Kako prepoznati da CPU bottlenecka GPU

Kratko i jasno; Quad. A onda ces shvatiti da CPU moze hraniti i jače grafe :) Suma sumarum, na trzistu polovnih CPU+Grafa = ~1200 - 1400 kn

 Nebi se kladio baš da neće. Ja sam vidio osjetnu razliku između e5300 @3.6Ghz i Athlona II X4 640 sa HD 4850. Ja isto glasam za quad pa onda grafa.

C2D 8X00 je osjetno jaci CPU od tvoga E5300, isto tako i osjetno clockabiniji, ide ni manje ni vise sa 1.4V na dobroj ploci ide 1GHZ vise od tvoga.

Neka proda to sve i ubode si Phenoma II X4, plocu i ram.

Taj C2D ionako drzi cijenu, 775 quad se ne isplati.

Heh, vise cachea znaci da ce i biti brzi u svim radnjama koje se spremaju u cache da se ne gubi na brzini, a jos ide preko 4GHZ a sa dobrom plocom na 4.5GHZ a tu se radi o osjetnoj razlici.

Q6600 ti je filao nju u GPU bound igrama, BF3 MP ju sigurno nije hranio kako treba pa si presao na i5.

PII X4/plocu i ram moze pronaci za otprilike 800tinjak HRK.

unlocker PII 5X5 II X2 max 500HRK

ploca AM3 4+1 regulacija 250HRK

4GB radne memorije 80HRK

Naravno da pojede, kad se radi o duplo jacem procesoru, nemos niti usporediti dual vs quad.

Nemrem dizati cpu multiplier jer je zaključan, preostaje mi dizati bus speed, a kada podižem bus speed diže se takt RAM-a!

Hoće li se ram više grijati i je li dosta za cpu 3.5 Ghz? 

:-)

Ovako, jesi li ti u rodu štogod sa vidovitim Milanom? Neznam na koju nogu si se digao, ali potrebe za ovakvim tonom; UOPĆE nema.

Nije mi filao "u GPU bound igrama", jer ne igram GPU bound igre, igram ___***SAMO***___ BF3. Multiplayer. Kad kažem filanje, tada je to bilo sve 4 jezgre na 90+% i grafa na 99%. MSI 580 TwinFrozr II OC. 1920*1200.

Prešao sam na i5 jer me oparilo, i pala mi je na pamet ideja za 580 SLI

Ne znam koliko se krecu cijene navedenog, tako da neću ih neću komentirati. Ako se to da složiti za 830 kn VS Q6600 za 600, AMD je relativni no brainer. S druge strane neznamo kakvu čovjek ima ploču, te si zaboravio možebitni kuler.

Nije baš bio duplo jači (E8400 na 4GHz i Q6600 na 3.2GHz)

Iskreno, sumnjam da ti je Q6600 @ 3.2GHZ hranio GTX580 OC na Caspianu i slicnim mapama sa 32+ igraca, ali nije me ni briga :)

Mislio sam na stock E8400 vs Q6600 3.2GHZ, ne OC 8400.

I da, AMD PII X4 konfa se nade za te novce.

Biti ce usko grlo.

A zašto bih kenjao?   Igrao sam više manje sve mape (OK Tehran prezirem, pa nisam)  16-64 igrača. Majkemi! Nažalost nemam nikakav SS, nije trajalo predugo uslijedila je zamjena konfe te je grafa je morala na RMA.

Ono što sam 200% siguran je da izmedju Q6600@3,2 i 2500k@4,5 sa 6950@6970 razlike meni vidljive nije bilo. Znam, nije isto; ali pokušavam sastaviti barem kakav takav kontekst.

