|
When using this resource, please read FragKrag's opening post. The Tech Support forum regulars have helped create countless of desktop systems without any compensation. The least you can do is provide all of the information required for them to help you properly. |
On June 23 2011 12:35 mav451 wrote:
That said, I wonder how much legitimacy there is for rumors last year of former eVGA mobo engineers going to Sapphire. There was never really an official corroboration on the matter, and the only press release from eVGA dodged this direct question.
I'd say the rumors of them losing their entire team would indeed be legit considering their current situation. If they still had their motherboard team, it would make no sense for a company that is targeting the enthusiast segment to only release P67 boards (that still aren't readily available) after Z68 boards have been released.
|
When ebay will get flooded with AMD 5xxx, will there be anything worth getting? (Remember, my goal is still to set up that eyefinity ^^) the 6xxx 2g are so expensive XD
|
How much performance boost will i experience from changing AMD X2 4400+ to i3 - 2100?
My GPU will stay the same. its XFX 9800GT..
My current FPS in TF2 With Lowest setting. 20~40fps in 32 man serv.
My current FPS in SC2 with Lowest wetting. 40~50fps? Drops drastically when 200 vs 200
Thanks.
|
Thought I'd recant my earlier experience with the Corsair H50 vs the CoolerMaster Hyper 212. Earlier, I said there was no difference between the two.
There is a HUGE difference when you install it right! :D
I turned my fan around to push cold air into the radiator instead of pulling hot air away from the radiator, added a 2nd fan for push pull and now my temps at 100% load are < 50 celcius!!!
And this was when they were bouncing off the 70s to 75s before!
K...totally makes a difference. :D Thought I would share hehe.
|
That CPU is considered ancient...
|
On June 23 2011 12:47 XenOmega wrote:
When ebay will get flooded with AMD 5xxx, will there be anything worth getting? (Remember, my goal is still to set up that eyefinity ^^) the 6xxx 2g are so expensive XD
Oh hell yes. 6970s, 5870s will be the the top of the heap, but 5850s and the like will be great as well. 5850s are a great deal quieter under load than 5870s.
|
On June 23 2011 13:04 Disregard wrote:
That CPU is considered ancient...
If you are refering to my Amd x2 4400+
That's very well said. :D
|
The difference between an Athlon 4400+ and a core i3 2100 is quite drastic. You're probably going to be well above 100 FPS with a core i3 2100 and 9800 GT at the start of a Starcraft II game.
|
On June 23 2011 13:06 benbrad2 wrote:If you are refering to my Amd x2 4400+ That's very well said. :D
Your performance increase to an i3 2100 would be closer to infinity percent than zero, I believe...
|
Will I be getting 100+ fps on TF2 in 32 man server?
(Med setting)
|
Not sure what FPS you'll get in TF2 but the 9800GT is definitely capable of handling the game on high with a decent processor.
|
On June 23 2011 13:11 benbrad2 wrote:
Will I be getting 100+ fps on TF2 in 32 man server?
(Med setting)
I would think so. I went from mid 50's to mid 80's, just going from a 3Ghz A64 to a stock e8400; that was in 2008 when I still had a 8800GT. The i3 2100 should probably give you 100FPS average, with maybe some dips to 90's.
*Hmm I play on slightly smaller servers though. Let's just say your minimum FPS should stay above 75 all the time, I think that's more than fair.
|
As a average FPS? I highly doubt it, maybe during more idle periods. Just make sure you enable multicore rendering.
edit: i5 760 @ Stock | 4770 512MB |
LFD2 - 1440x900, High Settings, No AA/AF
Max FPS around 165-175
MIN FPS around 75-80
|
|
|
On June 23 2011 13:19 Disregard wrote:
As a average FPS? I highly doubt it, maybe during more idle periods. Just make sure you enable multicore rendering.
edit: i5 760 @ Stock | 4770 512MB |
LFD2 - 1440x900, High Settings, No AA/AF
Max FPS around 165-175
MIN FPS around 75-80
Why are you posting LFD2 numbers when we're talking TF2? :p
LFD2 is one of the few Source games that became GPU-limited as you ramped up the setting/details.
|
On June 23 2011 13:23 Raagruk wrote:<3
No offense, but the heart was directed at Empyrean, who I was giving a rather smartass answer to, but I love, because he's a staff type that actually answered a question in the Tech Support feedback thread, before I spazzed out.
On June 23 2011 13:26 mav451 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 13:19 Disregard wrote:
As a average FPS? I highly doubt it, maybe during more idle periods. Just make sure you enable multicore rendering.
edit: i5 760 @ Stock | 4770 512MB |
LFD2 - 1440x900, High Settings, No AA/AF
Max FPS around 165-175
MIN FPS around 75-80
Why are you posting LFD2 numbers when we're talking TF2? :p LFD2 is one of the few Source games that became GPU-limited as you ramped up the setting/details.
Shhh, you're confusing the issue with all those facts and details...
|
On June 23 2011 13:26 mav451 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 23 2011 13:19 Disregard wrote:
As a average FPS? I highly doubt it, maybe during more idle periods. Just make sure you enable multicore rendering.
edit: i5 760 @ Stock | 4770 512MB |
LFD2 - 1440x900, High Settings, No AA/AF
Max FPS around 165-175
MIN FPS around 75-80
Why are you posting LFD2 numbers when we're talking TF2? :p LFD2 is one of the few Source games that became GPU-limited as you ramped up the setting/details.
I suppose they were the same Source engine just gradually updated. 
|
so i3 2100 + XFX 9800 GT
SC2 Med setting = 90+fps average?
TF2 Med Setting = 75+ fps average?
|
On June 23 2011 13:38 benbrad2 wrote:
so i3 2100 + XFX 9800 GT
SC2 Med setting = 90+fps average?
TF2 Med Setting = 75+ fps average?
Nobody will give you those exact fps benchmarks, I am sure everyone will assure you it will not dip below 60 in the majority of your playtime. Unless someone corrects me because of slight differences. No offense with the rational remarks. Haha!
|
On June 23 2011 13:38 benbrad2 wrote:
so i3 2100 + XFX 9800 GT
SC2 Med setting = 90+fps average?
TF2 Med Setting = 75+ fps average?
That's not quite it. I mention the minimum value as this is the absolute worst-case scenario for your config. Just like the "beginning of game" FPS that skyR mentioned, without context, it has no meaning. You need to consider both min/max FPS numbers to gain a true understanding of your average FPS. IMO, median FPS is the most useful, but it takes some work to get that information.
Consider TR's SB review:
+ Show Spoiler +
Find the i3 2100. Note that the min FPS is drastically lower than the average. This indicates that the game is rarely in that worst-case scenario situation - it basically crosses the 40FPS line just once.
+ Show Spoiler +
However, like anything in real life, we always prepare for the worst just-in case.
Now if we translate that thinking to TF2, how many times do you anticipate hitting a worst-case scenario? I.e. as the time winds down for CP maps? Ditto with PL maps as it nears the end, where you are likely to have all 32 players in the same space, at the same time? In the greater scheme (when you aren't close to capping or the PL is still far away), your average FPS will be far greater than the minimum FPS I've stated. However, like anything else, the minimum FPS is always useful to know and to plan for.
Cliff-notes - you shouldn't be worrying about your FPS after your upgrade. The end :D
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://techreport.com/r.x/sandy-bridge/sc2.gif)
![[image loading]](http://techreport.com/r.x/sandy-bridge/sc2-class2.gif)
