I had a game that would select DX9 render path, when DX7 looked crappy but ran like grease lightning. Sometimes, it might take a registry edit or the like, to fix that, as they may not have provided a control to override it. In an FPS, I'd rather have low latency and be able to respond rapidly, than have a nicely rendered scene, where I've just been fragged :-) Paul |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Will a processor by itself make a difference in video game resolution?
Doc wrote:
I installed an Nvidia GTX 460 video card to boost the gaming experience. Looked far better than the 8600 GT I'd been using. Then I went from an E8400 Core2 Duo processor to a Q9550 Core2 Quad processor. I don't know if it's some placebo effect but it seems like the graphics is even better after installing the Quad processor. Is there any basis for this to be true? I.e. is there any reason for an already fairly stout video card running under one CPU to look better just because it's running under an even stronger CPU? install and rune 3dmark and see for your self |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Will a processor by itself make a difference in video game resolution?
Doc docsavage20 yahoo.com wrote:
I installed an Nvidia GTX 460 video card to boost the gaming experience. Looked far better than the 8600 GT I'd been using. Then I went from an E8400 Core2 Duo processor to a Q9550 Core2 Quad processor. I don't know if it's some placebo effect but it seems like the graphics is even better after installing the Quad processor. Is there any basis for this to be true? I.e. is there any reason for an already fairly stout video card running under one CPU to look better just because it's running under an even stronger CPU? The Central Processing Unit (CPU) greatly affects gaming. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Will a processor by itself make a difference in video game resolution?
Doc writes:
I don't know if it's some placebo effect but it seems like the graphics is even better after installing the Quad processor. Is there any basis for this to be true? I.e. is there any reason for an already fairly stout video card running under one CPU to look better just because it's running under an even stronger CPU? Well, I don't see how graphics could get "better" with just more CPU cores. Faster certainly. I just found out this weekend that I seem to be CPU limited, at least in Borderlands 2. Can't quite always do 60 fps at 1920x1200, same CPU as yours, GTX 670 video. I usually run the CPU at 3 GHz just so it's easier to remember what I have. I thought the video card was the bottleneck but overclocking it showed no improvement. So then I looked at the task manager and saw the game seemed to have pegged out all four processors. So I tried a little overclocking. Saw some improvement, CPU seemed to work fine at 3.4 GHz. Still not quite enough though. So, probably getting a 3570K CPU, Asrock EXTREME4 and 16 GB of RAM pretty soon since those seem to be what I need without being overly expensive. My requirements for a motherboard aren't that complicated but a little above the cheapest boards: 7 SATA ports, USB3 pin header (the 19-pin one since I have a matching front panel), SPDIF optical out. Linux support too (seems to work from some user comments). Not happy about having to pay for *four* video output connectors on the motherboard that I'll likely never use but I guess that's the order of things now. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Will a processor by itself make a difference in video game resolution?
Anssi Saari wrote:
Doc writes: I don't know if it's some placebo effect but it seems like the graphics is even better after installing the Quad processor. Is there any basis for this to be true? I.e. is there any reason for an already fairly stout video card running under one CPU to look better just because it's running under an even stronger CPU? Well, I don't see how graphics could get "better" with just more CPU cores. Faster certainly. I just found out this weekend that I seem to be CPU limited, at least in Borderlands 2. Can't quite always do 60 fps at 1920x1200, same CPU as yours, GTX 670 video. I usually run the CPU at 3 GHz just so it's easier to remember what I have. I thought the video card was the bottleneck but overclocking it showed no improvement. So then I looked at the task manager and saw the game seemed to have pegged out all four processors. So I tried a little overclocking. Saw some improvement, CPU seemed to work fine at 3.4 GHz. Still not quite enough though. So, probably getting a 3570K CPU, Asrock EXTREME4 and 16 GB of RAM pretty soon since those seem to be what I need without being overly expensive. My requirements for a motherboard aren't that complicated but a little above the cheapest boards: 7 SATA ports, USB3 pin header (the 19-pin one since I have a matching front panel), SPDIF optical out. Linux support too (seems to work from some user comments). Not happy about having to pay for *four* video output connectors on the motherboard that I'll likely never use but I guess that's the order of things now. this is to Anssi Saari have you disabled any of your peripherals Ie storage hard drives. Second what is your psu. Third what are your settings for you nvidia gpu. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Will a processor by itself make a difference in video game resolution?
