Why lower FPS when I OC?

[FSBUZZ]

I think your ran can do 900 without voltage increase 2.1v and try 1.3 cpu core ... if your fsb voltage is set to auto change to 1.26 (if not stable try 1.28 -1.3 max)

leave all memory timing to auto for the time being then bring them down ... your memory should be fine at 900

 

[teamlosigp]

his flippin gpu is limiting him!!!!

 

[FSBUZZ]

teamlosigp did you really understand what his problem was ? I know that 8800gt is not the best card to run crysis with but with a nice oc on the cpu you can get a some fps increase....do you get it he lost some fps after the oc dude because his fsb timings went up

 

[Spitfire7]

I think your ran can do 900 without voltage increase 2.1v and try 1.3 cpu core ... if your fsb voltage is set to auto change to 1.26 (if not stable try 1.28 -1.3 max)

leave all memory timing to auto for the time being then bring them down ... your memory should be fine at 900

So you are saying I need to put my memory timing from 4-4-4-12 back up to 5-5-5-18?

Also, if I keep the FSB, CPU and Mem linked my memory goes from 800 up to 1400. So then I need to keep them unlinked? I have only OCed a little bit, so speak to me as if this was my first time.

Also teamlosigp, you are totally right. I am due for a new one. I will probably be getting the GTX 280.

Guys should I just send back the Q9550 and get the E8600 and OC easily up to 4Ghz?

 

[teamlosigp]

with the gtx 280 10 bucks ur oc will improve performance, right now u are completely limited by ur gpu even with ur oc, and the difference between your benchmarks is just within the margin of error, if u were playing the game u wouldnt notice the difference

+keep the quad more and more games are being optimized for quad cores, crysis, far cry 2 etc etc

@fsbuzz what fsb timings, are u smokin a little somethin somethin there? he is completely limited by his gpu and so his overclock makes no diff, the decrease in his fps is well within the margin or error

@spitfire7 dont increase your memory timings cause then when u buy ur GtX 280 u will actually see a drop in fps

 

[FSBUZZ]

Im smoking just a cig but I didnt pay attention to the very small frame decrease thought is was more. Had a similar thing happen to me with my 8800gt when I oced just with a higher frame drop

 

[Spitfire7]

So I am pretty much just sitting until I get a new GPU right?

I am still really debating, one person says keep the Quad and another says no way get the E8600 for the speed.

I cant seem to OC my Q9550 over 3.4Ghz, but I hear the E8600 is a 4Ghz CPU just down clocked to 3.3 and OC's to 4Ghz with ease. So I like those numbers and it almost makes sense to buy the cheaper dual core and get the max out of the Ghz and then in about a year or more then go get the Quads for a much lower price then now. Shoot in a year the Q9550 will probably be $200 if not less.

So guys stop me now if I am making a mistake, but it is sounding like I should go for the Ghz right now for games rather then the cores. I think I will send it back for the E8600 and put the extra $150 into a new GPU.

Good idea or bad?

 

[Spitfire7]

So can I just get a E8500 and OC to 4Ghz just as easily and it is the exact same thing as if I did it with the E8600? At that, couldn't I just get the E8400 and OC and that will do the same?

 

[alwaysoc0nfused]

I say keep the quad, i have mine OCed to 3.6 and i have a gtx 260 to go with that. I play crysis at 30+ FPS with everything maxed out no AA at 1650 x 1050. everything other game plays a lot better. In the long run you be spending the same amount of money for the quad. buying $160 dual and then another $200 later for the quad = $360.

If your quad now is giving you problems then replace it. I had to replace mine 3 times before gettin one that overclocked at all. Now im stable at 3.6ghz with my q9550.

 

[Spitfire7]

I say keep the quad, i have mine OCed to 3.6 and i have a gtx 260 to go with that. I play crysis at 30+ FPS with everything maxed out no AA at 1650 x 1050. everything other game plays a lot better. In the long run you be spending the same amount of money for the quad. buying $160 dual and then another $200 later for the quad = $360.

If your quad now is giving you problems then replace it. I had to replace mine 3 times before gettin one that overclocked at all. Now im stable at 3.6ghz with my q9550.

Wow, I actually already had to replace mine once too. Something just wasn't working right so I sent it back for a replacement just in case. Works now. My Q9550 seemed to OC to 4Ghz very well and no freezes or lockups in any games. The only thing is, I didn't notice any increase in performance. I think you are right by keeping it. Plus, GTA4 is going to utilize multiple cores. I wrote to you in the other thread, but I am still curious how you OCed your 260 to get better performance. Not calling you a liar, but wanting to learn.

Like I said before, all the charts are saying that the 280 is a very big improvement in most games over the 260. If you OCed up to the 280, then couldn't I just OC the 280 and it would still be faster and better? Im not bagging on your card at all, just ready to buy and dont want to waste the money.

