# Would upgrading to a GPU with more ram stop stuttering?



## LoneReaction (Nov 20, 2009)

When I play games like Dragon Age, and COD6, my frame rates are nice, from 40-60 fps @ 1920x1080. But the games often stutter or freeze for a split second.

What is causing this? Will upgrading to a 4870 1gb help?


----------



## InTeL-iNsIdE (Nov 20, 2009)

More than liekly you dont have enough Vram especially at 1920x1080. 1Gb is reccomended for anything above 1600x1050 typically


----------



## LoneReaction (Nov 20, 2009)

Ah I see. I plan to upgrade to an i7 rig with 5970 around 8 months later. Still trying to squeeze life out of my current system. 5770 looks interesting right now D:


----------



## Fishymachine (Nov 20, 2009)

If you do upgrade,you should go for a HD5770,more future proof eats less and has better clocks(basically a 40nm 4890 with less bandwith and DX11, in Anno 1404 it exceeds it)


----------



## Sir_Real (Nov 20, 2009)

Use msconfig & check what other progs you have running at start up. Disable everything thats not needed to be running all time. 

My sons pc was running MW2 abit jurky at first, turned out "curse client" for wow was always running in the back ground. Removing that from start up has made MW2 run noticeably smoother.


----------



## Greenmousa (Nov 20, 2009)

I have a 4850 and i play at 1920x1080 with no trouble whatsoever COD6 at 60fps same with dragon age, did you check the refresh option on those games? What's your monitor refresh? For example my monitor goes at 60hz so every game must be on that same value or else some stuttering may happen. And yes, 512mb vram it's a little on the edge for that resolution but so far this 4850 can handle it so i don't see why you 4870 wont  Hope it helps.


----------



## LoneReaction (Nov 20, 2009)

Monitor refreshes at 60hz too. I'm using 2 displays, but only game on one, does that matter?
The "stuck-unstuck" feeling doesn't happen too often on COD6, but more often with Dragon Age. Dragon age uses almost 100% cpu all the time.


----------



## Greenmousa (Nov 20, 2009)

I don't know man im using Dragon Age all maxed out and reaching 60 fps constant in 1920x1080, if i turn AA4x i reach 45fps, so i don't think it's a general problem more like something particularly wrong in your rig, may be soft wise so don't worry


----------



## niko084 (Nov 20, 2009)

Ya I'm not sure where your issues are..

I don't have any problems with any game at 1920x1080 with my 512mb 4850, Cod4-5, Crysis / Wars, Rainbow 6 vegas 1/2, supcom..

I get stuttering issues with guildwars.... LOL
Ncsoft sucks so hard...


----------



## kid41212003 (Nov 20, 2009)

I wouldn't buy anything below HD5850 performance, since your current card and HD5770 is quite close in performance.

Ask yourself if it worth spending hundred bucks for ~0-5% gain in performance.


----------



## Greenmousa (Nov 20, 2009)

i agree my upgrade will be 4850 to 5850 mid range cards proved to be great


----------



## LoneReaction (Nov 21, 2009)

Just ran about like a madman on both games, staring at the fraps meter. Even on the lowest settings, dragon age uses 100% cpu, and stutters for some miliseconds every few seconds. COD6 only uses 50-80% CPU. Maybe it's the cpu that's running out of steam here =(


----------



## ArmoredCavalry (Nov 28, 2009)

Dragon Age @1440x900 runs fine (from the short time I played it) maxed out with hd5850 and q9550 at stock clocks.

fyi


----------



## Mussels (Nov 28, 2009)

LoneReaction said:


> When I play games like Dragon Age, and COD6, my frame rates are nice, from 40-60 fps @ 1920x1080. But the games often stutter or freeze for a split second.
> 
> What is causing this? Will upgrading to a 4870 1gb help?



turn textures to low and AA off. if stuttering goes away, likely it was lack of Vram.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 28, 2009)

LoneReaction said:


> Monitor refreshes at 60hz too. I'm using 2 displays, but only game on one, does that matter?
> The "stuck-unstuck" feeling doesn't happen too often on COD6, but more often with Dragon Age. Dragon age uses almost 100% cpu all the time.





LoneReaction said:


> Just ran about like a madman on both games, staring at the fraps meter. Even on the lowest settings, dragon age uses 100% cpu, and stutters for some miliseconds every few seconds. COD6 only uses 50-80% CPU. Maybe it's the cpu that's running out of steam here =(



So, you know what the answer is. don't ya? Cpu cache is hurting you. I need 3.3ghz on quad AMD chips to get rid of the stutter.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Nov 28, 2009)

Your CPU is fine. Listen to Mussels but also how do you have your Catylast set up?


----------



## [Ion] (Nov 28, 2009)

Download GPU-Z, it will tell you how much VRAM is being used.  Open it up, start playing the game, and then Alt-Tab to GPU-Z after playing for a bit, and see how much VRAM it says you are using.  If it's over ~450-500, you should get a new 4870 1GB, 4890, or the newer, cooler, quieter 5770 (4870 performance, but uses ~30% less power)


----------



## human_error (Nov 28, 2009)

[Ion] said:


> Download GPU-Z, it will tell you how much VRAM is being used.  Open it up, start playing the game, and then Alt-Tab to GPU-Z after playing for a bit, and see how much VRAM it says you are using.  If it's over ~450-500, you should get a new 4870 1GB, 4890, or the newer, cooler, quieter 5770 (4870 performance, but uses ~30% less power)



doesn't work on ATi cards - only nvidia cards have the gpu-z vram meter enabled for now. OP i'd do what mussels suggested - no AA and low textures will cause a massive drop in the required vram so you'd be able to see if that is what your problem is.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 28, 2009)

No offense guys...but like I said, I get stutter...4890 1gb in Corssfire here. gpu usage @ 50-70%, avg abt 66%.

Adding the second card made it worse, but gpu usage will peg @ 36% per card.

Do any of you HAVE Dragon Age? it is not very gpu-intensive...

I mean, really, I could shoot a video and probably show the exact same behavoir he is desribing...in Dragon age...with a 4870 1gb. Yes, I have some of those too.


----------



## overclocking101 (Nov 28, 2009)

sounds like cpu cache to me your requesting a lot and your cpu is lacking the 3M cache chips are more towards everyday tasks then gamig for gaming 6M or higher is always better and for the price of an E8400/E8500 is a no brainer


----------



## Mussels (Nov 28, 2009)

it could also be something as simple as his HDD being fragmented, or his antivirus being a douche.


while its great to post suggestions, it seems odd that you're all leaping right into the "NEW HARDWARE!" path with zero evidence that it will actually help


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Nov 28, 2009)

Mussels said:


> it could also be something as simple as his HDD being fragmented, or his antivirus being a douche.
> 
> 
> while its great to post suggestions, it seems odd that you're all leaping right into the "NEW HARDWARE!" path with zero evidence that it will actually help



I find this typical of TPU. I wanna know his Catalyst settings.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 28, 2009)

Mussels said:


> it could also be something as simple as his HDD being fragmented, or his antivirus being a douche.
> 
> 
> while its great to post suggestions, it seems odd that you're all leaping right into the "NEW HARDWARE!" path with zero evidence that it will actually help



That's actually a very astute comment...I will say though, I've been investigating Dragon age and stutter(I've been on the "stutter" hunt for years now) recently in the past few days...like I said, with 4890 1GB, I get cpu stutter with less than 3.3ghz single card, and 3.6ghz dual card, on quad AM3, so I feel that I'm pretty familiar with the issue at hand.


Disabling Antivirii and defragging should be normal behavoir to optimize performance..such that I defrag daily, and had even forgotten that that might be the case....


----------



## overclocking101 (Nov 28, 2009)

do you own an E7XXX cpu?? I do and simply I had to upgrade. Im saying GO OUT AND BUY SOMETHING FTW!!! im stating this was happening to me and i grabbed a cheap E8400 and whammy! fixed but yes try a defrag and disable your antivirus whilist playing why not


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Nov 28, 2009)

His CPU is fine. This is a software issue.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 28, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> His CPU is fine. This is a software issue.



Ok, prove it. I'm gonna go to the store, buy some batteries for my cheapo vidcam, and prove you wrong. I even have a g15 so I can monitor the cpu usage while in-game, and will show the stutter disappear when cpu usage is NOT 100%.

Then, the OP can view my video, see if this is the behavior he is describing, and we can take it from there, OK?

Will take me about an hour to get the vids posted on Youtube. I expect your evidence to counter mine by then. Like I said, I've been exploring the same issue for the past week or so.


----------



## Mussels (Nov 28, 2009)

overclocking101 said:


> do you own an E7XXX cpu?? I do and simply I had to upgrade. Im saying GO OUT AND BUY SOMETHING FTW!!! im stating this was happening to me and i grabbed a cheap E8400 and whammy! fixed but yes try a defrag and disable your antivirus whilist playing why not



it doesnt hurt to try software first. we should always look at troubleshooting before replacing.


----------



## Wile E (Nov 28, 2009)

cadaveca said:


> Ok, prove it. I'm gonna go to the store, buy some batteries for my cheapo vidcam, and prove you wrong. I even have a g15 so I can monitor the cpu usage while in-game, and will show the stutter disappear when cpu usage is NOT 100%.
> 
> Then, the OP can view my video, see if this is the behavior he is describing, and we can take it from there, OK?



Ummm, I've seen E2xxx cpus run without stuttering. You are the one claiming a cpu fault, the burden of proof lies on you. AKA: *YOU* nedd to "prove it".

I happen to agree with him and Mussels, it's most likely a software issue.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Nov 28, 2009)

cadaveca said:


> Ok, prove it. I'm gonna go to the store, buy some batteries for my cheapo vidcam, and prove you wrong. I even have a g15 so I can monitor the cpu usage while in-game, and will show the stutter disappear when cpu usage is NOT 100%.
> 
> Then, the OP can view my video, see if this is the behavior he is describing, and we can take it from there, OK?



That will prove nothing man. Something as simple as a labor intensive process can make your CPU go up to 100% while gaming thus causing shutter. The answer lies in helping you and him tune his system correctly for smooth play.

Any smuck can overpower a problem with new hardware.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 28, 2009)

Mussels said:


> it doesnt hurt to try software first. we should always look at troubleshooting before replacing.



You are 100% correct here. 

But I'm gonna post the vids to show the stutter with a higher-power quad anyway, based on the troubleshooting I've done myself on my own system, with the same app, and stutter.



TheMailMan78 said:


> That will prove nothing man. Something as simple as a labor intensive process can make your CPU go up to 100% while gaming thus causing shutter. The answer lies in helping you and him tune his system correctly for smooth play.
> 
> Any smuck can overpower a problem with new hardware.




Yes, you are right. however, like I siad...I've laready investigated Dragon Age performance extensively over the past little while, and you said it was a software issue. So what software is the problem? At least mussels posts a fix....


----------



## Mussels (Nov 28, 2009)

true, but there will be a solution, or else everyone would have the problem.


its like how widely reported the slow load times are with resident evil 5 - if you ran teh game in DX9 with Vsync on, the load times went 5x longer.

so many lame theories and excuses were made up for the load times, when in the end it was just a bug in the game that could be overcome (run DX10, or vsync off)

This could be a similar problem, AA and Vsync are where i'd start, followed by audio settings (in windows as well, might be like the CoD WaW issues where it didnt like 24 bit audio)


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Nov 28, 2009)

cadaveca said:


> You are 100% correct here.
> 
> But I'm gonna post the vids to show the stutter with a higher-power quad anyway, based on the troubleshooting I've done myself on my own system, with the same app, and stutter.



