Can Your Old Athlon 64 Still Game?

[Guest]

this is very impressive

 

[PapIacoz]

For while I don't have to go to dual core, because my system plays all the games, without exceptions, all in repective maximum settings at 1920x1200 resolution.

 

[Guest]

I have Opt 170 OC from 2,0 to 2,5 Ghz, DDR 333 fsb 250 10/12 combine with Single Standard 8800GT @ 600-1800.
3D Mark 06 at default 1280 X 1024 = 9312
I guess there is a lot CPU bottleneck, however I couldn't push any higher than 2,5 GHZ. Any suggestion of how much performance or 3d Mark score i should obtain without CPU bottleneck, and how to obtain higher OC.
Thank you

 

[mapesdhs]

gemini,

Is it possible for you to switch to faster RAM? (DDR400) That would
make a difference I think.

Try comparing to my system:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=7303357

Or what is your ref link? I'll have a look. Of course, check the
individual results, and run the Feature tests aswell if you can,
not just the main tests.

It can be a little hard to get a firm answer to your question
since the results database keeps throwing back CF/SLI results
even when one requests single-GPU-only, but overall I reckon
with a 'good' CPU and high-quality more costly parts the figure
ought to be around 14000 to 15000, eg.:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=4573855

but note that despite this system having a much better CPU than
mine (100%+ better CPU scores) and a 30% better overall score,
the GPU results are only 17% better, even less so for overall SM3
(9% better) and the HDR tests (3% and 9% respectively). Other
results show better overall scores with a dual-core running at a
higher clock, especially with SLI, eg.:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=6041876

My result with a 6000+ and a single 8800GT is 11762, but what I
found was that there are many results where although my GPU scores
are higher, my overall score is lower because the other system has
a better CPU. It's important to compare the individual results as
it does appear a good CPU can skew 3DMark06 numbers up by as much
as 10%. A pity most submissions don't come with the Feature test
numbers too as that would be useful. At around the 14700 mark, I
start to see results where some of my GPU numbers are better even
though my system has a much lower overall score, eg. here's a fringe
example with an overall score of 14676:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=5568532

My system is slower all-round, except for the Canyon Flight test.
For me, a particularly interesting result is this one (despite
the use of non-approved drivers) for a 2.7GHz quad-core Phenom:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=7104306

The results are all over the place (compare the Feature tests to
my system), but the two main GPU tests (Proxycon/Firefly) are faster
on my system despite the Phenom getting much better CPU scores.

Perhaps the best example I can find offhand is this one:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=5775198

That's a 2.8GHz Core2Quad Q6600 with expensive mbd/RAM (easily better
CPU than my 6000+), giving a 6% higher overall score (12500) and yet
my system is faster for every GPU test. And here's a 4GHz E8400 system
that shows the same effect:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=6005882


Note that an SLI 8800GT setup with a good CPU gives more like
22000, with the highest number being 25022 for an SLI system with
a 5GHz QX9650:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=5090553

though there are many SLI results listed with scores more like
18000 and all the way down to around 14000. Here's an interesting
point: despite the above system having a CPU that gets 3X better
CPU scores than mine (ie. the main CPU score and the Red Valley
CPU tests), all the GPU tests top out at being 2X faster than my
result, which makes sense, ie. however good the CPU, an SLI could
never give more than a 2X speedup, but at least it does show that
an almost linear increase is possible, at least for 3DMark06's
GPU tests anyway.

Here's another example, an SLI system with a 4.4GHz QX9650:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=6172470

That gets 22581. Usefully, the owner has run the Feature tests;
for some reason my non-SLI system gets a higher SM3.0 number in
the Feature tests, which is a bit wierd (all the others are
faster on the SLI system, as is the Canyon Flight SM3 test).
3DMark does do odd things like this sometimes, so watch out.


So what to conclude? Perhaps that 3DMark06 doesn't tell you much
except how well 3DMark06 runs. Maybe you would be better looking
towards application or gaming benchmark results in order to make
judgements about what to upgrade, if anything. Overall, for games,
having a good CPU will help for those games which can benefit
from it, eg. lots of physics, running character AI, etc. When
running games at high resolutions and high detail/settings, the
GPU becomes more important. For some games, both issues matter.
If the GPU is the core bottleneck, then a better gfx card would
make a bigger difference (or an SLI solution), but it'll struggle
to shine if older RAM speed is holding it back, and remember not
all games benefit equally from SLI.

