Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

[OT] Possible issue with my comp?....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    [OT] Possible issue with my comp?....

    I have a 3.0 Prescott.. changed from a 2.0 willamette quite resently.
    ONS/AS map load times have trippeld and sometimes my game freezes for like 1<->15 seconds (static image looping sound) very anoying since it's frequent.

    Guess what I found?





    Does hyper threading mean that it shows ups like 2?...

    Becuse I've counted many times and it's only 1 proc on my 1 proc MOBO

    #2
    Hyperthreading will make it show up as 2, but it isnt HT because I have a 3.0 with HT. Check the heat of the chip and make sure you have a big enough PSU(which im sure you do)

    Comment


      #3
      Yes, Intel has come up with a very retarded concept: convincing the OS that the computer has two processors when in reality it only has one. For some things this works fine, (like typing a document up in WordPad, creating a new folder, or making nineteen shortcuts to your AOL icon ), but all in all I fail to see the logic in the concept of “shared everything” architecture. I like the idea of “shared nothing” architecture, so that there is no single point of failure, since there is always an “empty highway without speed limits” with which the data can go speeding down.

      I know that Xeons do this, but I don’t know about “Prescott” (sounds like the name of a feminine honor roll boy who wears fuzzy pink sweaters).

      I hope my rant about Intel’s retardation helps.

      Comment


        #4
        IIRC HT is **** for games anyway (especially non-SMP-supporting ones, such as UT.) Turn it off, unless you intend to be doing plenty of video editing or something

        Comment


          #5
          How do I turn it off? BIOS?

          Carl_1 it never goes above 45 degrees and I have a 400W PSU

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by KriLL3.2™
            How do I turn it off? BIOS?

            Carl_1 it never goes above 45 degrees and I have a 400W PSU
            I don't know.... probably BIOS though. (Call me back once I have something better than this 1.8GHz :sour: )

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by KriLL3.2™
              How do I turn it off? BIOS?

              Carl_1 it never goes above 45 degrees and I have a 400W PSU
              Why would you want to turn it off?

              If you want to, it's in the BIOS.

              Comment


                #8
                Ya its in the bios


                Originally posted by LittleDonny
                Yes, Intel has come up with a very retarded concept: convincing the OS that the computer has two processors when in reality it only has one. For some things this works fine, (like typing a document up in WordPad, creating a new folder, or making nineteen shortcuts to your AOL icon ), but all in all I fail to see the logic in the concept of �shared everything� architecture. I like the idea of �shared nothing� architecture, so that there is no single point of failure, since there is always an �empty highway without speed limits� with which the data can go speeding down.

                I know that Xeons do this, but I don�t know about �Prescott� (sounds like the name of a feminine honor roll boy who wears fuzzy pink sweaters).

                I hope my rant about Intel�s retardation helps.
                Do I smell an AMD fanboy? HT doesnt 'trick' the PC into thinking it has two processors. It uses the left over resources in the execution bus that the thread before it leaves (from cache misses etc. Yea you will loose 1-2 FPS but loading times will decrease ALOT.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Carl_1
                  Do I smell an AMD fanboy?
                  Nope. I don’t use products containing Intel CPUs nor do I use products containing AMD chips. I’ve been known to use chips made by MIPS, Motorola, and IBM though. The irony is that I work for a company founded in 1975 who relied heavily upon MIPS architecture, who was purchased in 1998 by a PC company from Texass, only to be purchased a few years later by a Cupertino/Palo Alto based PC company. Their marketing idiots are trying to sell everyone on Intel’s destination-less roadmap, whereas the real-world nature of the number of transactions per second required for high-end financial transaction server applications in addition to total cost of ownership and total operating cost per kilowatt hour parameters would dictate that IBM or Motorlola chips would fit ideally, and even using AMD chips would cut the power bill in half. Even the U.S. Army and a select few universities are using more practical hardware for such intensive applications.

                  HT doesnt 'trick' the PC into thinking it has two processors. It uses the left over resources in the execution bus that the thread before it leaves (from cache misses etc. Yea you will loose 1-2 FPS but loading times will decrease ALOT.
                  Technicaly one would lose 1-2 FPS, unless their CPU socket is loose.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    whereas the real-world nature of the number of transactions per second required for high-end financial transaction server applications in addition to total cost of ownership and total operating cost per kilowatt hour parameters would dictate that IBM or Motorlola chips would fit ideally
                    With no commas I just start reading faster and faster and then my head asplode. :bulb:

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Carl_1

                      Do I smell an AMD fanboy? HT doesnt 'trick' the PC into thinking it has two processors. It uses the left over resources in the execution bus that the thread before it leaves (from cache misses etc. Yea you will loose 1-2 FPS but loading times will decrease ALOT.
                      And you're not an Intel fanboy? For all intents and purposes, it does trick the OS into thinking there are two processors. Multi-threading is not the same as multi-processing. Don't get me wrong, I think it's a very neat concept, but I dislike the marketing **** behind it. I'll wait for dual-cores, thank you very much. A dual CPU machine, each with dual cores, each with HT, each with 512k L1 cache and 2MB L2 cache, non-recursive. Yeah, that's what I'm waiting for. And my 486DX2-66 is serving me fine until that day!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X