Friend you can have all the most powerful hardware in the world but if you system is not properly tuned you will get shutter and such. Also never assume everything in your system is properly tuned. This is why we all come here to TPU. 





cadaveca said:


> Yes, you are right. however, like I siad...I've laready investigated Dragon Age performance extensively over the past little while, and you said it was a software issue. So what software is the problem? At least mussels posts a fix....


 I asked twice to know his cat. settings.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 28, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Friend you can have all the most powerful hardware in the world but if you system is not properly tuned you will get shutter and such. Also never assume everything in your system is properly tuned. This is why we all come here to TPU.



You are assuming I'm a noob though, and I am far from it... Please google my username. I'vebeen aroudn the block quite a few times...used to bench, where tweaking is the ultimate skill.

he simply asked...would going form 512mb card to 1gb card fix the problem...my answer is no...Dragon age specifically requires more cpu power at higher settings. Why? maybe bad coding..maybe just the number of threads running...but my system should SPANK Dragon age...and does...with 3.6ghz quad cpu only.

Right now, my system bounces from 0-1% cpu usage, 55% ram(4gb).



TheMailMan78 said:


> I asked twice to know his cat. settings.




you did. Please accept my apologies for jumping the gun there.

FYI, I didn't come to TPU for troubleshhoting or performance help...back in 2006 I came to ask W1zz to get systool working on my abit board, and together, we did. I haven't asked for help with pc issues for years...rather...I'm the guy that provides help...trying to build some good karma during the idle times in my day. If you only knew man...anyway, I'm off to the store for batteries. I'll be back with video.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Nov 28, 2009)

cadaveca said:


> You are assuming I'm a noob though, and I am far from it... Please google my username. I'vebeen aroudn the block quite a few times...used to bench, where tweaking is the ultimate skill.
> 
> he simply asked...would going form 512mb card to 1gb card fix the problem...my answer is no...Dragon age specifically requires more cpu power at higher settings. Why? maybe bad coding..maybe just the number of threads running...but my system should SPANK Dragon age...and does...with 3.6ghz quad cpu only.
> 
> ...



I didnt assume anything. What I do know is no one is perfect and can in fact miss something. Lets get back on topic.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 28, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I didnt assume anything. What I do know is no one is perfect and can in fact miss something. Lets get back on topic.



Agreed. Can't argue that!!!


----------



## Wile E (Nov 28, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I didnt assume anything. What I do know is no one is perfect and can in fact miss something. Lets get back on topic.



I assume that both you and I are assholes most of the time. Does that count?


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Nov 28, 2009)

Wile E said:


> I assume that both you and I are assholes most of the time. Does that count?



Nothing to assume there. Thats just cold hard fact.


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 28, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Nothing to assume there. Thats just cold hard fact.



Yeah... I'm just a sociopath, and msut bow before your awesomeness. Ayt least you got a senes of humour...I seem to lack this.

I gots me some batteries.

Seriously though, it's pretty easy to open up taskmanager and see what's consuming resources, and even better, Vista's performance monitor, to see what's eating cpu time. If it's nothing other than the app...guess what..more cpu is needed.

then, we can do as suggested, and lower some of the settings...does this recitfy the stuttering behavoir?

I can easily say now, because I've already done this testing, that VRAM is not the issue here, at least, not in a way that will solve the OP's problem.

It's not a big deal to prove that Dragon Age is a cpu hog...ergo, the OP needs a better cpu in order to get the performance he desires..or are you suggesting he's better off tryig to recode the game himself?


----------



## 20mmrain (Nov 28, 2009)

Your overclocked E7XXX Series @3.6 is just fine. Going to a Quad or a i7 right now might help a little but honestly there aren't that many games out there that properly take advantage of Multi core CPU's anyway. 
Honestly I think your problem lies in the fact that your playing a high end game @ 1900X1080 with a 4870 that only has 512mb of Vram. 
You are probably getting stuttering from that. Now if you do not have the money to upgrade right now (aka 5870 or another 4870 Xfire it or 5970) then I would play with less detail. Weather it be turning off AA or lowering shadows what ever you have to do till you get the money.
If that won't suffice than upgrade your video card first and move on from there. Buy it in pieces..... well that's my opinion hope this helps a little.
Other wise I am maybe considering selling my 5870 to buy the 5970 but that won't be for a little while .


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 28, 2009)

Hmmm.....V-sync goes a long way to even out framerates....


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Nov 28, 2009)

cadaveca said:


> Hmmm.....V-sync goes a long way to even out framerates....



Geee who would have guessed? Maybe if someone listed some F&#KING CATALYST settings!


----------



## cadaveca (Nov 28, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Geee who would have guessed? Maybe if someone listed some F&#KING CATALYST settings!










Doesn't perfect it though. just makes it more even. AI still jumps a fair bit with low cpu speed...


----------



## Binge (Nov 28, 2009)

LoneReaction said:


> Ah I see. I plan to upgrade to an i7 rig with 5970 around 8 months later. Still trying to squeeze life out of my current system. 5770 looks interesting right now D:



Don't upgrade until you have the ability to make a large leap... the slight pauses in gameplay could be any number of issues with your machine.  It's likely that a large upgrade would be more beneficial than getting new hardware which is very similar to your current config.


----------



## BababooeyHTJ (Dec 3, 2009)

InTeL-iNsIdE said:


> More than liekly you dont have enough Vram especially at 1920x1080. 1Gb is reccomended for anything above 1600x1050 typically



Any proof to back up such a statement like that? Most of the 4870 512 vs 4870 1GB that I have seen beg to differ.


----------



## Jstn7477 (Dec 3, 2009)

My post from the thread "GPU-Z 0.3.8 released":



			
				Jstn7477 said:
			
		

> I decided to test out the memory usage monitor with my PNY XLR8 9800 GT 1GB. I played Team Fortress 2 at 1440*900, High settings, 16xAF/16xAF and achieved this maximum memory usage:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 3, 2009)

Jstn7477 said:


> My post from the thread "GPU-Z 0.3.8 released":



AWESOME!!!

Do you have dragon age? 

But...that's nV cards, which may not use VGA ram in the same fashion...but it would be a good place to start...


----------



## Jstn7477 (Dec 3, 2009)

cadaveca said:


> AWESOME!!!
> 
> Do you have dragon age?
> 
> But...that's nV cards, which may not use VGA ram in the same fashion...but it would be a good place to start...



Unfortunately, I don't have Dragon Age. I also ran TF2 again yesterday I think and I still got up to about 560MB of VRAM usage (same settings).

I think that all GPUs would use RAM pretty similarly, since they are displaying the same textures. Team Fortress 2 is a DirectX 9.0c Source game by the way.


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 3, 2009)

Jstn7477 said:


> Unfortunately, I don't have Dragon Age. I also ran TF2 again yesterday I think and I still got up to about 560MB of VRAM usage (same settings).
> 
> I think that all GPUs would use RAM pretty similarly, since they are displaying the same textures. Team Fortress 2 is a DirectX 9.0c Source game by the way.



Sure, the textures would be the same, but the compression used, as well as how things are rendered, will affect vram usage.

StreetFighter4 stays under 256mb....most like due to the PS3 only having that much.

With games that are primarily designed for consoles, typically vram usage is very small due to the PS3's miniscule amt of ram.


----------



## BababooeyHTJ (Dec 3, 2009)

Jstn7477 said:


> Unfortunately, I don't have Dragon Age. I also ran TF2 again yesterday I think and I still got up to about 560MB of VRAM usage (same settings).
> 
> I think that all GPUs would use RAM pretty similarly, since they are displaying the same textures. Team Fortress 2 is a DirectX 9.0c Source game by the way.



Half Life 2 Episode 2 at 1920x1200 and 8xAA, a much higher resolution with the same version of the source engine sees a 4fps difference between the 4870 512 and 1GB. Any setting below that seem to see no benefit in this review.


Dragon Age is heavily cpu dependent based on the reviews that I have seen, btw.


----------



## rahulyo (Dec 3, 2009)

I also face same stuttering problem with my Palit 4850 sonic card in most of games,3d mark 2006 ,Vantage,Furmark test almost in every thing ...

My GPU temp :-
Min =48 and Max = 70

All settings are default in CCC ...


----------



## rahulyo (Dec 3, 2009)

So any one found answer ???

What is the cause of stuttering , Software/Hardware(CPU/GPU) ???


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Dec 3, 2009)

Mussels said:


> turn textures to low and AA off. if stuttering goes away, likely it was lack of Vram.



QFT

Yeah AA should definately be off.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 3, 2009)

rahulyo said:


> So any one found answer ???
> 
> What is the cause of stuttering , Software/Hardware(CPU/GPU) ???


There is no one answer my friend. Everyone shutters for different reasons. What exactly is happening to your rig? Maybe I can help?


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 3, 2009)

its DAO... do you stutter in massive hallways? in the brescian ruins? its a software issue.  Updating drivers worked for me - its most likely a driver bug.

GPU-z has a video memory monitoring feature now too.


----------



## rahulyo (Dec 3, 2009)

I OCed my E4500 upto 3.0 GHz and HD4850 up to 740/1100 ...

I face Stutturing,Lagging in almost every Game,Benchmark.I play games at 1900x1080 Res. without AA and AF. All default settings in CCC. 

I reinstall OS,Change drivers,Try lower Res. but cant solve this problem.Currently I m using 9.10 drivers.

Pls help me to sort out this problem ...


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 3, 2009)

rahulyo said:


> I OCed my E4500 upto 3.0 GHz and HD4850 up to 740/1100 ...
> 
> I face Stutturing,Lagging in almost every Game,Benchmark.I play games at 1900x1080 Res. without AA and AF. All default settings in CCC.
> 
> ...



Reset your bios to default and update your drivers to the latest. Once you do that we will talk catalyst.


----------



## rahulyo (Dec 3, 2009)

Ok...

Doing ...


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 3, 2009)

you are running 7 on 2gb of some of the slowest ram by current standards - get another 4gb, OC the chips/or just drop timings to 4-4-4-12 and a 64-bit OS disk (your 32 bit key will work) - that will stop stuttering

the stuttering is probably the game having to swap data from the hard drive.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 3, 2009)

phanbuey said:


> you are running 7 on 2gb of some of the slowest ram by current standards - get another 4gb, OC the chips/or just drop timings to 4-4-4-12 and a 64-bit OS disk (your 32 bit key will work) - that will stop stuttering
> 
> the stuttering is probably the game having to swap data from the hard drive.



Its possible. But lets cover the basics first with him.


----------



## rahulyo (Dec 3, 2009)

Okk...

BIOS reset = Done ...

Update Drivers (9.10 ->9.11) = Done ...


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 3, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Its possible. But lets cover the basics first with him.



cover w/e you want, im not stopping you.

+ running out of ram is about as basic as it gets.  

Vista/7 is notorious for using  ~1GB to run on a fresh install that means his game has a gig to play with.


----------



## Mussels (Dec 3, 2009)

phanbuey said:


> running out of ram is about as basic as it gets.
> 
> Vista/7 is notorious for using  ~1GB to run on a fresh install that means his game has a gig to play with.



far less, with it being a DX9 game.

