Curse

xigel · Mar 21, 2008, 04:35 AM // 04:35

Hey Guys,

I'm planning on upgrading my system and am weighing up between the E8650 and the Q6600. Graphic's will probably be a 8800GT. I'll probably stick with XP - haven't got a view on 32 vs 64 bit yet. But maybe 32bit.

Anyway, I like the idea of the future-proofing aspects of the Quad so am leaning towards that. I mostly only play GW (and I assume GW2 when it arrives).

I assume I shouldn't have any GW issues with the Quad? Anyone got any useful thoughts or comments on their experiences?

Cheers

Seraphim of Chaos · Mar 21, 2008, 04:44 AM // 04:44

Quad is actually overkill X 9001.

You'll be fine.

Brianna · Mar 21, 2008, 04:57 AM // 04:57

Well, a few things.

Guild Wars wasn't designed or optimized around Dual/Quad core processors, there for it has some problems..

Here's a few to start:

*The game may run in super slow/super speed.

*You may get bad FPS.

*The game can crash on you, or it can crash your whole entire system.

This is easily fixed by running ForceCore to make Guild Wars execute on only one processor.

Or, when Gw.exe is up in the processes tab, you go CTRL + ALT + Delete > Processes > Gw.exe > Right click > Set Affinity > Uncheck all CPU's except for one. Same thing that ForceCore does in a sense, except just manually.

Personally I've had some problems, severe lag, bad FPS with the game running on two cores, but never crashes. I run an AMD Dual Core right now.

I've noticed somewhat that Crashes are more common with Intel, and AMD just seems to get the bad lag bit.

Though running it with only one core doesn't really decrease performance much, and if it does then your 8800GT will back it up by far.

You'll be fine pretty much.

Mr D J · Mar 21, 2008, 05:11 AM // 05:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brianna

Well, a few things.

Guild Wars wasn't designed or optimized around Dual/Quad core processors, there for it has some problems..

Here's a few to start:

*The game may run in super slow/super speed.

*You may get bad FPS.

*The game can crash on you, or it can crash your whole entire system.

This is easily fixed by running ForceCore to make Guild Wars execute on only one processor.

Or, when Gw.exe is up in the processes tab, you go CTRL + ALT + Delete > Processes > Gw.exe > Right click > Set Affinity > Uncheck all CPU's except for one. Same thing that ForceCore does in a sense, except just manually.

Personally I've had some problems, severe lag, bad FPS with the game running on two cores, but never crashes. I run an AMD Dual Core right now.

I've noticed somewhat that Crashes are more common with Intel, and AMD just seems to get the bad lag bit.

Though running it with only one core doesn't really decrease performance much, and if it does then your 8800GT will back it up by far.

You'll be fine pretty much.

O_o you can't be serious...

If it wasn't designed for a dual core, it'll simply use 1 core...? I mean c'mon I've been using dual core for over a year now and I've been playing some REALLY REALLY old games (like early 90s old). Not a single problem. I don't know if AMD really messed up their dual cores but Intel has been working just fine for me. Aside from that, having 600 FPS does not affect the speed of the game in any way (multiplayer games that rely on the server that is). It will be there but you won't see it. I run counter-strike source and get 400+ FPS all the time... and even if you do encounter some FPS related issue, there's V-Sync which doesn't let FPS go above the frequency of your monitor. You could be experienced the problems you mentioned above because of a faulty hardware piece... not because the game wasn't designed for Dual core CPUs. It would be ridiculous if every game had to be redesigned for the Dual or Quad cores and I REALLY REALLY DOUBT anyone in the right mind would buy one if it was screwing with the games. That being said, OP, go get yourself a dual or a quad and enjoy it

EDIT forgot to add, GW CAN'T run super fast because all of your motions are monitored and recorded by the server to prevent speed hackers

Brianna · Mar 21, 2008, 05:20 AM // 05:20

I said that it may happen.

I play old games fine too. We're talking about Guild Wars here.

The first few months of playing on my dual core, I had no problems, but after time they started picking up.

This problem with Guild Wars happens more than it doesn't, it seems.

Or people just never notice the minor problems it may create, if it doesn't make big ones, like in my case.

If you don't believe me, ask some other techs around here, they'll tell you the same basically.

EDIT: Also by lag I didn't mean Ping lag, I just meant lag from Guild Wars running poorly while under two cores.

Also another note, my Laptop has a Dual Core intel processor, never had one problem with Guild Wars on it. So as you can see it doesn't always happen no, but it's likely and should be made aware of.

Admael · Mar 21, 2008, 05:25 AM // 05:25

Used over 10 combination dual/quad core processors, I even have an ES AMD Tri-core processor (AMD Phenom 8600, Toliman 2.3Ghz).

Zero problems. (at least problems that don't have solutions

)

But yes, Guild Wars only uses one core, but... which one?

EDIT: Guild Wars is an old game :<

beregond · Mar 21, 2008, 05:25 AM // 05:25

I run an AMD dual core as well. the only problem I see is that GW crashed fo the first time ever for me, I never had it crash on my really old computer with a single core.

Overall though, I'm doing ok, except or the occasional rediculously low FPS like under 10, when normally its 40-50 FPS.

Mr D J · Mar 21, 2008, 05:28 AM // 05:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brianna

I said that it may happen.

I play old games fine too. We're talking about Guild Wars here.

The first few months of playing on my dual core, I had no problems, but after time they started picking up.