 

[Gordobobo]

Every attempt, on this topic, to try explain why your game is slower when u overclocked your CPU are elegant but wrong. Nice try thought.

When u overclock an integrated circuit the performance gain is not linear but we can approximate it. If u rise the CPU clock speed by 10%, lets say that at the same temperature (of the processors with its original clocks) the performance gain would be 5%. But we know that the chip (on a complex circuit, like a computer, not only the chip u are overclocking will rise its temperature) will produce more heat, then the real performance gain will be 5% minus the percertual lost due more transistors now being used to compensate the temperature difference.
Of course there is a lot other factors involved here but like I said we are approximating.

This approximated function of performance gain Vs clock speed (teorical gain minus % lost due transistors used to compensate the temperature rise) gives u a non-linear curve, with a maximum as critical point.

That mean that after the maximum point, if u keep rising the clock, the temperature will make your chip downgrade due the high number of transistors that now are used just to compensate the temperature on the circuit.

This is not necessarily caused by your CPU temperature, its mainly caused by the memory controller temperature that in your motherboard controlls the communication with the graphic card and other components as well.....When u overclock your processor, the memory controller will work a lot harder and out of its original specifications and that may downgrade its performance making your computer a lot slower.

Thats why high end power suplys (that use components with low tolerance) and high end motherboards are often used by proffissional overclockers. Of course this hardware need to be paired with high end graphic cards and CPUs but intel, amd, nvidia are happy to be part of a small group that hold top technology on this matter so if u are overclocking u need make sure u have a good power suply and motherboard bcuz graphic card and cpu u probably alredy have.

Also, your hardware seems good to overclock, I just wanted to correct the argument that some ppl are using - saying that overclocking a CPU will make the game slower if the bottleneck is the GPU. By that u could say that upgrading your CPU will make your game slower if u the GPU is not enought to bring FPS up and thats an absurd but u guys did a good job trying to guess, keep going.

Your problem seems like not a problem, I would say +-0.1 FPS is not to be considered, its a small error margin. You should repeat the test several times and then divide (total fps)/(number of times). Thats how its done by professional benchmarking tools.

Im sry for the terrible english.

 

[Spitfire7]

Every attempt, on this topic, to try explain why your game is slower when u overclocked your CPU are elegant but wrong. Nice try thought.

When u overclock an integrated circuit the performance gain is not linear but we can approximate it. If u rise the CPU clock speed by 10%, lets say that at the same temperature (of the processors with its original clocks) the performance gain would be 5%. But we know that the chip (on a complex circuit, like a computer, not only the chip u are overclocking will rise its temperature) will produce more heat, then the real performance gain will be 5% minus the percertual lost due more transistors now being used to compensate the temperature difference.
Of course there is a lot other factors involved here but like I said we are approximating.

This approximated function of performance gain Vs clock speed (teorical gain minus % lost due transistors used to compensate the temperature rise) gives u a non-linear curve, with a maximum as critical point.

That mean that after the maximum point, if u keep rising the clock, the temperature will make your chip downgrade due the high number of transistors that now are used just to compensate the temperature on the circuit.

This is not necessarily caused by your CPU temperature, its mainly caused by the memory controller temperature that in your motherboard controlls the communication with the graphic card and other components as well.....When u overclock your processor, the memory controller will work a lot harder and out of its original specifications and that may downgrade its performance making your computer a lot slower.

Thats why high end power suplys (that use components with low tolerance) and high end motherboards are often used by proffissional overclockers. Of course this hardware need to be paired with high end graphic cards and CPUs but intel, amd, nvidia are happy to be part of a small group that hold top technology on this matter so if u are overclocking u need make sure u have a good power suply and motherboard bcuz graphic card and cpu u probably alredy have.

Also, your hardware seems good to overclock, I just wanted to correct the argument that some ppl are using - saying that overclocking a CPU will make the game slower if the bottleneck is the GPU. By that u could say that upgrading your CPU will make your game slower if u the GPU is not enought to bring FPS up and thats an absurd but u guys did a good job trying to guess, keep going.

Your problem seems like not a problem, I would say +-0.1 FPS is not to be considered, its a small error margin. You should repeat the test several times and then divide (total fps)/(number of times). Thats how its done by professional benchmarking tools.

Im sry for the terrible english.

Thanks Gordobobo,

I appreciate the wise information. SO would you then say it would be wiser for me to get the E8600 or E8500 even for multiple core games to come instead of my Q9550?

 

[Gordobobo]

I dont think u should change processors, u have great hardware and u dont need overclock either.
Games that support multiple cores out in the market only support up to two cores.
If FPS is your concern u should change the graphic card like the other members pointed out.