I say this over and over, but DX9 keeps a copy of the video textures in system ram - 2GB aint enough for gaming on vista with a game like MW2 that can use 900MB of Vram


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 3, 2009)

Mussels said:


> far less, with it being a DX9 game.
> 
> I say this over and over, but DX9 keeps a copy of the video textures in system ram - 2GB aint enough for gaming on vista with a game like MW2 that can use 900MB of Vram



 qft


----------



## rahulyo (Dec 3, 2009)

Hello TheMailMan78 ...

Whr r u ???

Tell me what to do now ???


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 3, 2009)

rahulyo said:


> Hello TheMailMan78 ...
> 
> Whr r u ???
> 
> Tell me what to do now ???



still stuttering?


----------



## rahulyo (Dec 3, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> still stuttering?



Run 3d mark Ventage but still face Stuttering problem ...

CPU E4500 @ 2.2 GHz And GPU 685/1000 ...

Ventage score :- P6032
CPU score :- 3746
GPU Score :- 7573


----------



## brandonwh64 (Dec 3, 2009)

install XP (if you haven't already) and try to see if it still shutters


----------



## rahulyo (Dec 3, 2009)

XP no way ...


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Dec 3, 2009)

rahulyo said:


> Run 3d mark Ventage but still face Stuttering problem ...
> 
> CPU E4500 @ 2.2 GHz And GPU 685/1000 ...
> 
> ...




Um.... your desktop has a game shortcut called RapeLay lol I didn't know what it was but Wikipedia says, "The game centers on a male character who stalks and rapes a mother and her two daughters."

Maybe your computer is stuttering because it finds it to be creepy?


----------



## brandonwh64 (Dec 3, 2009)

rahulyo said:


> XP no way ...



i was only saying this cause like others say vista/7 need more mem


----------



## the goose (Dec 3, 2009)

hi,i have a few things to point out,firstly ,vista and windows 7 will run quite happily on 2 gig ram,i believed the hype saying 2gig wasnt  enough,i upgraded to 4 g ,ran pc mark and tested with games ,it made very little if any difference,your main problem is your cpu,quite frankly 2.2g isnt fast enough,you may get away with 3g so long as your cpu temps dont get to high,i have found from my own experience that oc`ing gpu isnt worth the hasle,infact it just made my sytem slower in 3d vantage,i think you may be expecting your system to do more than it can,there are 2 things you can do ,either (depending on your budget)upgrade your cpu,with the  i7,i5 and now the i3 chips all the other intel chips are getting cheaper by the day,or try a game with settings striped right back to minimum setting then increase the settings one stage at a time until you find a happy medium between quality and performance


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 3, 2009)

Stuttering problems can be caused by a variety of things which is why it's hard to track down.

Hardware:
-incorrect overclock settings
-low vcore for the CPU's OC
-not using the recommended voltage for your ram
-using the wrong divider for your ram
-PCIe frequency is incorrect
-north bridge voltage is incorrect
-Your CPU is a complete bottleneck and not adequate to run the game at that resolution smoothly (which might be because the vcore is set to low).  
-etc

Software:
-corrupt registry which may require a reinstall of your OS
-using a antivirus program or anti adware program that's consentingly scanning while you are gaming
-updated video card drivers are needed
-an update to the OS maybe needed (rare)
-In game settings are to high for your PC
-etc


----------



## the goose (Dec 3, 2009)

an increase from 2.2 to 3g for cpu wouldnt need voltage setting to be changed,memory setting dont need to be changed and neither does the nb volt setting,im sure if he`s got enough knowledge to change his cpu setting he`ll know what other settings he has changed,if he has reset mobo bios and still has problems then it is not the memory or nb settings,as i have already said he is expecting to much from his system,the e4500 is a low end chip more suitable to media centre`s,a cpu score of 3746 is very low which outlines the main problem,he only has a hd 4850 which is a low-mid range card,i hate to say this but it is not a gaming machine,not the latest games at least,suggesting an upgrade to a 64bit is only anygood if the games support ,most games dont,the hd 4850 is dx10 whats the point of downgrading to a dx9 os,both vista and windows 7 manage the memory better,if he only has the 512mb version of the 4850 that will cause problems too,the problem is not just the cpu it is the system overall


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 3, 2009)

the goose said:


> an increase from 2.2 to 3g for cpu wouldnt need voltage setting to be changed,memory setting dont need to be changed and neither does the nb volt setting,im sure if he`s got enough knowledge to change his cpu setting he`ll know what other settings he has changed,if he has reset mobo bios and still has problems then it is not the memory or nb settings,as i have already said he is expecting to much from his system,the e4500 is a low end chip more suitable to media centre`s,a cpu score of 3746 is very low which outlines the main problem,he only has a hd 4850 which is a low-mid range card,i hate to say this but it is not a gaming machine,not the latest games at least,suggesting an upgrade to a 64bit is only anygood if the games support ,most games dont,the hd 4850 is dx10 whats the point of downgrading to a dx9 os,both vista and windows 7 manage the memory better,if he only has the 512mb version of the 4850 that will cause problems too,the problem is not just the cpu it is the system overall


This for the most part is not correct in this case because voltage can impact the speed in which the CPU will perform.  You can get a stable low vcore but when the CPU is fully stressed the performance is not as good as it could be.  Another example is the use of EIST; which can be used to lower the vcore when the CPU is idle. The CPU does have that kind of vcore range were a lower vcore makes the CPU stable during low/no CPU demand while more vcore is needed for high cpu demand.  

So in the end, just because you are able to OC your CPU with no voltage increase doesn't always mean that vcore is ideal for that overclock! This is why we used programs like SuperPI, etc when trying to determine vcore.  Furthermore, some bioses actually increase vcore automatically without any intervention from the user.  So in that example vcore still increases (assuming that auto was used for vcore).


----------



## rahulyo (Dec 3, 2009)

So my total system is a problem ???


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 3, 2009)

DaedalusHelios said:


> Um.... your desktop has a game shortcut called RapeLay lol I didn't know what it was but Wikipedia says, "The game centers on a male character who stalks and rapes a mother and her two daughters."
> 
> Maybe your computer is stuttering because it finds it to be creepy?



Um yeah I saw that too. WTF?!


----------



## BababooeyHTJ (Dec 3, 2009)

DaedalusHelios said:


> Um.... your desktop has a game shortcut called RapeLay lol I didn't know what it was but Wikipedia says, "The game centers on a male character who stalks and rapes a mother and her two daughters."
> 
> Maybe your computer is stuttering because it finds it to be creepy?



I think the fact that he needs a desktop shortcut for the "game" makes it even worse.


----------



## DaveK (Dec 3, 2009)

Wow, that is disturbing...


----------



## MK4512 (Dec 3, 2009)

cadaveca said:


> So, you know what the answer is. don't ya? Cpu cache is hurting you. I need 3.3ghz on quad AMD chips to get rid of the stutter.



???!

My X3 720 can handle Dragon Age full settings with no stutter ever! No way would you need a 3.3GHz Quad Core to deal with that...

Edit: Also, kinda creepy...


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 3, 2009)

MK4512 said:


> ???!
> 
> My X3 720 can handle Dragon Age full settings with no stutter ever! No way would you need a 3.3GHz Quad Core to deal with that...
> 
> Edit: Also, kinda creepy...



2560x1600? Crossfire 4890's? I think that this is part of my problem(two cards means literally twice the driver overhead).


3 other 1920x1080 monitors? Full system must be considered.  For my system, that's what it takes.



Actually, with the new Dirt2 hotfix, cpu utilization has gone down ALOT. Now, yes, I have found 2.8ghz is fine. Also seems to depend on which version of Dragon age you are running...


The OP asked if getting a 1GB card would solve his issues, stating he was getting 100% cpu utilization...I said no, his cpu's cache was probably killing it for him.


----------



## erocker (Dec 3, 2009)

Mussels said:


> it could also be something as simple as his HDD being fragmented, or his antivirus being a douche.
> 
> 
> while its great to post suggestions, it seems odd that you're all leaping right into the "NEW HARDWARE!" path with zero evidence that it will actually help



I agree. A new video card most likely isn't needed. I'm willing to bet that the stuttering/freezing is being caused by sytem RAM that is impoperly configured, background processes and or a messy HDD.


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 3, 2009)

erocker said:


> I agree. A new video card most likely isn't needed. I'm willing to bet that the stuttering/freezing is being caused by sytem RAM that is impoperly configured, background processes and or a messy HDD.



After the new driver, and playing around, I'd have to agree, too.

Mind you , in Denerim, with those kids running around, they still "jump" a bit, even with cpu @ 3.6ghz, abt 60% cpu use, vgas @ 36% each...might just be how the game works, period.

Could be absolutely NOTHING wrong with his system. If it's the STEAM version, defragging the game's cache after big downloads is ALWAYS a good idea.


----------



## the goose (Dec 3, 2009)

i have a qx9650@4g with no volt change and my system is perfect


----------



## rahulyo (Dec 4, 2009)

I trying to play Games at 1600x1050 and 1440x900 but still facing stuttering problem ...

Any help guys ...


----------



## rahulyo (Dec 4, 2009)

After come back to default settings i.e. CPU E4500 @2.2GHz and GPU at 685/1000 not facing any stuttering problem in Dirt2 Demo.Playing it at 1900x1080 with 2xAA and Ultra high settings ...


----------



## the goose (Dec 4, 2009)

ok,thats a start,try your games with your cpu oc`d then your gpu oc`d,but do then separately


----------



## the goose (Dec 4, 2009)

is your psu  450watts,that may be a problem when your oc`ing your cpu and gpu


----------



## rewindlabs (Dec 4, 2009)

Some of the reply's in here are just sooo funny...

As to the OP's problem it is NOT his CPU...iv got an AMD 6000+ at 3.2Ghz paired with a 4850 512MB at 750/1050 and there has been NO stuttering what so ever in dragon age...the system is running on a 1280x1024 monitor for the moment and iv set the AA i believe to 2X but it may be as high as 4X

Windows 7 64-Bit and 4GB's of decent ram BTW

Sounds like the OP is running out of Vram...i know when i ran my 4850 512MB on my 1680x1050 monitor in dragon age and tried pushing 8XAA i watched my stat readouts show that i ran out of vram as well as the game stuttering along unplayable


----------



## the goose (Dec 4, 2009)

his last post"After come back to default settings i.e. CPU E4500 @2.2GHz and GPU at 685/1000 not facing any stuttering problem in Dirt2 Demo.Playing it at 1900x1080 with 2xAA and Ultra high settings ..."


----------



## r9 (Dec 4, 2009)

I just wonder what is going to be marketing line for RapeLay II = " Now even more mothers and daughters "


----------



## the goose (Dec 4, 2009)

i think that rules out vram


----------



## rewindlabs (Dec 4, 2009)

the goose said:


> his last post"After come back to default settings i.e. CPU E4500 @2.2GHz and GPU at 685/1000 not facing any stuttering problem in Dirt2 Demo.Playing it at 1900x1080 with 2xAA and Ultra high settings ..."



You did notice i said "As to the OP's problem" that means my message was to the original poster...as to Dirt 2 and 2xAA bla bla bla so what?

Hey look i can play GTA 3 at 1900x1080 with 8XAA on ultra settings with only 512MB's of vram!