EDIT: Našao jedan relativno relevantan link S obzirom da je clock per clock usporedba, mislim da OC E8400 nije dovoljan da se priblizi C2Q. Mislim da ova grafa definitivno nije pod 100% opterecenja, preloš mi je njemacki da bi citao dalje od grafa

http://www.ocaholic.ch/xoops/html/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=817&page=6

Može i na engleskom, gore lijevo na sajtu prebaci na engleski, pa u trazilicu upisi "Core 2 Duo" i neki 5-6 link je "Core 2 Duo Gaming performanse with ATI 7***"

Nemojte me ubit zbog spama, ali pejstam cijeli conclusion na engleskom :)

Conclusion:

As you can see from those results, the Intel Core2Quad is still up to date if you compare it to the FX-4170/FX-8150 from AMD. Okay in some games like Call of Duty, Skyrim and StarCraft II, the AMD FXs are 10 % faster than the Core2Quad but that's all. Everywhere else those processors are scoring almost the same at +/- 1% in both games and synthetic benchmarks. Talking about games only and throwing away synthetic benchmarks away from the calculation, the AMD FXs processors are only 3 % faster in average. Which is not bad at all since the Q6600 is five and a half years old, has only four cores clocked at 3.0 GHz (for this test, stock frequency is 2.4 GHz) and powered by DDR2 Memory. Why the Core2Quad is not far away behind latest AMD's processor for example? There are several reasons but the main ones are the following:
- Today's games are still not optimized for multicore processors.
- AMD's FX architecture result in serious lacks of performance. Mostly due to non optimized softwares.

Now if you compare the Q6600 to the i7 3770K you see a serious gap performancewise going from almost nothing up to twice the performance. But hey, this is another league. Anyway the results are in and here is what we see:
- You don't see any performance improvement going for the Core2Quad to the Core i7 in Alien vs Predator.
- The Core i7 is about 5-6 % faster than the Q6600 under BattleField 3, Crysis 2 and S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
- The gap is only 8 % under Dragon Age II.
- Some big numbers: The Core i7 is 20 % faster under Batman, 28 % faster under DIRT2 et 45 % under Call of Duty.
- Now comes the real big numbers: The Core i7 kicked Q6600's butt by 73.1 % under Skyrim and 91 % under StarCraft II, almost twice the performance.

What if you are still using a Core 2 Duo processor, would the Core 2 Quad be worth the upgrade gaming performancewise? Well in my opinion yes, go for it, here is why:
- Increase performance by 20 up to 35 % in half of the games we tested here, and Crysis 2 even with his 40.3 fps wasn't smooth with our C2D E8400 and here it was with the Q6600.
- Increase of 2D performance as well of course, meaning daily usage of your computer will be faster and smoother.
- Easy overclocking to 3.0 GHz using 333 MHz FSB and no need to increase voltage.
- Easy upgrade, no need to change motherboard in most case nor memory and cooling.

Conclusion: the Core2Quad still has some hidden power and doesn't give up too easy. If you take a look at the performance/price ratio you can see that the ratio is very close to the FX-8150 and way better than the Core i7 3770K but unfortunately way lower than the FX-4170 and E8400. The reason is that this processor is highly unavailable, using geizhals.at as price comparison tool you can find the boxed version for 170 Euros which is very expensive. While if you take a look at ebay you can easily find it for around 70 Euros max, which in this case gives him the impressive performance/price ratio of 14, destroying anything else. For the record the performance/price ratio is calculated like this: PerformanceIndex / Price x 10. As for the price of other processors we tested here - using geizhals.at - in EU the C2D E8400 is priced at 140€, the FX-4170 and FX-8150 offers start at 116 and 175€ and finally the big boy is worth 300€.

To neznamo, nema grafa opterećenosti grafe

Ovisi koje 400W. Nije isto MS Industrial 400W, Fortron 400W i Corsair CX 400W.

Ako je neko kvalitetno, ići će ko od šale, al ako je neko šrot ja ne bih stavljao.

Unutra ti je Fortron cini mi se. Drzat ce bez problema.

Fortron, ne frotron ili kako si vec napisao.

Marka napajanja, nisu nekvalitetni kao npr MS industrial. Snadbijevaju dosta starijih konfiguracija ali nisu vise tako popularna.

Aopen je rebrand Fortrona cini mi se. Pitaj OVOG forumasa za detalje, gotovo sam siguran da sam to od njega cuo.