This problem with Guild Wars happens more than it doesn't, it seems.

Or people just never notice the minor problems it may create, if it doesn't make big ones, like in my case.

If you don't believe me, ask some other techs around here, they'll tell you the same basically.

EDIT: Also by lag I didn't mean Ping lag, I just meant lag from Guild Wars running poorly while under two cores.

Oh, intermittent problems are different though. Computers are like cars... every one of them has a unique problem. The only problem I've been experiencing with Guild Wars is constant corruption of the archive (white squares instead of people and all that crap). It's either the motherboard or the CPU. But given the performance boost between the generation of processors before DC were released and the actual DCs, minor problems are not really that important.

Brianna · Mar 21, 2008, 05:30 AM // 05:30

Any core, Admael! :P

I'm just speaking this out of my experience and reading so many issues around related to multiple cores, I wish mine would run good with it because honestly I wouldn't complain about the extra 10 FPS I get with it.

:EDIT: Yeah, pretty much DJ.

I just wonder what makes the actual core not work well with the game?

Also I can't run a game called Thief: Deadly Shadows on a Dual Core, have to use ForceCore or else that is a huge mess.

beregond · Mar 21, 2008, 05:33 AM // 05:33

Yeah, overall I'm pretty happy with my dual core. Quad core seems like overkill...

Admael · Mar 21, 2008, 05:36 AM // 05:36

Go with the dual-core, if you're just into pure gaming/casual browsing. If you're benchmarker, heavy video editing and/or heavy data compression, go with the quad.

The Q6600 is a budget quad (orly, there are budget quads? yes!) they can be clocked to 3.0GHz easily, I've even seen 4GHz on golden chips.

But! (actually I've never heard of the E8650, but if it's anything like the E8400 you'll need either an X38 board or nF780i board) The chip costs the same right?

EDIT: why do I never get to type what I want to, anyways. My suggestion is get a dual-core processor, then when programs start utilizing all four cores, then switch over. By that time (probably 4 years down the road when Sandy Bridge comes out) you'll be looking for a new computer

Sandy Bridge + Larabee = Win

Pleikki · Mar 21, 2008, 06:23 AM // 06:23

go with dual-core with it you get less problems then quad.. well i did have problems with dual and it crashed whole system all the time. then fixed it.

Masseur · Mar 21, 2008, 06:31 AM // 06:31

Most programs can care less how many cores you have, unless it's an old 16 bit windows program. I have a Quad Core AMD Phenom 9500 and it runs great, no problems. I did have to upgrade my vid card to keep up, got an nvidia 9600GT. If the system is crashing, it's the system, not the programs you're running.

Blackhearted · Mar 21, 2008, 06:34 AM // 06:34

I've used a dual core for about 2.5 months and i've never had any problems at all with gw or with other old games. Even when overclocked by roughly 35% from stock speeds everything i've thrown at it, including gw, has worked fine with no speed or crash issues.

Brianna · Mar 21, 2008, 07:54 AM // 07:54

Well that's good to hear that all of you haven't had any problems, that shines new hope if I build a new PC later - Perhaps no problems with dual core. But that's only hope.

Maybe when the OP gets one of these processors they can let us know how it runs?

Admael · Mar 21, 2008, 08:18 AM // 08:18

The future is with Penryn! (atleast till Nehalem and Sandy Bridge comes) The new Wolfdale (which I think the E8650 are, I haven't found any data on it) chips are badass, puts my Yorkfield to shame.

Unreal Havoc · Mar 21, 2008, 09:47 AM // 09:47

I'm running an AMD Athlon 5000+ (Black Edition) Dual Core at 2.6ghz per core, on Vista, haven't even touched it yet in regards to overclocking.Guilld Wars is running absolutely fine for me. Any minor errors or crashes I do get are nothing different from what I used to get when running an AMD 3.2ghz single core on XP. If anything its faster, especially since the new Vista Service Pack 1. Only time I tend to get any fps drops in may be in towns or outposts, other than that I very rarely drop under 60fps.

Abedeus · Mar 21, 2008, 10:28 AM // 10:28

Dual Cores work with GW pretty nicely. My cousin has one + GeForce 8800GT and it was about 80 FPS all the time. So yeah, dual cores are useful.

Aera · Mar 21, 2008, 10:50 AM // 10:50

I've been having quite a bit of problems with my C2Quad and GW. But I'm starting to think it might be something else, considering the fact my screen goes black randomly every now and then, and my arrow is still visible.

Hmmm....

Pasha the Mighty · Mar 21, 2008, 10:53 AM // 10:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Admael

Go with the dual-core, if you're just into pure gaming/casual browsing. If you're benchmarker, heavy video editing and/or heavy data compression, go with the quad.

The Q6600 is a budget quad (orly, there are budget quads? yes!) they can be clocked to 3.0GHz easily, I've even seen 4GHz on golden chips.

But! (actually I've never heard of the E8650, but if it's anything like the E8400 you'll need either an X38 board or nF780i board) The chip costs the same right?

EDIT: why do I never get to type what I want to, anyways. My suggestion is get a dual-core processor, then when programs start utilizing all four cores, then switch over. By that time (probably 4 years down the road when Sandy Bridge comes out) you'll be looking for a new computer

Sandy Bridge + Larabee = Win

That's what I was gonna say. The current quad's will be obsolete by the time they're fully utilized. You're better off getting an e8400(it's a badass oc'er)