EPT![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v416/dave374/driver.jpg)
Now, I'm quite sure the PSU (the XFX 650w) can handle it, even though I have no instruments to test it...
Temperatures aren't that high (around 65C at load) and this happens even at stock clock/voltages. Anyone got an idea?
Computer Build Resource Thread - Page 678
| Forum Index > Tech Support |
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. | ||
|
Shauni
4077 Posts
Now, I'm quite sure the PSU (the XFX 650w) can handle it, even though I have no instruments to test it... Temperatures aren't that high (around 65C at load) and this happens even at stock clock/voltages. Anyone got an idea? | ||
Womwomwom
5930 Posts
| ||
|
Shauni
4077 Posts
| ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
On October 22 2011 23:00 Shauni wrote: Well yeah, it's a cheat if you're arguing semantics. You could also argue that normal overclocking or overvolting can be cheating... In any case, it was a cheat that most likely favored AMD, so I don't see why they'd want to remove it. How does it favor AMD if you get a 300$ product for 200$? That makes no sense. That makes them lose 100$ every time someone wants the 300$ product but gets the 200$ product instead. Also sending a hate-mail about it is like mailing a record company " YOUR ALBUM SUCKS, I CAN'T FIND IT ON PIRATEBAY"... There really is something wrong with the assumptions of entitlement there.(Okay a better example would be say, collectors edition, and buying the normal one and sending hate mail about not getting collectors edition for the same price although it's priced higher) Hmm Finnish computer forums seem really bad, everyone over there also recommends totally overkill components, I still don't understand why when a person states his resolution is 1280x1024 and he wants to upgrade his Core 2 Quad processor and 8800 for some games, people say "if your budget allows it get 2500k and 6950" when it should be obvious the processor's good enough and they should instead consider GT 420 or perhaps 6670 or something. I just don't understand people. -_- | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
| ||
|
Womwomwom
5930 Posts
On October 23 2011 08:18 Shauni wrote: I don't think so? Maybe I had Opera in the background, but it'd seem unlikely to happen because of that.. Hardware acceleration is what generally causes AMD's drivers to shit their pants. PowerPlay has three states it runs in. The second state, where the GPU is being used but isn't being stressed, is broken. The memory in this state is clocked far too low (we're talking about 100mhz low), so it crashes when ever its being used in this state. Hmm Finnish computer forums seem really bad, everyone over there also recommends totally overkill components, I still don't understand why when a person states his resolution is 1280x1024 and he wants to upgrade his Core 2 Quad processor and 8800 for some games, people say "if your budget allows it get 2500k and 6950" when it should be obvious the processor's good enough and they should instead consider GT 420 or perhaps 6670 or something. I just don't understand people. -_- Depending on what he wants to play, the processor is a fair recommendation. Resolution is utterly dictated by the GPU and the GPU alone. As much as the HD6950 is too much, getting an i5 2500k for a low resolution is not overkill if he's playing games that will need that processing power (flight simulators for instance). That doesn't take into account that he might swap out that dinosaur of a monitor (who uses 1280x1024 to play anything?) for something better. Computer nerds are the worst kind of nerds in existence but there might be some logic behind their recommendations. | ||
|
Madoga
Netherlands471 Posts
On October 23 2011 08:33 Shikyo wrote: Hmm Finnish computer forums seem really bad, everyone over there also recommends totally overkill components, I still don't understand why when a person states his resolution is 1280x1024 and he wants to upgrade his Core 2 Quad processor and 8800 for some games, people say "if your budget allows it get 2500k and 6950" when it should be obvious the processor's good enough and they should instead consider GT 420 or perhaps 6670 or something. I just don't understand people. -_- Same here. Than you try to argue your point with some good benchmarks. Then they counter your arguements with one flimsy benchmark from some site that has no clue what they are talking about or say something along the lines of:"we can keep trowing benchmarks at eachother but (inset bad excuse)". For example: People keep advising the coolermaster GX650/750W, since: "Coolermaster is a top psu brand". Which is allways followed by some review from a dutch site that gave the coolermaster GX (no, not even the bronze version) an award. Not only are those psu's bad, the wattage they advise is allways mega overkill. Its very frustrating since you have to argue each and every single post you make. /end rant | ||