What is definitely true is that one can get good results without
spending loads of money. Overclocked E8400 is a popular choice,
and there are some excellent low-cost coolers now, eg. the Xigmatek
HDT-S1283 Heatpipe (almost as good as the U120 Extreme, but only
half the price). 2GB DDR2/800 RAM is cheap now, no need to spend
a fortune on a costly mbd. You could boost your scores by 40%
I reckon at least, but would that mean you'd see similar gains
for whatever games/apps you run? That's another matter.

Let's face it, with all the statistical issues involved, 3DMark06
is often just bragging rights, but it's still good fun.

Ian.

 

[Guest]

Thank you Ian, that would be very helpful reference. Currently I'm using DDR 3200(400Mhz) but pull down into 333 to achieve overclocking result max fsb 260 = 2,6 Ghz (OPT 170)
It seems i have no choice SLI 8800 GT require all new MB,Proc,RAM, however I will stick with my current rig for a while.

 

[mapesdhs]

{Yay Obama!! 8----) Sorry, I'm having a happy fit... }


You may get better results with the RAM running at 400 or more,
even if that means a lower overall CPU clock. Given how Opteron
works, faster RAM and lower fsb might well be better than slower
RAM and higher fsb. Try it and see. There ought to be a way to
balance it out and keep the Opteron's clock reasonably high.
What is its stock speed? My brother's Athlon64 3400+ (which is
on a cheap Asrock K8Upgrade-1689 mbd) had a stock clock of
2.4GHz; I was able to boost it to 2.64GHz using 220x12 (440 FSB)
giving pretty good results with an X1950Pro AGP...

http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/misc/mysystemsummary.txt

...when compared to a dual-XEON P4/2.66 DDR266 system and my
older 6000+/X1950Pro + DDR2/800 setup. At high detail, the
Athlon64 held its own nicely, completely trouncing the XEON
system; as far as I can tell, RAM speed was critical. Actually,
I was able to boost the 3400+ up to an amazing 2.74GHz which was
stable for many tasks, but not Oblivion/Stalker, though at 2.7GHz
it was fine for 3DMark06:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=2003611

I pulled it back to 2.64 to ensure it would be ok for everything.
For reference, the system has a Thermalright XP-90 CPU cooler,
Zalman 80mm/92mm fans, 2 x 1GB DDR400 OCZ RAM (OCZ4002048PFDC-K),
QLA12160 PCI SCSI card and Maxtor Atlas 15K II 147GB U320 system
disk. Can't recall what the PSU is offhand.


But yes, if your setup can handle what you currently use it
for ok, then why bother to upgrade? Wait until it really can't
hack it anymore and then upgrade, but note that by the time
that point arrives I'd say most likely there would be no point
in switching to an 8800GT SLI setup with a newer mbd, because
the games of the day would need something better than SLI 8800GT
to run well (indeed, some of them do already). Just remember that
there is no need to spend a fortune to get good results, as I
discovered when I obtained such excellent numbers with a mbd that
only cost $70 (ie. the 6000+/X1950Pro numbers in the above
reference were done with an AM2 Asrock AM2NF3-VSTA mbd).
Elsewhere, people are reporting good results with the 4850x2;
pick a card at that sort of price/performance level when you
upgrade and you'll have a good system at minimal cost. The only
things I did not compromise on were a decent PSU, nice case and
good CPU cooler and fans.


What applications/games/whatever do you mostly use btw?

Ian.

PS. Obama about to speak, time to sign off to watch history
in the making... 8)

 

[Nightstar]

An Interesting but misleading article. In order to make this a meaningful study, rerun the tests at 1920x1200 since that is the resolution anyone with a modern Video card will use.

I assure you my Opteron 180 @3Ghz is not the bottleneck in my system, my HD4850 is.

Why would anyone buy a HD4850 or better to run such low resolutions anyway?