We are talking about entirely different game's here...different engine's and different people behind the engine coding it so unless he is able to run EVERY game at that resolution along with AA caked...just because he can run Dirt 2 with those settings does not mean he could go and run Crysis with the same results

The E4500 guy just doesn't have enough Vram for his resolution...he has enough that he should be able to play most titles without AA but if he wants AA he'll be SOL in a lot of games


----------



## rahulyo (Dec 4, 2009)

What is SOL ???


----------



## Mussels (Dec 4, 2009)

shit outta luck


----------



## mdsx1950 (Dec 4, 2009)

Try using game booster 1.22 since it stops all unneccessary services and appications that are running. It even shuts down windows aero temporarily. But still if u insist on upgrading go for a 5870. I can assure you that you will see quite a big difference and you wont have to upgrade for a quite a long time.  Cheers


----------



## the goose (Dec 5, 2009)

sol=shit out of luck i guess lol


----------



## LoneReaction (Feb 26, 2010)

Ahh, sorry to bump up this thread, while you guys were trying to help me, I was doing some stupid 9 week truck driving courtesy of the local military, and practically get out of camp only 1 day a week.

I happened to have the good luck of needing a pc for my sister, and so got to upgrade to an i7 860. Still using the same old 4870 512MB, same HDD, PSU. Dragon age stuttering problem gone! Also, I completed Mass effect, which I stopped playing in 2008 due to stuttering and lag.

Most games run very smoothly now (same fps, but smoother, if it makes any sense?). Gonna keep the 4870 for awhile more!


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 26, 2010)

LoneReaction said:


> Ahh, sorry to bump up this thread, while you guys were trying to help me, I was doing some stupid 9 week truck driving courtesy of the local military, and practically get out of camp only 1 day a week.
> 
> I happened to have the good luck of needing a pc for my sister, and so got to upgrade to an i7 860. Still using the same old 4870 512MB, same HDD, PSU. Dragon age stuttering problem gone! Also, I completed Mass effect, which I stopped playing in 2008 due to stuttering and lag.
> 
> Most games run very smoothly now (same fps, but smoother, if it makes any sense?). Gonna keep the 4870 for awhile more!



So how is your progress in "RapeLay"?


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Feb 26, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> So how is your progress in "RapeLay"?



Wrong guy. You are thinking of that guy from India.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 26, 2010)

DaedalusHelios said:


> Wrong guy. You are thinking of that guy from India.



Oh ok. Im glad that guy never came back.

Sorry LoneReaction.


----------



## cadaveca (Feb 26, 2010)

LoneReaction said:


> Ahh, sorry to bump up this thread, while you guys were trying to help me, I was doing some stupid 9 week truck driving courtesy of the local military, and practically get out of camp only 1 day a week.
> 
> I happened to have the good luck of needing a pc for my sister, and so got to upgrade to an i7 860. Still using the same old 4870 512MB, same HDD, PSU. Dragon age stuttering problem gone! Also, I completed Mass effect, which I stopped playing in 2008 due to stuttering and lag.
> 
> Most games run very smoothly now (same fps, but smoother, if it makes any sense?). Gonna keep the 4870 for awhile more!



Glad to see I was right, and a new cpu would breathe new life into a trusty RV770.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Feb 26, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Oh ok. Im glad that guy never came back.
> 
> Sorry LoneReaction.



Unless its secretly btarunr! 

Just kidding.


----------



## LoneReaction (Feb 27, 2010)

God, rapelay is disgusting. But if it had dx11, I bet everyone would be benching it or something.


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Feb 27, 2010)

just had to google rapelay


----------



## rahulyo (Feb 27, 2010)

[I.R.A]_FBi said:


> just had to google rapelay



So what u found ???


----------



## rahulyo (Feb 27, 2010)

My CPU is the main problem.Waiting for reduce i7 price.

Thanx guyz for help.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 27, 2010)

rahulyo said:


> So what u found ???



I would rather you not be a member of TPU.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Feb 27, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I would rather you not be a member of TPU.



Everybody has bad habits or a dark side. For some its darker than others. Its not a huge hit in India because of the cost of computers makes it impossible for it to be. Japan is the country notorious for the most twisted pornography right behind Korea which is the largest consumer of pornography in general.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 27, 2010)

DaedalusHelios said:


> Everybody has bad habits or a dark side. For some its darker than others. Its not a huge hit in India because of the cost of computers makes it impossible for it to be. Japan is the country notorious for the most twisted pornography right behind Korea which is the largest consumer of pornography in general.



I don't care. There is no excuse for it.


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Feb 27, 2010)

no excuse for rape man


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 27, 2010)

[I.R.A]_FBi said:


> no excuse for rape man



Maybe they tripped and fell on his pecker......violently.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Feb 27, 2010)

[I.R.A]_FBi said:


> no excuse for rape man



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fqq051BU2MY


----------



## Mussels (Feb 28, 2010)

cease discussing rapelay.


----------



## rahulyo (Feb 28, 2010)

Sorry guyz if my any action hurt u . I have no intention to hurt anyone .I read about that game in newspaper and just want to try it. I m not a rapist or no intention to to do any wrong thing.Pls forgive me about that game.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Feb 28, 2010)

rahulyo said:


> Sorry guyz if my any action hurt u . I have no intention to hurt anyone .I read about that game in newspaper and just want to try it. I m not a rapist or no intention to to do any wrong thing.Pls forgive me about that game.



You don't have to explain it to anybody as the game is legal to own. I want you to feel welcome at TPU and I am sorry if you felt threatened. I was making jokes and then everybody else got way too serious. Have a great day and you are welcome on TPU anytime.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 28, 2010)

DaedalusHelios said:


> You don't have to explain it to anybody as the game is legal to own. I want you to feel welcome at TPU and I am sorry if you felt threatened. I was making jokes and then everybody else got way too serious. Have a great day and you are welcome on TPU anytime.



Not by me you ain't.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 28, 2010)

everyone calm down.


----------



## rahulyo (Feb 28, 2010)

Ohh u guys make jock !!! 

I really take it seriously.A whole night i didn't sleep and thinking about what i do if u guyz banned me ??


----------



## phanbuey (Feb 28, 2010)

I dont understand how someone can play games like GTA where you steal cars, run down innocent civilians, and then blow their brains all over the sidewalk, and then someone says the word 'rape' and all of a sudden the panties are in a wad.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Feb 28, 2010)

phanbuey said:


> I dont understand how someone can play games like GTA where you steal cars, run down innocent civilians, and then blow their brains all over the sidewalk, and then someone says the word 'rape' and all of a sudden the panties are in a wad.



Some people think rape is worse than mass murder. It just stems from sexual insecurity really. Treating people badly in any form should be frowned upon and murder being the worst IMO. Different strokes for different folks as they say.


----------



## Wile E (Feb 28, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> Glad to see I was right, and a new cpu would breathe new life into a trusty RV770.



No, changing an ENTIRE setup save for the video card does not, in any way, prove the cpu was to blame.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 28, 2010)

DaedalusHelios said:


> Some people think rape is worse than mass murder. It just stems from sexual insecurity really. Treating people badly in any form should be frowned upon and murder being the worst IMO. Different strokes for different folks as they say.



Yeah ok. Thats it. I can tell you don't have kids. I have two girls and a wife. I think anyone that plays a game where the objective is to stalk them and rape them should be locked up. Stop trying to justify shit. There is right and there is wrong. Black and white. Gray only exists for people that need an excuse.


----------



## rahulyo (Feb 28, 2010)

We play lots of games.We play lots of characters in game depends on game story. We kill people in games (like COD-mw,COD-mw2,ME,ME2),play virtual life games like Sims.We r not like game characters in our original life. 

We need some excitement ,adventure which is not present our real life thr4 play games.


----------



## Wile E (Feb 28, 2010)

Seriously, drop the rapelay thing guys. There is no need for it in this thread.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 28, 2010)

rahulyo said:


> We play lots of games.We play lots of characters in game depends on game story. We kill people in games (like COD-mw,COD-mw2,ME,ME2),play virtual life games like Sims.We r not like game characters in our original life.
> 
> We need some excitement ,adventure which is not present our real life thr4 play games.



Next up. A child molestation game......You know for the "excitement".

Rot in hell weirdo.



Wile E said:


> Seriously, drop the rapelay thing guys. There is no need for it in this thread.


 There is no need for it anywhere.


----------



## rahulyo (Feb 28, 2010)

Wile E said:


> Seriously, drop the rapelay thing guys. There is no need for it in this thread.



Yes ur right .OP create this thread for help not to heard other things.


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 28, 2010)

Alright since warnings don't go so well, next one to mention the word rape or the game rapelay or whatever the game is gets a week with no posting rights. I saw Mussels ask twice already, there is no reason I should even have to be here posting this.

If you don't like his screen shot, move on and don't help, carrying on about it isn't solving his issues or your issues with what a image of a game icon represents.


----------



## LoneReaction (Feb 28, 2010)

Wile E said:


> No, changing an ENTIRE setup save for the video card does not, in any way, prove the cpu was to blame.



The things that changed were the cpu, ram, motherboard. Is it possible to be a ram problem? 4GB DDR2 vs 4GB DDR3. I feel that it is the CPU because for games that I have this kind of problem with, my old E7200 was maxing out. On the i7 it barely uses 30% of total power.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 28, 2010)

sneekypeet said:


> Alright since warnings don't go so well, next one to mention the word rape or the game rapelay or whatever the game is gets a week with no posting rights. I saw Mussels ask twice already, there is no reason I should even have to be here posting this.
> 
> If you don't like his screen shot, move on and don't help, carrying on about it isn't solving his issues or your issues with what a image of a game icon represents.



i was about to give infractions, but you beat me to it while i was at work.

*ANY* more mentions of this topic, results in infractions. I dont care what your post content is, you HAVE been warned.


----------



## Wile E (Feb 28, 2010)

LoneReaction said:


> The things that changed were the cpu, ram, motherboard. Is it possible to be a ram problem? 4GB DDR2 vs 4GB DDR3. I feel that it is the CPU because for games that I have this kind of problem with, my old E7200 was maxing out. On the i7 it barely uses 30% of total power.



30% of your current cpu is most likely nearly equivalent to the processing power of your old cpu at 100%. I've tested games with a 4870 on my 6400+ X2 downclocked to 2Ghz, and didn't get any stuttering, and a 2Ghz AM2 X2 is a lot less powerful than the e7200. Sure, it loses a few frames, but ti doesn't stutter at all.

Did you do a clean install with the new hardware? If so, it could've been purely software related.


----------



## LoneReaction (Feb 28, 2010)

Wile E said:


> Did you do a clean install with the new hardware? If so, it could've been purely software related.



Yes, I did that. Seems like this will remain a mystery.


----------



## rahulyo (Feb 28, 2010)

U change ur CPU+Mobo+RAM still face stuttering Strange ...

Try other GPU on ur system.(I don't tell u to buy new GPU just try ur friend's GPU on ur system ).I also face stuttering when i had Palit 4850 Sonic,Now i buy Sapphire HD5850 and my stuttering problem is gone.


----------



## LoneReaction (Feb 28, 2010)

No, the stuttering is gone. Problem is gone, just no idea what cured it. XD


----------



## Adol007 (Feb 28, 2010)

Hello,

Did you do a re-install when you changed hardware?

I've had stuttering problems before with sli'd 8800gt but it always went away after doing a clean windows install wich means it was software related.

If it comes back try to remember what you installed beforehand.