|
Medrea
10003 Posts
| ||
|
Shauni
4077 Posts
On October 23 2011 08:46 Womwomwom wrote: Hardware acceleration is what generally causes AMD's drivers to shit their pants. PowerPlay has three states it runs in. The second state, where the GPU is being used but isn't being stressed, is broken. The memory in this state is clocked far too low (we're talking about 100mhz low), so it crashes when ever its being used in this state. My own computer has run one of the 6950 for a long time though with lots of different multitasking applications and the same drivers without any issue whatsoever... I think it might be related to the CF, but I'm not sure what's making it crash. | ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
On October 23 2011 08:33 Shikyo wrote:+ Show Spoiler + On October 22 2011 23:00 Shauni wrote: Well yeah, it's a cheat if you're arguing semantics. You could also argue that normal overclocking or overvolting can be cheating... In any case, it was a cheat that most likely favored AMD, so I don't see why they'd want to remove it. How does it favor AMD if you get a 300$ product for 200$? That makes no sense. That makes them lose 100$ every time someone wants the 300$ product but gets the 200$ product instead. Also sending a hate-mail about it is like mailing a record company " YOUR ALBUM SUCKS, I CAN'T FIND IT ON PIRATEBAY"... There really is something wrong with the assumptions of entitlement there.(Okay a better example would be say, collectors edition, and buying the normal one and sending hate mail about not getting collectors edition for the same price although it's priced higher) Hmm Finnish computer forums seem really bad, everyone over there also recommends totally overkill components, I still don't understand why when a person states his resolution is 1280x1024 and he wants to upgrade his Core 2 Quad processor and 8800 for some games, people say "if your budget allows it get 2500k and 6950" when it should be obvious the processor's good enough and they should instead consider GT 420 or perhaps 6670 or something. I just don't understand people. -_- Your reasoning is flawed. It does favor AMD fyi. A 6950 isn't sold below costs so they aren't losing any money when someone purchases a 6950. If that individual decides to flash it to a 6970 than yes you could argue that they lost the difference in price between the 6950 and 6970. But it's better to lose the difference in price between your own products than to lose the entire sale to a GTX 560 Ti or GTX 570. Pirating music is the equivalent to stealing, not the equivalent to risking money spent for something better that costs more. And the other example wasn't that much better. I'm sure the brilliant individuals at AMD thought of this marketing ploy because it's pretty stupid if the engineers overlooked the uses of the dual BIOS switch. This isn't out of reach since they do this sort of thing for their processors. If the individual is looking for an upgrade even if his resolution is abysmal, he's obviously not satisfied with the performance he's getting currently with his C2Q and 8800GT. So recommending a GT420 which is miles worse or a Radeon HD6670 which is negligibly better is pretty stupid. Most people aren't looking for negligible upgrades. And he did spend $200+ on a 8800GT and $300+ on a C2Q three years ago so spending $200 and $300 for a 2500k and a 6950 for another three years doesn't seem unreasonable at all. | ||
|
mormonaculous
United States33 Posts
| ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
| ||
|
mormonaculous
United States33 Posts
On October 23 2011 11:11 skyR wrote: It'll still be doing the same amount of calculations regardless of what resolution the game is being played at so the resolution should have no impact on your processor choice. True, but if the FPS difference is, say, 60 vs. 80 on my resolution, I probably wouldn't notice, as opposed to something like 40 vs. 60. | ||
|
Interloper
Sweden217 Posts
