matching processor & graphics card

[Matthias]

Like so many others I'm looking serioulsy at hardware upgrade options now that HL2 is on the horizon.

I've had my eye on a 9600 xt however my processor is only an Athlon 1.2 Ghz. What's worse my motherboard (FIC AD11) will only support up to a 1800+

Is an athlon xp 1800+ quick enough to allow a 9600 xt to run effectively? I suspect it's not and I'll have to do motherboard/processor upgrade (which will no doubt call for a RAM and power supply upgrade, starting a dangerous chain reaction of events).

Another option since I'll be shelling out loads is the 9800 Pro. What is the accepted wisdom on realistic processor options for these two cards?

 

[blahblahblah]

Questions

1) Are you a hardcore gamer? Or do you occasionally play computer games?
2) How much money would you like to spend.
3) What are your current system specs?

 

[Sonduren]

Yes tell your specs and we will se (tell us hoe much u will Dish out)

 

[Matthias]

Current specs are kinda irrelevent as it looks like I'm heading for a combined motherboard/cpu/ram/graphics card upgrade (assuming harddrive and cdrom drive performance wont adversly affect things!)

I really haven't been keeping up with hardware trends recently (specifically I'm not sure of the extent to which processor speed limits graphics card performance). Say my budget is £300.

 

[GPRT]

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/acatalog/AMD_Bundles.html
Have a nice bundle with an athlon 64 2800 for £250, maybe if you stretch your budget a bit you can get a 9800 pro?
You would not be dissappointed.

 

[Matthias]

Unfortunately if I strech my budget to a just a little bit for a 64 bit processor and little bit more for a 9800pro I'll then have to get a new power supply and probably some more cooling for the case and it starts to get pretty expensive.

Sticking to the budget I can get an motherboard, athlon xp 2600+, 512mb of pc2700 and a 9600xt

This seems like it should be able to run hl2 respectibly. I could probably stretch to the faster pc3200 ram if that would make a noticable difference. What is the biggest performance bottleneck of a mid-range system like this? (a lot of questions I know, I'm reading up on this stuff but it's a really useful having poeple around who seriously into hardware).

 

[JimmehH]

Probably that 9600XT (biggest performance bottleneck) but it should be fine for HL2. I have a similar spec machine and I get 50fps in the VST with everything turned up to max at 1024x768 (no AA or AF though).

 

[ATI4EVER!]

I am the master at explaining how this stuff works. At least i think so. Peple normally write to me asking. So here: (I am so sick of posting this on so many threads)

Videocards opperate by Pipelines, much like your CPU. Videocard pipelines are very very deep and wide. The 9600xt features 4 of these pipelines, the 9800 features 8, the x800 12 and the 6800 16. Holy crap. That is a lot. Now you ask "so what?". Well when your videocard draws out something, it has to pass through the pipelines (the rule of thumb is more pipelines usually is faster) so if you have say 16 pipelines, it will do the work faster than if you have 4 pipelines. Now, these pipelines are beeing feeded by the CPU (your 1.2ghz athlon). If you have an 8 pipeline videocard with a crappy cpu, the cpu won't be able to issue enough instructions to the videocard. Pipelines are REQUIRED to be full at all costs, if they are not, all work that is currently in the pipeline will be tossed out and it has to start all over again, this results in lost clock cycles, you prbably loose some 40fps for 2 seconds. This could happen with the fastest CPU on the planet, and a 4 pipeline videocard, if the cpu messes up or something, it is very rare and it would only last 2 seconds. BUT.. if you have a 8 pipeline vodeocard with your cpu it will happen very very often.

Here is a little thing i made up myself to guide you.

4 pipeline: 1.8ghz P4 or AMD equivelent
8 pipeline: 2.4ghz P4 (w/HT) or AMD equivalent
12 pipeline: 3.0ghz P4 (w/HT) or an athlon 64 (any speed)
16 pipeline: 3.0ghz P4 (w/ HT Preferably extreme edition) or Athlon 64FX 51

Ram also matters, when i bought my 9600XT i had 256mb ram, it SUCKED. I upgraded and bought a stick of 512 mb, that helped alot.

generally you should always have at least 512 mb.

I hoped this helped.

 

[Matthias]

That's good news, seeing as the price of the 9800 pro has come right down and I'm looking at getting a 2600+

To avoid having to flush a pipeline the CPU must be able to read the main memory and send it to the graphics card so I'm guessing the FSB speed is important also.

AMDs naming strategy relates to the fact that the athlon does more per clock cycle and so is supposably the same speed as the pentium despite a lower clock speed. Does this extra work per cycle apply to the older athlon chips before the xxxx+ numbering (ie. is the xp 2400+ less than twice the speed of the old athlon 1.2GHz)?

 

[ATI4EVER!]

im not that AMD knowing so i cant answer all of that. anyways, a CPU's clock speed is determined like this: FSB x CPU multiplier.

AMDs naturally have low clock speeds (the top is like 2.4? while INtel is at 3.4 i think) But, something in their architecture permits it to be as fast or faster than intel. And yes, AMD CPUs do more each clock cycle than Intel.

 

[Kazuki_Fuse]

Probably that 9600XT (biggest performance bottleneck) but it should be fine for HL2. I have a similar spec machine and I get 50fps in the VST with everything turned up to max at 1024x768 (no AA or AF though).

Really? That's a pretty good score. On my 9800XT at 1024x768
I get 80 something fps, but when I put the resolution up to 1280x1024 it drops to friggin' 34 fps! What's up with that? That's a drop of at least 46 fps! Ahh Anyway, sorry to go off topic a bit.

 

[bosox188]

im not that AMD knowing so i cant answer all of that. anyways, a CPU's clock speed is determined like this: FSB x CPU multiplier.

AMDs naturally have low clock speeds (the top is like 2.4? while INtel is at 3.4 i think) But, something in their architecture permits it to be as fast or faster than intel. And yes, AMD CPUs do more each clock cycle than Intel.

It is the fact that they do a lot more work per clock cycle that make them as good as Intel at much lower speeds.