----------



## Flyordie (Feb 28, 2010)

kid41212003 said:


> I wouldn't buy anything below HD5850 performance, since your current card and HD5770 is quite close in performance.
> 
> Ask yourself if it worth spending hundred bucks for ~0-5% gain in performance.




I can personally state that the performance increase is more than 0-5%.

Upgrading from a HD4850 512MB OC (750Mhz Core, 1.2Ghz Mem) to a 1GB HD5770 which is running 900Mhz Core 1.3Ghz Mem, I see a 15-20% increase across the board.  If it was an HD4850 1GB, the increase would probably be 5-10% but you see my point now I hope.


----------



## Mussels (Feb 28, 2010)

Flyordie said:


> I can personally state that the performance increase is more than 0-5%.
> 
> Upgrading from a HD4850 512MB OC (750Mhz Core, 1.2Ghz Mem) to a 1GB HD5770 which is running 900Mhz Core 1.1Ghz Mem, I see a 15-20% increase across the board.  If it was an HD4850 1GB, the increase would probably be 5-10% but you see my point now I hope.



5770's are quite equal to a 4870. they will be a decent jump from a 4850, especially if you go 512MB to 1GB.


----------



## cadaveca (Feb 28, 2010)

LoneReaction said:


> No, the stuttering is gone. Problem is gone, just no idea what cured it. XD



The larger cache of your new cpu, plus the better memory controller, together, make for less system latency, which leads to better performance.

Running a 2MB cpu, which must run the game, driver, plus OS and VGA overhead. AMDs have less issues in this regard due to have onboard memory controllers. 2MB just wasn't enough.

Going from an E6600(4mb cache) to an e8400(6MB cache), both at the same 3ghz, has the e8400 a fair bit faster. I've had all these chips/vgas, so have alot of experience as to what shoudl be paired with what...E7300 should be paired with HD4770.


----------



## rahulyo (Feb 28, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> The larger cache of your new cpu, plus the better memory controller, together, make for less system latency, which leads to better performance.
> 
> Running a 2MB cpu, which must run the game, driver, plus OS and VGA overhead. AMDs have less issues in this regard due to have onboard memory controllers. 2MB just wasn't enough.



So its a cpu cache memory problem ...


----------



## cadaveca (Feb 28, 2010)

Sure. in order to have ALT-TAB to desktop, copy of vga ram is cached in system ram. This means every time the vga changes it's cache, system cache changes to, and this leads to some stutter in some situations, as teh cpu cache gets thrashed. Pretty common, actually.

It's reasons like this that you should not just grab parts and throw them together..I mean you can, and it will work, but there just something about properly selecting parts to work well with one another.


----------



## rahulyo (Mar 1, 2010)

So computer assembly is like a Engineering ....


----------



## hellrazor (Mar 1, 2010)

Has anybody thought of getting a sound card? My cousin has a dual-core with a Radeon 5500 HD, and he can barely play Oblivion because he uses on-board sound, and any more than like 5 or 6 sounds playing together makes it stutter really badly (it gets even worse when he's on a horse).

Whoo.... I almost forgot the 's' in horse. That would've sounded funny.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 1, 2010)

Onboard typically uses cpu for processing, hence the stutter.


----------



## Wile E (Mar 1, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> Onboard typically uses cpu for processing, hence the stutter.



In anything newer than XP, the cpu is used for processing. Vista and newer do not allow direct access to sound hardware. Post-processing can still be handled at the hardware level tho. He might want to try disabling any post processing, like Graphic equalizer or those environmental effects(Hall, Theater, etc.). Also, just try updating drivers. That can go a long way sometimes. Although, I would still grab a sound card, just because they sound so much better. Even my Audigy 2ZS is better sounding than the best on-board out there.

And a 2MB cpu is still enough to play game stutter free. jrracingfan has been doing it for quite a while, and many others on this board have been gaming with low-cache cpus with no ill side effects. I have built many budget gamers with low-end cpus from both Intel and AMD for clients, and none of them stuttered either. I would bet large sums of money the OP's problem was not his cpu.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 1, 2010)

No, I agree, most likely software-caused, but it was likely due to the overlcock to get the cpu to usable speeds. All it takes is one crash. I don't agree that 2MB *INTEL 775* cpus are adequate, however.

Inherent problem with benchmarking apps. Just because an overlcock gets you better scores, doesn't mean everything is gonna work faster...


----------



## Wile E (Mar 1, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> No, I agree, most likely software-caused, but it was likely due to the overlcock to get the cpu to usable speeds. All it takes is one crash. I don't agree that 2MB *INTEL 775* cpus are adequate, however.
> 
> Inherent problem with benchmarking apps. Just because an overlcock gets you better scores, doesn't mean everything is gonna work faster...



I don't test client computers with benchmarks. I test them with games. There is no more stuttering with Intel 2MB cpus than any other cpu. They do take a little more clock to reach the same performance, but they don't stutter at all.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 1, 2010)

Not directly, no. But forcing a greater workload than they can handle will, as with any cpu. Every time the cpu has to hit the memory through the chipset causes a performance hit.


----------



## BababooeyHTJ (Mar 3, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> Not directly, no. But forcing a greater workload than they can handle will, as with any cpu. Every time the cpu has to hit the memory through the chipset causes a performance hit.



How so? I've yet to see a bench where my Q9650/P45 isn't on par with an AM2 setup. Maybe a slight hit in latency.



cadaveca said:


> Onboard typically uses cpu for processing, hence the stutter.



It's Oblivion, hence the stutter. Have you ever played that game? It could be due to anything. He could even be talking about the classic Oblivion/FO3 "stutter" that every rig sees weather the user does or not.


----------



## ArmoredCavalry (Mar 3, 2010)

BababooeyHTJ said:


> It's Oblivion, hence the stutter. Have you ever played that game? It could be due to anything. He could even be talking about the classic Oblivion/FO3 "stutter" that every rig sees weather the user does or not.



Yah... Oblivion is the only game that you could spend 3 grand on a rig and still have stutter.

I think it actually ran better on my old laptop than it does on my desktop today.... 

I've always suspected it is the variations in FPS more than low FPS. You could play at 20 fps and have it smoother than playing at 100-60 fps, because the drops became very noticeable.

I think this is why games like Crysis can be played at lower framerates, because the frame rate is rocks solid with barely any variation, which makes for a smooth game (unlike Oblivion).

This is why I like to see min/max FPS in benchmarks rather than average.


----------



## Fourstaff (Mar 3, 2010)

Oblivion likes loading many little things, so if you are looking somewhere where there is a lot of details to be rendered, it slows down massively. Makes the game look good though. 

Anyway, have the people who asked for help fixed their problems?

Note to self: Keep a clean desktop, only showing wallpaper and more or less nothing else when doing a screenie.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 3, 2010)

BababooeyHTJ said:


> How so? I've yet to see a bench where my Q9650/P45 isn't on par with an AM2 setup. Maybe a slight hit in latency.



Q9650 has how much more cache? There's a reason it has more...and an E7400 @ 3.0ghz would be like the q9650 @ 2.0ghz. Every 2MB of cache is Core2 cpus = 200mhz in performance. But you also lose an avg 200mb/sec in memory bandwidth by the addition of that extra 2MB of cache. The same loss of memory performance was seen in 512k cpus vs 1mb cpus.





> It's Oblivion, hence the stutter. Have you ever played that game? It could be due to anything. He could even be talking about the classic Oblivion/FO3 "stutter" that every rig sees weather the user does or not.



Well, I was speaking speciifcally to the performance increase by disabling sound. I'm being very specific. You are being very general, speaking about the app overall. The reason for Oblivion's very variable framerate is due to what, exactly? And yes, of course I have that game. I own almost every mainstream title Since 1995 on pc. Played probably 95% of them to completion, too.


----------



## BababooeyHTJ (Mar 3, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> Q9650 has how much more cache? There's a reason it has more...and an E7400 @ 3.0ghz would be like the q9650 @ 2.0ghz. Every 2MB of cache is Core2 cpus = 200mhz in performance. But you also lose an avg 200mb/sec in memory bandwidth by the addition of that extra 2MB of cache. The same loss of memory performance was seen in 512k cpus vs 1mb cpus.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The poster made no mention of disabling sound. Secondly, processing sound in a game should have little to no impact on performance on that cpu. Especially in Oblivion where it still would have to go through the shoddy memory heap manager even if using a sound card.

You were mentioning memory bandwith and I don't see how L2 cache would effect that since the MCH connects directly to the FSB and not L2 on 775, afaik.

The famous Oblivion stutter has nothing to do with framerates, it's an issue with the engine. It's not really even a classic stutter to begin with. The only workaround that I know of is to cap the framerate and no V-sync does not do the trick. I'm not sure if Oblivion Stutter Remover uses just caps the framerate as a workaround. You would have to ask SkyRanger from Bethsoft forums for a real answer as to why Oblivion and FO3 tend to have this stutter.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 4, 2010)

BababooeyHTJ said:


> The poster made no mention of disabling sound. Secondly, processing sound in a game should have little to no impact on performance on that cpu. Especially in Oblivion where it still would have to go through the shoddy memory heap manager even if using a sound card.



Um:



hellrazor said:


> Has anybody thought of getting a sound card? My cousin has a dual-core with a Radeon 5500 HD, and he can barely play Oblivion because he uses on-board sound, and any more than like 5 or 6 sounds playing together makes it stutter really badly (it gets even worse when he's on a horse).
> 
> Whoo.... I almost forgot the 's' in horse. That would've sounded funny.







BababooeyHTJ said:


> You were mentioning memory bandwith and I don't see how L2 cache would effect that since the MCH connects directly to the FSB and not L2 on 775, afaik.



Uh, dude, what purpose does the memory serve, but to hold data not possible to hold in cpu cache? Of course it has an effect! In EVERY cpu!

Screen/vga are the book you are reading, cpu is the table that organizes that data you read, memory... the shelves of the library, the HDD the library itself! It's all inter-related, and each presents bottlenecks.



BababooeyHTJ said:


> The famous Oblivion stutter has nothing to do with framerates, it's an issue with the engine. It's not really even a classic stutter to begin with. The only workaround that I know of is to cap the framerate and no V-sync does not do the trick. I'm not sure if Oblivion Stutter Remover uses just caps the framerate as a workaround. You would have to ask SkyRanger from Bethsoft forums for a real answer as to why Oblivion and FO3 tend to have this stutter.



And that's 'nuff said.


----------



## BababooeyHTJ (Mar 4, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> Um:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Where does he say that when he disables sound that these "stutters" go away? He may think that this only happens during sound effects but, tbh that may not be the case.

You still have yet to explain how l2 cache effects *memory bandwith and/or latency* on 775. You are way oversimplifying how memory works, btw.

On a side note not all applications are that dependent on cache. For all either one of us knows Oblivion might be one of those applications.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 4, 2010)

I'm not simplifying it...larger cache means longer times for data to travel physically within the cpu, thus affecting memory transfers. This has been offset over time with smaller processes, but cpu cache is the main limiting factor in cpu speed, today. Cpu's can run @ faster than 4ghz. But because of the heat generated(and thereby power consumption) by cache running at the speeds to match cpus @ 4ghz, this is currently impossible in large quantity. A large reason why the 45nm chips scale farther than 65nm in clocks is directly due to the ability to keep the cpu fed with data from the added cache (4MB vs 6MB) of these parts.

Because we use the cpu to calculate memory bandwidth, it's easy to see how cache affects bandwidth.