I'm about to upgrade my rig and these are the parts i've picked out so far: Processor: Intel Core™ i7 Quad Processor i7-2600K 3,4GHz, Socket LGA1155, 8MB, Boxed Motherboard: ASUS Sabertooth P67, Socket-1155 ATX, P67, DDR3, 2xPCIe(2.0)x16, CFX& SLI, SATA 6Gb/s, USB 3.0, FW, BT, EFI RAM: Corsair Vengeance™ DDR3 1600MHz 8GB CL9 Kit w/2x 4GB XMS3 modules, CL9-9-9-24, 1.5V, Vengeance Heatspreader, 240 pin Can some one give thier opinion on the parts in general? Anyone own these parts and have some input to give? Is there anything obviously stupid with this setup and are there any other parts i could get which would be better and so forth? I have been out of the loop for a while and i'm having some trouble to understand everything again so to speak ^^. Also, what GPU should i get for this setup? | ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
On October 23 2011 11:14 mormonaculous wrote: True, but if the FPS difference is, say, 60 vs. 80 on my resolution, I probably wouldn't notice, as opposed to something like 40 vs. 60. This depends on the game. But the difference between a core i3 2100 and core i5 2400 is 300MHz at most which isn't that big of a deal. The majority of games will benefit more from a stronger GPU than a stronger CPU. There are those rare cases such as Starcraft II that aren't graphic intensive at all but destroys the processor. On October 23 2011 11:16 Interloper wrote:+ Show Spoiler + Idk where to put this but this thread feels right. I'm about to upgrade my rig and these are the parts i've picked out so far: Processor: Intel Core™ i7 Quad Processor i7-2600K 3,4GHz, Socket LGA1155, 8MB, Boxed Motherboard: ASUS Sabertooth P67, Socket-1155 ATX, P67, DDR3, 2xPCIe(2.0)x16, CFX& SLI, SATA 6Gb/s, USB 3.0, FW, BT, EFI RAM: Corsair Vengeance™ DDR3 1600MHz 8GB CL9 Kit w/2x 4GB XMS3 modules, CL9-9-9-24, 1.5V, Vengeance Heatspreader, 240 pin Can some one give thier opinion on the parts in general? Anyone own these parts and have some input to give? Is there anything obviously stupid with this setup and are there any other parts i could get which would be better and so forth? I have been out of the loop for a while and i'm having some trouble to understand everything again so to speak ^^. Also, what GPU should i get for this setup ASUS Sabertooth is a premium board with a five year warranty. If you're selecting this board, you should be planning to do a multi-GPU configuration with a ~$300+ GPU (Radeon HD6950, HD6970, GTX 570, GTX 580, etc). These premium types of boards are a waste of money for most people and if you need to be asking for advice than it's probably a waste of money. Most people are fine with ~$120 boards for single GPU configurations and up to ~$150 boards for multi-GPU configurations. If you have specific needs (connectivity) and wants (warranty, service, aesthetics, etc) than you know what they are so select a board that suits your needs and wants. Corsair Vengeance is usually overpriced in comparison to other 1600MHz kits, mainly from GSkill. 1600MHz memory also provides almost no benefits over 1333MHz: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/memory/display/sandy-bridge-ddr3.html http://www.anandtech.com/show/4503/sandy-bridge-memory-scaling-choosing-the-best-ddr3 http://techreport.com/articles.x/20377 So it's best to spend this money elsewhere or save it unless you are already getting premium components in which case you are so it doesn't really matter. The 2600k also provides little to no benefits in gaming since most if not all games cannot utilize more than four threads, and only very few even utilize four threads. You should only be getting this processor if the applications you are using are multithreaded (encoding, editing, professional tasks). | ||
|
mormonaculous
United States33 Posts
On October 23 2011 11:34 skyR wrote: This depends on the game. But the difference between a core i3 2100 and core i5 2400 is 300MHz at most which isn't that big of a deal. The majority of games will benefit from a stronger GPU than a CPU. There are those rare cases such as Starcraft II that aren't graphic intensive at all but destroys the processor. Ok, that makes sense. So in SC2 (which is the main game I play), how would 300MHz translate into performance? I'm really only aiming for maxed settings 1v1 with at least 50 FPS, I don't really care about 4v4 with all-maxed armies. | ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