Anssi Saari wrote:
Doc writes: I don't know if it's some placebo effect but it seems like the graphics is even better after installing the Quad processor. Is there any basis for this to be true? I.e. is there any reason for an already fairly stout video card running under one CPU to look better just because it's running under an even stronger CPU? Well, I don't see how graphics could get "better" with just more CPU cores. Faster certainly. I just found out this weekend that I seem to be CPU limited, at least in Borderlands 2. Can't quite always do 60 fps at 1920x1200, same CPU as yours, GTX 670 video. I usually run the CPU at 3 GHz just so it's easier to remember what I have. I thought the video card was the bottleneck but overclocking it showed no improvement. So then I looked at the task manager and saw the game seemed to have pegged out all four processors. So I tried a little overclocking. Saw some improvement, CPU seemed to work fine at 3.4 GHz. Still not quite enough though. So, probably getting a 3570K CPU, Asrock EXTREME4 and 16 GB of RAM pretty soon since those seem to be what I need without being overly expensive. My requirements for a motherboard aren't that complicated but a little above the cheapest boards: 7 SATA ports, USB3 pin header (the 19-pin one since I have a matching front panel), SPDIF optical out. Linux support too (seems to work from some user comments). Not happy about having to pay for *four* video output connectors on the motherboard that I'll likely never use but I guess that's the order of things now. It helps to understand what the processor is being wasted on. Try "PhysX Medium - GPU". http://physxinfo.com/news/9425/borde...physx-effects/ Someone tests with a second video card dedicated to PhysX, and gets a modest improvement. http://1pcent.com/?p=135 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PhysX "accelerated by either a PhysX PPU or a CUDA-enabled GeForce GPU (if it has at least 32 CUDA cores), thus offloading physics calculations from the CPU" The game looks like a good way to promote the sale of new hardware. Paul |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Will a processor by itself make a difference in video game resolution?
On Nov 1, 8:55 am, Doc wrote:
I installed an Nvidia GTX 460 video card to boost the gaming experience. Looked far better than the 8600 GT I'd been using. Then I went from an E8400 Core2 Duo processor to a Q9550 Core2 Quad processor. I don't know if it's some placebo effect but it seems like the graphics is even better after installing the Quad processor. Is there any basis for this to be true? I.e. is there any reason for an already fairly stout video card running under one CPU to look better just because it's running under an even stronger CPU? A partial benefit is to program in a language capable of addressing disparate core processors in such a way that "the one hand washing the other" is within means other than what is accorded the pseudo- actuality of notoriety to programming as it's spoken. Forgive me. Allow me to rephrase that into words that make sense. Time Magazine, I happened to notice this week, says that Microsoft's Halo debut is "beautiful." Beautiful obviously is within a means the program is coded, written for matrixes timed to address both GPU/MPU cores over a syncopated return we perceive in similar fashion for a cat rolling in catnip. In actuality, programming over multiple cores is no different in that modal forms predicating a logic behind that language is very much abstract and without the determinism of established precepts involving singe-core linearity. Perhaps, but an aspect to incongruity, a stipend, portioned to residuals, as it were, much as would be a practical implication of expectation from serious chess players if asked to sit before a three-tiered board of 3D chess. Computer science does have that tendency -- to flow slowly behind the advancement of conditional relationships as presented and fashioned for social determinacy. Whether you would use four more cores more efficiently than your present four (on W7 - XP is limited to two). . .I should doubt that without special considerations first on the user's part to stage a semi-convoluted sequence of programs to such end. Beyond what most would be likely conceive if capable of implementing, and certainly beyond a return on benchmarks for present means as averages to benefit overall processor power available and utilized. It's rather a brutish approach, then, as affordable and more cores impose themselves over all other considerations to approach what practical limits no doubt would exist. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Will a processor by itself make a difference in video game resolution?
On 01/11/2012 9:55 AM, Doc wrote:
I installed an Nvidia GTX 460 video card to boost the gaming experience. Looked far better than the 8600 GT I'd been using. Then I went from an E8400 Core2 Duo processor to a Q9550 Core2 Quad processor. I don't know if it's some placebo effect but it seems like the graphics is even better after installing the Quad processor. Is there any basis for this to be true? I.e. is there any reason for an already fairly stout video card running under one CPU to look better just because it's running under an even stronger CPU? You didn't mention if you were using XP, Win7, or Vista. Those might have a bearing on the answer. If you're using XP then that only supports upto DirectX 9, whereas the others support upto DirectX 11 or higher. The higher DirectX's have more offloading onto the GPU from the CPU. So if you were using XP with DX9, then you would indeed have a more CPU-dependent graphics subsystem. Yousuf Khan |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Motherboard - video - processor for a modest game machine | David Kistner | Homebuilt PC's | 4 | December 6th 05 01:39 AM |
speculation: Apple wants to make its own media-hub game console with a CELL-style processor from INTEL | Yousuf Khan | Intel | 2 | August 11th 05 04:55 AM |
speculation: Apple wants to make its own media-hub game console with a CELL-style processor from INTEL | Ati Videocards | 0 | August 3rd 05 03:38 AM | |
speculation: Apple wants to make its own media-hub game console with a CELL-style processor from INTEL | Nvidia Videocards | 0 | August 3rd 05 03:38 AM | |
Would a new video card make a difference ? | Daniel | Nvidia Videocards | 9 | March 20th 05 08:54 AM |