The 45nm Intel chips are 50% smaller than thier 65nm cousins, and this allows for a 10% increase in bandwidth, using the same board.

Had they used just 4MB, this increase would have been much larger, as L2 cache latency would have been halved, just by physical size alone. But, becuase more cache allows for a higher scxaling of clocks, they increased the cache as well, and still maintained an overall bandwidth increase.

It's the differences in cache and memory that prevent AMD chips from hitting the same clocks as Intel chips on air.


----------



## Wile E (Mar 4, 2010)

Cache does not make that big of a difference in games. You are hugely overstating it's effects on performance. At best, a larger cache is a few percentage points faster than a smaller cache, all else being equal. Those percentage points are easily made up with OCing.

At worst, there is absolutely no difference at all. There are plenty of programs that the cache makes no difference in whatsoever.

Additional bandwidth does not always equal additional performance, period. Some things just don't need it.

And AMD clocks differently, not because of Cache, but because it's a completely different architecture in general. The architectures are so vastly different between AMD and Intel, that you CANNOT attribute their clocking differences to anything in particular. People used to say AMD didn't clock as well because the IMC held them back, and Intel didn't have that burden. Well, guess what, Intel has an IMC now, and STILL out clocks AMD. Intel's smaller cached cpus still tend to out clock AMD cpus anyway, so your point is moot.

For the Oblivion issue, ANY dual core is capable of processing sound without stuttering, especially considering Oblivion primarily uses one core, leaving the other core(s) to process sound on their own. A sound card won't help at all. Besides, the only sound cards that are actually capable of processing the sound in hardware are the X-Fi cards, and only on XP. If you use any Windows newer than XP, you are using you cpu to process sound, if you use anything other than X-Fi, you are using your cpu to process sound. He has a software or driver problem, or a bottleneck elsewhere in the system.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 4, 2010)

best case, cache gives you a 10% boost or so - in massively CPU intensive applications.

higher clocks gets you back up there anyway.

i went from a 2MB allendale to a 4MB conroe to an 8MB kentsfield - and at the same clocks (which i did test each time) the performance difference was negligible. there was no magic cure for stuttering or sudden epic smoothness... just the fact that a higher clocked CPU performed better.


----------



## kid41212003 (Mar 4, 2010)

I thought the only different between Celeron and P4 is Cache? And they're so different in gaming performance...


----------



## Mussels (Mar 4, 2010)

kid41212003 said:


> I thought the only different between Celeron and P4 is Cache? And they're so different in gaming performance...




they had lower clocks, lower FSB, lower cache speed, and MASSIVELY reduced cache - we're talking 2MB vs 256KB, that kind of difference.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 4, 2010)

Mussels said:


> best case, cache gives you a 10% boost or so - in massively CPU intensive applications.



This is my point. The OP had occasional stutter. The second was a laptop. Both instances I think are due to a lack of cpu grunt.

A 4870 is really anemic, in most games, until you hit 3.6ghz on a 4mb 775 cpu. His cpu did not equal this, I said he needed a new cpu.

And now look, he got a new one, and has no problems. Go figure.

The difference in the cpus? IMC/NB and larger cache(well, cores too, I suppose).

i7 hasn't brought any major changes from Core2. The base core is the same, but the IMC/NB is there, and the bus has changed from FSB to QPI. It wasn't the cpu cores that were too slow, nor the mhz ...purely the cache and interface with rest of the system were at fault here, in the case of the OP.

Fact of the matter is, most cpus they sell today aren't up to snuff for real gaming. It's why most of us overlcock, isn't it?


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Mar 4, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> This is my point. The OP had occasional stutter. The second was a laptop. Both instances I think are due to a lack of cpu grunt.
> 
> A 4870 is really anemic, in most games, until you hit 3.6ghz on a 4mb 775 cpu. His cpu did not equal this, I said he needed a new cpu.
> 
> ...




Am I the only one thinking that statement is a little strange. Under that train of thought AMD Phenom II wouldn't be great for gaming. When PII is on par with the LGA775 top end offerings. Nobody needs an i7 for just gaming with a single GPU. Although multiple GPUs scale better with fast quads like i7s as I have seen.

i7 was a huge change IMO. How is it not. What did you expect?


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 4, 2010)

It's not that it isn't good for gaming...it is, it's jsut that I feel that different vgas require different supporting cpus...the cpu provides a bottleneck to the gpu's performance.

3ghz phenom vs 3.6ghz, I usually see about a 20% improvement in FPS. If the cpu wasn't a bottleneck, I'd see NO improvement.

i7 are Core2Quads with hyperthreading/IMC/NB tacked on, basically, to me. There's no real large perforamcne increase that cannot be explained by that change, which, although quite complex, isn't really anything new.


I eman really...we've been running chips 3.6ghz+ for how long? Adding new cores may give false bench numbers that make the sytems seem faster, and the added ram channel on i7 really does help 3D, but i7 is hardly anything fantastic, like Core2 was when it come out.


----------



## angelkiller (Mar 4, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> 3ghz phenom vs 3.6ghz, I usually see about a 20% improvement in FPS. If the cpu wasn't a bottleneck, I'd see NO improvement.


I don't mean to take sides here, but consider this:

If I overclock my graphics card while leaving the Phenom at 3GHz, I'm still going to see an improvement. But I thought you said the CPU was the bottleneck?


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 4, 2010)

Well, depending on situation, one will give a GREATER improvement. There's no set rule as to what will be a bottleneck...depends on alot of things.

Specifically, in the OP's instance, the cpu was bottlenecking. Increasing gpu clocks wouldn't fix the issue.

You cannot just take pure perforamcen numbers when looking for bottlenecks...typically, gains should be linear when increasing clocks, and if this does not happen, then something else is the bottleneck.


----------



## hellrazor (Mar 4, 2010)

BababooeyHTJ said:


> Where does he say that when he disables sound that these "stutters" go away? He may think that this only happens during sound effects but, tbh that may not be the case.
> 
> You still have yet to explain how l2 cache effects *memory bandwith and/or latency* on 775. You are way oversimplifying how memory works, btw.
> 
> On a side note not all applications are that dependent on cache. For all either one of us knows Oblivion might be one of those applications.



Here's the deal: He didn't have any stuttering problems until he got a couple of crappy-ass hspeakers and decided to turn the sound on in all of his games, and all of a sudden he can barely play Oblivion, Doom 3 stutters whenever something is yelling at him and he shoots it before the sound stops playing, and Battlefield 2 stutters during gun fights.

I know it's a lack-of-sound card issue (and he IS running XP), because it's all fine and dandy until I had the hunch and told him to run Winamp and Windows Media Player at the same time (a dual-core should be able to handle both with no problems).


----------



## BababooeyHTJ (Mar 4, 2010)

hellrazor said:


> Here's the deal: He didn't have any stuttering problems until he got a couple of crappy-ass hspeakers and decided to turn the sound on in all of his games, and all of a sudden he can barely play Oblivion, Doom 3 stutters whenever something is yelling at him and he shoots it before the sound stops playing, and Battlefield 2 stutters during gun fights.
> 
> I know it's a lack-of-sound card issue (and he IS running XP), because it's all fine and dandy until I had the hunch and told him to run Winamp and Windows Media Player at the same time (a dual-core should be able to handle both with no problems).



I didn't mean to sound condescending. I just wanted some clarification on how you came to the audio as the issue. Hell, yesterday I was cursing Nvidia's latest driver for crappy performance in a game and when I went back to the driver that I was using before with no issues or so I thought there was no difference. People tend to jump to conclusions, myself included. Sorry if I came off badly.

Honestly, to me it sounds like a software issue. I would play around with some audio drivers and see if it helps. Creative has their own issues too and afaik Oblivion doesn't even support EAX so I can't see it really helping there.



cadaveca said:


> Well, depending on situation, one will give a GREATER improvement. There's no set rule as to what will be a bottleneck...depends on alot of things.
> 
> *Specifically, in the OP's instance, the cpu was bottlenecking. Increasing gpu clocks wouldn't fix the issue.*
> 
> You cannot just take pure perforamcen numbers when looking for bottlenecks...typically, gains should be linear when increasing clocks, and if this does not happen, then something else is the bottleneck.



How do you know that? You are just jumping to conclusions again. Could be and most likely is a software issue.

Also you do know that the FSB directly communicates with memory, right?



cadaveca said:


> It's not that it isn't good for gaming...it is, it's jsut that I feel that different vgas require different supporting cpus...the cpu provides a bottleneck to the gpu's performance.
> 
> 3ghz phenom vs 3.6ghz, I usually see about a 20% improvement in FPS. If the cpu wasn't a bottleneck, I'd see NO improvement.
> 
> ...



I'm not even sure how to respond to that. Not every application relies on cache, bandwith (which is why you don't see the jumps in performance on a desktop than you would on a server going from Core2 to Nehalem), and even clock speed. Secondly that does not explain the massive increase in bandwith. If what you are stating were the case i7 would see AM3 like bandwith and latency. It's a completely different architecture.


----------



## hellrazor (Mar 4, 2010)

It's fine, I'm just having a bad day so I might sound a little PO'd at the moment.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 4, 2010)

BababooeyHTJ said:


> How do you know that? You are just jumping to conclusions again. Could be and most likely is a software issue.



Yes, of course I'm jumping to conclusions. Playing 1920x1080 on a 512mb card requires alot of cpu, cpu he didn't have. While there may have been software at play causing the issue for him, I know for a fact to get he most out of his vga required more cpu. Sure, less would have done the job, but not optimally.


> Also you do know that the FSB directly communicates with memory, right?



Actually, the FSB communicates with nothing. The cpu, using the FSB, communicates with the chipset. Insisde the chipset is the memory controller and PCI-E, not the memory itself. Drive control and other things are in southbridge. The voltage of the FSB must be converted to the voltage of the ram FIRST, and vice-versa. The link between the cpu itself, and the FSB, is via cache and a crossbar, that converts the cpu volts to FSB volts, like the memory controlelr converts the FSB voltage to Memory voltage. 












Also, see here:

http://download.intel.com/design/intarch/manuals/318476.pdf


http://www.intel.com/technology/architecture/coremicro/demo/demo.htm



BababooeyHTJ said:


> I'm not even sure how to respond to that. Not every application relies on cache, bandwith (which is why you don't see the jumps in performance on a desktop than you would on a server going from Core2 to Nehalem), and even clock speed. Secondly that does not explain the massive increase in bandwith. If what you are stating were the case i7 would see AM3 like bandwith and latency. It's a completely different architecture.



Different memory controllers, and add another memory channel, you get better bandwidth. And no, it's not really all that different...or it they would not both be using DDR2/DDR3. Timings and tolerances are different, but they are essentailly the same, conforming to JEDEC specs.


Also, note that the "pro benchers" are still getting FPS increases by upping CPU speed. If the vga was a bottleneck, there'd be NO increase at all. Fact of the matter is that even 6ghz doesn't fully utilize a gpu to it's fullest extent. A cpu will only not be a bottleneck when increasing it's speed yeilds no perforamnce increase in FPS.