On October 23 2011 09:30 skyR wrote: Then if that's how it is, why aren't they just selling 6970s for 200$?Your reasoning is flawed. It does favor AMD fyi. A 6950 isn't sold below costs so they aren't losing any money when someone purchases a 6950. If that individual decides to flash it to a 6970 than yes you could argue that they lost the difference in price between the 6950 and 6970. But it's better to lose the difference in price between your own products than to lose the entire sale to a GTX 560 Ti or GTX 570. Pirating music is the equivalent to stealing, not the equivalent to risking money spent for something better that costs more. And the other example wasn't that much better. I'm sure the brilliant individuals at AMD thought of this marketing ploy because it's pretty stupid if the engineers overlooked the uses of the dual BIOS switch. This isn't out of reach since they do this sort of thing for their processors. If the individual is looking for an upgrade even if his resolution is abysmal, he's obviously not satisfied with the performance he's getting currently with his C2Q and 8800GT. So recommending a GT420 which is miles worse or a Radeon HD6670 which is negligibly better is pretty stupid. Most people aren't looking for negligible upgrades. And he did spend $200+ on a 8800GT and $300+ on a C2Q three years ago so spending $200 and $300 for a 2500k and a 6950 for another three years doesn't seem unreasonable at all. .... On October 23 2011 11:44 mormonaculous wrote: Ok, that makes sense. So in SC2 (which is the main game I play), how would 300MHz translate into performance? I'm really only aiming for maxed settings 1v1 with at least 50 FPS, I don't really care about 4v4 with all-maxed armies. I'd go for a Pentium G840-860 for maximum bang-for-buck. i3 2100 is kind of a low upgrade for the price but could be worth it. | ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
| ||
|
skyR
Canada13817 Posts
On October 23 2011 12:06 Shikyo wrote:+ Show Spoiler + On October 23 2011 09:30 skyR wrote: Then if that's how it is, why aren't they just selling 6970s for 200$?Your reasoning is flawed. It does favor AMD fyi. A 6950 isn't sold below costs so they aren't losing any money when someone purchases a 6950. If that individual decides to flash it to a 6970 than yes you could argue that they lost the difference in price between the 6950 and 6970. But it's better to lose the difference in price between your own products than to lose the entire sale to a GTX 560 Ti or GTX 570. Pirating music is the equivalent to stealing, not the equivalent to risking money spent for something better that costs more. And the other example wasn't that much better. I'm sure the brilliant individuals at AMD thought of this marketing ploy because it's pretty stupid if the engineers overlooked the uses of the dual BIOS switch. This isn't out of reach since they do this sort of thing for their processors. If the individual is looking for an upgrade even if his resolution is abysmal, he's obviously not satisfied with the performance he's getting currently with his C2Q and 8800GT. So recommending a GT420 which is miles worse or a Radeon HD6670 which is negligibly better is pretty stupid. Most people aren't looking for negligible upgrades. And he did spend $200+ on a 8800GT and $300+ on a C2Q three years ago so spending $200 and $300 for a 2500k and a 6950 for another three years doesn't seem unreasonable at all. .... It's called making money. Basic business. | ||
|
Womwomwom
5930 Posts
On October 23 2011 09:05 Shauni wrote: My own computer has run one of the 6950 for a long time though with lots of different multitasking applications and the same drivers without any issue whatsoever... I think it might be related to the CF, but I'm not sure what's making it crash. The permanent fix is in the BIOS level I believe so that might be why your card doesn't shit its pants. Its a commonly reported issue so I think it might be worth a try. All of those AMD cards that crash while running Flash can fix this problem by creating a profile, with the correct memory values, within Catalyst. To be certain its the incorrect memory value, you create a new Catalyst profile, find the text file for that profile (its in C:\Users\Username\AppData\Local\ATI\ACE\Profiles), and check the given memory values. PowerPlay will have three states and for cards that crash often, its generally missing a whole digit or something stupid. Needless to say, changing the memory clock to something sensible will generally solve the issue. This also solves the flickering dual monitor ATI Overdrive issue as well. Of course it could be something else but its still worth checking out regardless because it solves a lot of issues AMD cards tend to have. | ||
| ||