 

[mapesdhs]

Very true. And these days it seems two 4850s in Crossfire is a
good low-cost way of getting high performance that often beats
a GTX280, at least for those games where the ATI drivers seem
to be a nice match. Just a pity that whether a particular game
will work ok under Crossfire seems to be a rather hit & miss
afair. Beats me why there isn't more parity between different
games. When considering a multi-GPU setup, one shouldn't have
to think about the particular games one is playing, but in
reality this is essential atm.

Ian.

 

[chuccck]

Paul -

Great article. I have the same mobo with and desperately need an upgrade. Did you have any trouble installing the daughter board? I read somewhere something about having to get a backplate or something and that it may block some other parts of the the mobo??? can you elaborate on that?

Ian-

Wow man you have been a great help. Like I said, i need to upgrade, i have the 939 dual sata2 mobo, 64 3800+ single core, a 7600gt, and 3 GB of Corsair DDR. Looking to pick up that daughter board and significantly increase my performance. Without going overboard, wat would you recommend for processor, video card, and ram?

 

[mapesdhs]

chuccck writes:
> Wow man you have been a great help. ...

Most welcome! Feel free to email if you don't want to clutter the
thread with overly specific questions.


> ... Looking to pick up that daughter board and
> significantly increase my performance. ...

I must confess, when I looked into this for my brother who is in a
similar position (Asrock K8Upgrade-1689 that can take the AM2CPU
board to support AM2/DDR2), I found the price of the daughter card to
be such that it would make more sense just to replace the mbd. I also
wasn't keen on mounting a heatsink/fan horizontally (my brother's
system currently has an XP-90, allowing for a highly oc'd S754
3400+). However, the above happened a year ago; searching just now I
did find the AM2CPU board on ewiz.com for $31 which is quite good I
suppose, but overall it's probably better to replace the mbd if
you're going to upgrade at all. Maybe this is not an option for you
though, eg. for budget reasons.


> ... Without going overboard, wat
> would you recommend for processor, video card, and ram?

I guess the starter questions would be, what's your budget and what's
your main target task? (games?) There's a vast range of options, eg.
one could spend ages browing mbds alone and the following is just for
one typical source (in each case, click on 'View All'):

http://www.scan.co.uk/Index.aspx?NT=1-0-31-0-0
http://www.scan.co.uk/Index.aspx?NT=1-0-92-0-0

but something like the following AM2/SLI board looks pretty ok

http://www.scan.co.uk/Product.aspx?WebProductId=401838

Here's an example LGA775/Crossfire board which also supports DDR3 (but
no need to get DDR3 IMO):

http://www.scan.co.uk/Product.aspx?WebProductId=615972

And here's an LGA775/SLI board:

http://www.scan.co.uk/Product.aspx?WebProductId=459994

Bound to be an AM2/Crossfire example, but I didn't check.

In general, I wouldn't want to spend more than about 80 UKP ($130)
for an SLI-capable mbd. More than that and one is not really gaining
much in most cases. Everyone's different though, wrt to perceived
value; IMO it's better to spend any spare budget on an inherantly
better GPU setup rather than an OTT mbd.

If you didn't want SLI or Crossfire support for multiple GPUs, then
a typical board would be at least 30% cheaper.


For CPUs, a 3.1GHz 6000+ is pretty reasonable these days:

http://www.scan.co.uk/Product.aspx?WebProductId=884792

while for LGA775 there is of course the E8400 and the Q6600 which are
both well-priced now (almost the same), though both are a good chunk
more expensive than a 6000+:

http://www.scan.co.uk/Product.aspx?WebProductId=736334
http://www.scan.co.uk/Product.aspx?WebProductId=643237

the payoff being much better overclockability if you want to get into
that side of things (Xigmatek HDT-S1283 is a good option). Lesser
models will save some pennies.

As for gfx, here's a decent 9800GT (supply issues seem to mean these
are now cheaper than 8800GTs):

http://www.scan.co.uk/Product.aspx?WebProductId=853561

or there's the 4850 of course, though they're a bit more expensive
than 9800GTs, at least here anyway. I wouldn't recommend any of the
'crippled' cards however, like the 8600GT or 9600GT.