----------



## phanbuey (Mar 4, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> Yes, of course I'm jumping to conclusions. Playing 1920x1080 on a 512mb card requires alot of cpu, cpu he didn't have. While there may have been software at play causing the issue for him, I know for a fact to get he most out of his vga required more cpu. Sure, less would have done the job, but not optimally.
> 
> 
> Actually, the FSB communicates with nothing. The cpu, using the FSB, communicates with the chipset. Insisde the chipset is the memory controller and PCI-E, not the memory itself. Drive control and other things are in southbridge. The voltage of the FSB must be converted to the voltage of the ram FIRST, and vice-versa. The link between the cpu itself, and the FSB, is via cache and a crossbar, that converts the cpu volts to FSB volts, like the memory controlelr converts the FSB voltage to Memory voltage.
> ...








not necessarily true... probenchers use 3dmark benches which also bench CPU.  You will NOT get any more FPS out of a Vcard if the CPU is fast enough.

http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/cpu_scaling_with_the_radeon_hd_5970,1.html


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 4, 2010)

Of course, it goes without saying that it's app-dependant. But those same apps can help us pinpoint difficiencies.



> When I play games like Dragon Age, and COD6, my frame rates are nice, from 40-60 fps @ 1920x1080. But the games often stutter or freeze for a split second.
> 
> What is causing this? Will upgrading to a 4870 1gb help?



Now, given that Dragon age only uses about 80% of a 4870@ 60FPS, and COD6 is somewhat the same, I made judgement. Specific quesiton...would upgading to a 1GB gpu fix the issue...I said no..cpu cache was causing the issue. Clear as day, to me, what the problem is. Simply making a lateral move to a 1gb gpu with the same core WOULD NOT have fixed the problem, no matter what everyone else wants to blame the problem on.

Also, that legion Hardware review presents the wrong idea...trying to increase FPS by cpu with 5970 @ 2560x1600 is kinda silly, IMHO. it would present a different perspective @ 1920x1080. 2560x1600 purposefully creates a gpu-bottleneck. No cpu is gonna help a gpu bottleneck. You need to eliminate the gpu bottleneck, not create it.


----------



## angelkiller (Mar 4, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> Of course, it goes without saying that it's app-dependant. But those same apps can help us pinpoint difficiencies.
> 
> 
> Now, given that Dragon age only uses about 80% of a 4870@ 60FPS, and COD6 is somewhat the same, I made judgement. Specific quesiton...would upgading to a 1GB gpu fix the issue...I said no..cpu cache was causing the issue. Clear as day, to me, what the problem is. Simply making a lateral move to a 1gb gpu with the same core WOULD NOT have fixed the problem, no matter what everyone else wants to blame the problem on.
> ...


I find it hard to believe that a game would stutter becasue of lack of onboard cache. But unfortunately, I have nothing that disproves you. OTOH, you have no proof that you are right.

The Legion Hardware review was meant to answer the question "At what speed does the CPU need to be at in order to fully utilize a 5970?"


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 4, 2010)

angelkiller said:


> I find it hard to believe that a game would stutter becasue of lack of onboard cache. But unfortunately, I have nothing that disproves you. OTOH, you have no proof that you are right.



Well, other than the fact he got a new cpu like I suggested, and now no longer has the issues. COuld be software...but there's no way to know...the only thing we know, 100%, was he changed his cpu, and the problem is gone.



> The Legion Hardware review was meant to answer the question "At what speed does the CPU need to be at in order to fully utilize a 5970?"



I know...but only with those apps, @ 2560x1600. I mean, truly, to me, they should have tested 5870x1080 or 1200. You don't need a 5970 for 2560x1600, a single 5870 will do(being both a 30-inch monitor and 5870 owner).


----------



## BababooeyHTJ (Mar 4, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> Yes, of course I'm jumping to conclusions. Playing 1920x1080 on a 512mb card requires alot of cpu, cpu he didn't have. While there may have been software at play causing the issue for him, I know for a fact to get he most out of his vga required more cpu. Sure, less would have done the job, but not optimally.



You don't know that. Once again jumping to conclusions.



> Actually, the FSB communicates with nothing. The cpu, using the FSB, communicates with the chipset. Insisde the chipset is the memory controller and PCI-E, not the memory itself. Drive control and other things are in southbridge. The voltage of the FSB must be converted to the voltage of the ram FIRST, and vice-versa. The link between the cpu itself, and the FSB, is via cache and a crossbar, that converts the cpu volts to FSB volts, like the memory controlelr converts the FSB voltage to Memory voltage.



What do you think that the northbridge is? Unlike that diagram there are multiple traces between the northbridge and cpu. When the cpu needs to "speak" to the MCH it doesn't speak to this magic northbridge it speaks directly to the MCH. Same deal with the pci-e controller. 

My point is that this does not happen through the L2 cache like you seem to think. Once again *How does L2 cache effect memory bandwith?*

I am no electrical engineer much like yourself obviously. There is no voltage of the FSB being converted to the voltage of the ram, thats just gibberish.





> Different memory controllers, and add another memory channel, you get better bandwidth. And no, it's not really all that different...or it they would not both be using DDR2/DDR3. Timings and tolerances are different, but they are essentailly the same, conforming to JEDEC specs.



Thats a small part of the difference between the two architectures. They are nowhere near the same. Nehalem doesn't even have a FSB for starters. If the MCH was "just moved on die" you would see bandwith results much like we see on AM3. Have you ever seen a Nehalem memory bandwith bench it's very impressive and thats for a reason. There is also a reason that the chip is faster on apps that don't require much memory bandwith.



> Also, note that the "pro benchers" are still getting FPS increases by upping CPU speed. If the vga was a bottleneck, there'd be NO increase at all. Fact of the matter is that even 6ghz doesn't fully utilize a gpu to it's fullest extent. A cpu will only not be a bottleneck when increasing it's speed yeilds no perforamnce increase in FPS.



No, shit. A cpu scales very well with cpu benchmarks like 3Dmark06. 

Have you ever seen a benchamrk on the effects of overclocking while gaming, especially at higher resolutions? Diminishing returns would be putting it mildly, also normally non-existant past 4.0ghz and thats being generous. Your 6ghz comment is BS.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 4, 2010)

BababooeyHTJ said:


> You don't know that. Once again jumping to conclusions.


 Actually I DO know this, having had all these parts myself. You're jumping to conclusions here, bud. You have no idea how much experience I have specifically with 775 cpus.



> What do you think that the northbridge is? Unlike that diagram there are multiple traces between the northbridge and cpu. When the cpu needs to "speak" to the MCH it doesn't speak to this magic northbridge it speaks directly to the MCH. Same deal with the pci-e controller.


It's not the FSB. Really, the FSB is the interconnecting copper on the motherboard between cpu and chipset, and nothing more. QPI differs in that it's a point-to point connection(direct device-device exclusive), rather than a "bus"(many devices inclusive) the data travels along. They still serve the same purpose, however.



> My point is that this does not happen through the L2 cache like you seem to think. Once again *How does L2 cache effect memory bandwith?*






> I am no electrical engineer much like yourself obviously. There is no voltage of the FSB being converted to the voltage of the ram, thats just gibberish.



Really? Gibberish? You might want to check it out. Data travels along the FSB using GTL, and magically, according to you, increases itself in voltage to make it on to the ram. We have Memory Controllers for what, then? 






> Thats a small part of the difference between the two architectures. They are nowhere near the same. Nehalem doesn't even have a FSB for starters. If the MCH was "just moved on die" you would see bandwith results much like we see on AM3. Have you ever seen a Nehalem memory bandwith bench it's very impressive and thats for a reason. There is also a reason that the chip is faster on apps that don't require much memory bandwith.


QPI and FSB are the same thing..an interconnect between cpu and chipset. How they do it differs, so the name is different. 

If I have ever seen a i7 bench?  LoL. You realize it was me that spawned the B2B tweak going public for i7?





> No, shit. A cpu scales very well with cpu benchmarks like 3Dmark06.
> 
> Have you ever seen a benchamrk on the effects of overclocking while gaming, especially at higher resolutions? Diminishing returns would be putting it mildly, also normally non-existant past 4.0ghz and thats being generous. Your 6ghz comment is BS.



You're talking to the guy that has been running Crossfire since it was released to public, 30-inch monitors, S3D, and now, eyefinity. I know all about high-res gaming, been doing it for years. CAre to explain why the returns are diminishing? Perhaps yet another system bottleneck?

Cache and bandwidth...

Get and E2400, clock it to 3ghz.

Get an E8400, same settings for 3ghz.

Compare bandwidth.

Done.

As to why...maybe look at a die shot.

http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT030906143144&p=7

And with that, I'm done. BFBC2 is calling.


----------



## BababooeyHTJ (Mar 5, 2010)

I'm not going to continue to argue with you. I'm not sure if your bragging about I'm not sure what is supposed to impress me but it doesn't but if it satisfies your e-peen then whatever. Reputable posts with some good advice like we see from people like Mussles does on the other hand. Not saying buy a sound card and upgrade your cpu, I'm sorry but that is just poor advice. I'm done here believe what you want but apparently gaming can't be done on anything but a high end overclocked cpu. 

Bye


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 5, 2010)

Wasn't me who said to buy a sound card. Perhaps you are confused.


----------



## Wile E (Mar 5, 2010)

And absolutely nothing that you have said in any way translates to low cache cpus causing stutter. Sorry cadaveca, you are quite simply wrong in this argument, on ALL counts. It has been proven over and over again, even right here in these forums. Low cache cpus do not cause stutter, and they have little impact on real-world gaming performance. They hurt benchmarks, and that's about it.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 5, 2010)

LoL. You're taking it the wrong way then, because that's totally NOT what i am saying...merely that it has an impact on performance. The OP had enough mhz...enough vga...I've had an e7400, and in comparison to my E8400, feels quite slow.

Having gone through the Core2 gen since Conroe, I've seen how the added cache of the 45nm chips helps, too. Nevermind the perforamnce boost in memory they brought.

In the end, I'm not talking about anything other than ideals. A low cache cpu is NOT as ideal as one with larger cache, and this is becoming even more important as games get multi-threaded...they need the data for those threads in a very timely manner.


----------



## Wile E (Mar 5, 2010)

Yeah, but the OP was about stutter, and you automatically jumped on CPU. Single core Athlons can game perfectly smoothly. Sure, they suffer in performance somewhat, but they are smooth. Nobody said cache makes no difference, we all just said it makes LITTLE difference, especially in gaming.

As for the guy with audio problems, check drivers. I'd bet money that it's a driver or software issue. Perhaps AV softare is interfering? And don't some games have issues with Xfire and other chat type programs as well? Any dual core is capable of processing the sound of a video game without stuttering, so the issue has to be software.


----------



## phanbuey (Mar 5, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> LoL. You're taking it the wrong way then, because that's totally NOT what i am saying...merely that it has an impact on performance. The OP had enough mhz...enough vga...I've had an e7400, and in comparison to my E8400, feels quite slow.
> 
> Having gone through the Core2 gen since Conroe, I've seen how the added cache of the 45nm chips helps, too. Nevermind the perforamnce boost in memory they brought.
> 
> In the end, I'm not talking about anything other than ideals. A low cache cpu is NOT as ideal as one with larger cache, and this is becoming even more important as games get multi-threaded...they need the data for those threads in a very timely manner.



but he's talking about noticeable stutter... not a low framerate as a cpu  with low cahce would have...

I've played with CS:S and Single-core AMD semprons for a while.. and it wasnt until my first Athlon that I noticed it SMOOTHER than my sempron at the same clock.  But the sempron didnt stutter... it lagged... it felt sluggish, but it didnt stutter. 

I know the stutter he is talking about, and it was the same with my 750i chipset... i would have it too - 80 FPS and then a jerk - like the virus scanner just kicked in or something, only oddly, it would happen wayyy too often. The system was fast, had way more than enought GPU Vmem for 1680x1050 (2x gtx260's), but it would stutter.

As soon as I changed CPU's to the quadcore q9650... the system stuttered less, was less jerky, but still did it noticeably still. The problem was still there, but less pronounced.  Once i got the i5 750, the stutter was completely gone.

I'm guessing that the inefficient 750/780 nv chipset had something to do with it.  My farcry2 and Crysis warhead benches also improved by close to 40% with the same gfx combination.  Cache is definitely great for 3d games, but im not sure that it has to do with the jerkiness of the system.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 5, 2010)

phanbuey said:


> I'm guessing that the inefficient 750/780 nv chipset had something to do with it.  My farcry2 and Crysis warhead benches also improved by close to 40% with the same gfx combination.  Cache is definitely great for 3d games, but im not sure that it has to do with the jerkiness of the system.



nV didn't exactly have the best 775 chipsets. In fact, as a final chipset, it was embarassing..

But you know, bringing the memory controller out of the chipset, and right next to the cache of the cpu has enormous benefits when done right.

And as to why, really it's so important to performacne, and not just gaming, and would be why they had shared cache on Core2 chips. Keeping it this way in i7 was very important, as data going to the 4th core has much farther to travel than the 1st, as the QPI link is next to one core's cache only. With a shared cache, any core can read something pretty much as soon as it hits the L3, without waiting for a crossbar managing data to the cores from the chipset link(as in 775 quads)in the way.

I'm convinced that a shared cache and triple channel mem would have Phenom performing as well, if not better, than i7. But in the end, AMD's Phenom target market isn't the same as i7. 

AMD semprons are kinda moot to this point, as memory is so close(since 754 AMD has had IMC, this is what made them so good far gaming back then, remember?), but with 775, and it being so far away, cache becomes oh so much more important, and why, currently, i7 is so much better than AMD for gaming...it's all about cache and memory control.


----------



## rahulyo (Mar 5, 2010)

Is mobo cause stuttering/low performance problem ???


----------



## LoneReaction (Mar 5, 2010)

phanbuey said:


> I know the stutter he is talking about, and it was the same with my 750i chipset... i would have it too - 80 FPS and then a jerk - like the virus scanner just kicked in or something, only oddly, it would happen wayyy too often. The system was fast, had way more than enought GPU Vmem for 1680x1050 (2x gtx260's), but it would stutter.



I feel kinda bad that I caused members to have tension in this thread =X

Thinking about it more, the stutter I experienced back in my E7200 setup, with any game, is what the quote above describes. 

However, with CPU intensive (was using 100% on E7200) games like dragon age, it's more like the game skips a frame every second, or 2 seconds. Consistently. I think it would be impossible to capture this on fraps (because running it changes things) or on a digicam, unless it's a high speed one.

It could be the software that cause this, but I just remembered that I've been with XP, Vista, and Win 7 on the E7200, and all of them behaved identically.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 5, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> LoL. You're taking it the wrong way then, because that's totally NOT what i am saying...merely that it has an impact on performance. The OP had enough mhz...enough vga...I've had an e7400, and in comparison to my E8400, feels quite slow.
> 
> Having gone through the Core2 gen since Conroe, I've seen how the added cache of the 45nm chips helps, too. Nevermind the perforamnce boost in memory they brought.
> 
> In the end, I'm not talking about anything other than ideals. A low cache cpu is NOT as ideal as one with larger cache, and this is becoming even more important as games get multi-threaded...they need the data for those threads in a very timely manner.



and i've been on core 2 since allendale. if those CPU's caused stuttering, everyone would have been far worse off on the older CPU's they upgraded from...

you've made an assumption, and we all know its wrong. simple as that. cache is NOT the cause. if you have shit onboard sound that depends on the CPU, maybe its upgrading to the faster CPU that helps? maybe a soundcard would do the same thing?

OCing, faster per clock (cache), better sound card... ya know, theres more than one solution here.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 5, 2010)

Then why does he no longer have any issues? And ya gotta drop the whoel soudncard thing..wasn't me suggesting changing a soundcard.

The answer "software" doesn't do it for me. 

And like I said in the quote, he's pushing his system to the limit. We are talking about a specific situation, not "in general". Could have just been the overclock itself causing the problem, and I'm more inclined to go with that than the "unknown software" cause.

It would be intersting to see if he's installed all the same software, and when he does, if it causes stutter...because if it WASN'T the cpu, than he'd be subject to the same problem.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 5, 2010)

uhhh... we're saying a soundcard might have fixed it. Not dropping it, cause its probably a working solution as opposed to just the CPU one.

If you hadnt realized we were mentioning that as an alternative to a CPU with more cache, you arent reading our posts...


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 5, 2010)

No, I'm reading, and when 2mb of cache equates 200mhz of performance, you're simply arguing to be argumentative, it seems!

The difference is, you're looking just at performance via mhz, and in the end, agreeing with me, in a way. Performance does not have to be had by mhz alone...cache is just another option, similar to a sound card. But as others have mentioned, in Vista and Win7, all sound uses cpu time, so replacing a soundcard is kinda moot, unless you got a board with a bad codec, and today codecs are pretty damn good.



LoneReaction said:


> It could be the software that cause this, but I just remembered that I've been with XP, Vista, and Win 7 on the E7200, and all of them behaved identically.



And there ya go. 3 OSes, same issue, gone with cpu upgrade.


In the end, it's not mhz he was lacking, and this is my point. So we gotta look elsewhere, and I said cache, plain and simple. Buying another cpu with 2MB would have had the same issues. Personally, I think a 45nm Core2 would have done just fine, but maybe not.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Mar 6, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> I'm convinced that a shared cache and triple channel mem would have Phenom performing as well, if not better, than i7. But in the end, AMD's Phenom target market isn't the same as i7.



That makes no sense whatsoever. i7's perform almost the exact same when they are run in dual channel. I ran one of my i7's with dual channel memory for a while until I found a good tri-channel kit for it. It had the same PPD then as it does now, when at the same clocks. Phenom II would have to have better performance numbers to be able to take advantage of triple channel memory and have it make a difference. AMD did the right thing keeping it dual channel as it simply isn't fast enough to take advantage of triple channel. They have to walk before they can run. i7 is even far from taking full advantage from triple channel.

I am just stating it from experience and benchmarks.

AMD is a generation behind Intel. Nvidia is a generation behind ATi. I have faith in all these four companies because it is all we have got to choose from in such a limited market.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 6, 2010)

triple channel would only really help if you had all 8 threads hammering away at something like video encoding - its intels future proofing, not something that really benefits us right now.


----------



## cadaveca (Mar 6, 2010)

DaedalusHelios said:


> That makes no sense whatsoever.



I was refering to bandwidth only.


----------



## Wile E (Mar 6, 2010)

cadaveca said:


> No, I'm reading, and when 2mb of cache equates 200mhz of performance, you're simply arguing to be argumentative, it seems!
> 
> The difference is, you're looking just at performance via mhz, and in the end, agreeing with me, in a way. Performance does not have to be had by mhz alone...cache is just another option, similar to a sound card. But as others have mentioned, in Vista and Win7, all sound uses cpu time, so replacing a soundcard is kinda moot, unless you got a board with a bad codec, and today codecs are pretty damn good.
> 
> ...


No, a Bad OC can cause issues. Bad chipset drivers can cause issues that will show up across all OSes. A bad BIOS revision can cause it. Bad graphics driver, bad sound driver, etc., etc. Still does not prove anything.

There are mountains of evidence that proves low cache cpus can game perfectly well, without stutter or poor performance, a ton of which is right on this site. Hell, DaMulta even showed us an older Athlon Single core with single channel ram was perfectly capable of gaming on an 8800GT, albiet at a reduced framerate, but smooth as butter.

Sorry, you are still flat out wrong, and barking up the wrong tree. It's simply not the cpu cache. We would be hearing about a hell of a lot more issues if low-cache cpus caused stuttering.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Mar 6, 2010)

Wile E said:


> No, a Bad OC can cause issues. Bad chipset drivers can cause issues that will show up across all OSes. A bad BIOS revision can cause it. Bad graphics driver, bad sound driver, etc., etc. Still does not prove anything.
> 
> There are mountains of evidence that proves low cache cpus can game perfectly well, without stutter or poor performance, a ton of which is right on this site. Hell, DaMulta even showed us an older Athlon Single core with single channel ram was perfectly capable of gaming on an 8800GT, albiet at a reduced framerate, but smooth as butter.
> 
> Sorry, you are still flat out wrong, and barking up the wrong tree. It's simply not the cpu cache. We would be hearing about a hell of a lot more issues if low-cache cpus caused stuttering.



I agree. I just see cache size comparisons are only valid on the same architecture too. Cache makes a CPU faster per clock when compared with another CPU of the same architecture. But it doesn't mean it necessarily could be bad enough to cause stuttering. That would have to be one incredibly slow CPU IMO. So I suppose it is possible in an extreme situation. Like a gtx 295 being driven by an early sempron somehow. But not in the OP's situation. I remember a micro stutter in early 9800gx2 drivers making me get a little nauseated but that was the launch driver's fault in a multi-GPU configuration.


----------



## Mussels (Mar 6, 2010)

one cause for stutter, the original CPU had bad thermal paste and overheated/throttled a lot - new CPU may appear to have fixed the issue, but it could have been as simple as that.

its a possibility, but its far more likely than cache being a magic bullet.


----------



## hellrazor (Mar 8, 2010)

DaedalusHelios said:


> I agree. I just see cache size comparisons are only valid on the same architecture too. Cache makes a CPU faster per clock when compared with another CPU of the same architecture. But it doesn't mean it necessarily could be bad enough to cause stuttering. That would have to be one incredibly slow CPU IMO. So I suppose it is possible in an extreme situation. Like a gtx 295 being driven by an early sempron somehow. But not in the OP's situation. I remember a micro stutter in early 9800gx2 drivers making me get a little nauseated but that was the launch driver's fault in a multi-GPU configuration.



Wait, he did get all new drivers (and game patches) before buying a new CPU, right? I'm not reading through 7 pages of people complaining about Rapelay just to figure it out (Oh, I mentioned it, please don't take my posting privs). It could have been a bad driver taking way too much in a certain situation (textures being loaded, a decent change in poly count, a special effect, etc.) and the CPU could have just added bandwidth between the GPU and itself, causing a smaller percentage of it to be taken up during the certain situation, leaving more to be used by normal stuff (animation, effects, lighting, etc.).

I'm not taking sides here, just a thought.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Mar 9, 2010)

Wile E said:


> No, a Bad OC can cause issues. Bad chipset drivers can cause issues that will show up across all OSes. A bad BIOS revision can cause it. Bad graphics driver, bad sound driver, etc., etc. Still does not prove anything.
> 
> There are mountains of evidence that proves low cache cpus can game perfectly well, without stutter or poor performance, a ton of which is right on this site. Hell, DaMulta even showed us an older Athlon Single core with single channel ram was perfectly capable of gaming on an 8800GT, albiet at a reduced framerate, but smooth as butter.
> 
> Sorry, you are still flat out wrong, and barking up the wrong tree. It's simply not the cpu cache. We would be hearing about a hell of a lot more issues if low-cache cpus caused stuttering.



I used to game just fine on a 4200x2. Hell I played all the way through Fallout 3 with that thing.


----------