Meanwhile, there are oodles of good options for RAM, with even 4GB
very affordable now:

http://www.scan.co.uk/Index.aspx?NT=1-0-24-329.459.82-0

Note that scan.co.uk is not necessarily the cheapest UK source, and
prices in the US should be better in terms of real value. I use Scan
as a typical reference as it's easy to browse. I bought my own
upgrades from lambda-tek.com and overclockers.co.uk (lambdatek had
loads of Gigabyte GV-NX88T512HP 8800GT cards available at a good
price, while overclockers had the PCIX-capable board I wanted).

The above are just examples, and not necessarily the best options; I
didn't hunt down detailed info on the example gfx/mbds, they're
merely a typical sampling of what's out there. Depending on your
budget, I might recommend something completely different.

I suppose one obvious question: do you intend to keep your mbd and
make use of the AM2CPU upgrade, ie. to use AM2 CPUs? For reference,
here's the info links and example source/price:

http://www.asrock.com/mb/spec/AM2CPU%20Board.asp
http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?name=AM2CPUBRD

Hmm, checking the specs of the AM2CPU upgrade, one thing occurs to
me: why did the review only use DDR2/533 RAM when the board supports
DDR2/800? My own upgrade experiences showed RAM speed really helps
for modern games, though for any significant speed increase vs. extra
cost, the gains often top-out around the DDR2/800 mark. Infact, this
was one of the reasons why I bought an AM2 board (bare in mind I
already had an AGP card I wanted to retain, an X1950Pro), I just could
not find any LGA775 board with AGP and full DDR2/800 support.

Lastly, there's also the option of buying 2nd-hand - eBay, etc. Bit
of a dodgy area this one, eBay is rife with poor sellers and
scammers, and of course with 2nd-hand there's usually no warranty;
you've no idea how well an item has been treated in the past, whether
it's already been put through overclocking strains, and so on.
2nd-hand can mean a much lower upfront cost, but it can be a false
economy if any problems occur (and let's face it, they usually do).
On the other hand, sometimes one strikes lucky (I have a few times),
one just has to choose carefully.


Btw, Lambdatek here still lists the Gigabyte 8800GT I bought:

http://www.lambda-tek.com/componentshop/index.pl?prodID=B93240

though the price shows why the 9800GT is now a better choice (when I
bought my 8800GT, the 9800GT was a lot more expensive).


Oh, I haven't mention PSUs/fans/etc. I've left that to your own
judgment. Just follow forum/review recommendations, etc., but never
buy cheap, though there's no need to spend a fortune. There are good
sources of info now for working out whether your current PSU is ok.
This may indeed be another reason why changing the mbd is not an
option for you. Depends on what you might consider replacing it with
I guess, some boards might need a better PSU, especially depending on
what other items you choose. There are more combinations than grains
of sand on a beech...

Ian.

 

[chuccck]

Thanks Ian! I sent you an email.

 

[mapesdhs]

chuccck, received ok! Will reply when I can, bit busy atm.

Ian.

 

[drumthrasher109]

GREAT GREAT article!

I bought a 4850 3 weeks ago and since I'm on a single-core AMD Athlon 64 3700+ CPU, many of my newer games (Far Cry 2, Bioshock, NFS:Undercover, CoD:WAW, etc) run very poorly. I'm getting similar frame rates as with my old 2600PRO.

I'll probably be getting a X2 4200+ from someone soon (socket 939).

I HOPE (VERY!) that I can get more than 10FPS in CoD:WAW/NFS:Undercover!!!!!!!!!!!! I know my video card can definitely handle it!

Please email me if you have any comments or whatever because I want to know if getting a dual-core CPU will really help me that much.

 

[mapesdhs]

Just read my previous posts. I think I pretty much covered it all.
Or email me and I'll forward you the replies I sent to chuccck by
email.

Ian.

 

[speedj2]

I have an Athlon 64 3200+ single core 939 processor and a geforce 7600gt pcie video card w/ 2 gigs ddr400 and i can run bioshock fine on max settings except for dx10. as for crysis i can play on all medium settings w/ no AA at 1440x900 resolution and still get decent fps. only time the slowdown gets to be noticeable is with binocs or sniper scope even then i can still snipe distant targets without too much trouble.

 

[Guest]

I still game with a 939. All I've had to do is upgrade other components. The Athlon 64 X2 dual 3800+ is running FO3 at full graphics with decent framerates.