The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
This thread has been linked to the game 'Half-Life 2'.
My current setup is as follows:
Radeon 9800 pro 256mb
1GB DDR Ram
Amd Athlon 2600+ 1.9ghz
What I'd like to find out is, will my proccesor hold the PC back from it's full potential? (As in, the lack of 2ghz+ will hold the Graphics card back from running as good as it could be?)
Thankyou.
Radeon 9800 pro 256mb
1GB DDR Ram
Amd Athlon 2600+ 1.9ghz
What I'd like to find out is, will my proccesor hold the PC back from it's full potential? (As in, the lack of 2ghz+ will hold the Graphics card back from running as good as it could be?)
Thankyou.
Page:
Pinger wrote:
> First AMD's naming convention is to show its equivilant Intel Clock
> speed, the actual AMD clock speed is much lower but equals the Intel
> of the same clock speed as the AMD CPU name.
Fourth time this has been stated in one thread.
> First AMD's naming convention is to show its equivilant Intel Clock
> speed, the actual AMD clock speed is much lower but equals the Intel
> of the same clock speed as the AMD CPU name.
Fourth time this has been stated in one thread.
gah lots of mis information.
First AMD's naming convention is to show its equivilant Intel Clock speed, the actual AMD clock speed is much lower but equals the Intel of the same clock speed as the AMD CPU name.
So your 2600+ is Equal to a Intel p4 2.6gig
Now the reason your AMD is running at 1.9gig is because its the newer Barton Core which again runs slightly slower than the older Thoroughbread AMD which runs at 2.02gig.
As for if it will be a bottle neck you wont beable to tell until you have the game.
First AMD's naming convention is to show its equivilant Intel Clock speed, the actual AMD clock speed is much lower but equals the Intel of the same clock speed as the AMD CPU name.
So your 2600+ is Equal to a Intel p4 2.6gig
Now the reason your AMD is running at 1.9gig is because its the newer Barton Core which again runs slightly slower than the older Thoroughbread AMD which runs at 2.02gig.
As for if it will be a bottle neck you wont beable to tell until you have the game.
Robiow wrote:
> you will never get a 2.6 processor running at 2.6 I'm afraid.
>
Incidentally, I've seen a 2600+ running at 2.88ghz. Bit nippy that was.
My 1700+ runs at 2.2ghz - it's certainly possible to push it above AMD's PR rating.
> you will never get a 2.6 processor running at 2.6 I'm afraid.
>
Incidentally, I've seen a 2600+ running at 2.88ghz. Bit nippy that was.
My 1700+ runs at 2.2ghz - it's certainly possible to push it above AMD's PR rating.
Robiow wrote:
> It's true what I said though
>
> you WILL not get an Atlon processor running at the speed it states.
>
> it is impossible.
>
> your motherboard will stop you putting too much voltage though the
> processor to avoid frying it, otherwise you'd need about 4 volts and
> extreme cooling
>
> it will not work
>
> Let Damarus change your multiplier settings and your FBS if you're
> not careful your fcuk your computer.
> you will not hit 2.6 ghz
2600 does not mean that it has a clock speed of 2.6 Ghz.
I think it's meant to be a guide to how well it performs in comparison to the Intel equivalent, but I could be wrong there.
> It's true what I said though
>
> you WILL not get an Atlon processor running at the speed it states.
>
> it is impossible.
>
> your motherboard will stop you putting too much voltage though the
> processor to avoid frying it, otherwise you'd need about 4 volts and
> extreme cooling
>
> it will not work
>
> Let Damarus change your multiplier settings and your FBS if you're
> not careful your fcuk your computer.
> you will not hit 2.6 ghz
2600 does not mean that it has a clock speed of 2.6 Ghz.
I think it's meant to be a guide to how well it performs in comparison to the Intel equivalent, but I could be wrong there.
Ok posted
http://ukchatforums.reserve.co.uk [SPACE] /display_messages.php?threadid=113441&forumid=206
http://ukchatforums.reserve.co.uk [SPACE] /display_messages.php?threadid=113441&forumid=206
Head over to the Web Design and PC forum before you do anything else. A lot of them know more than me about the situation.
Just to avoid a little confusion I just changed my nickname. My 4 year old "Elite Chaos" just sounded dumb, and needed to be changed.
Where the hell did you get the 2.6ghz from? I'm trying to get it to run a 2.0ghz instead of 1.92ghz. Why do you think 2600's are meant to run at 2.6ghz? Because of the number 2600?
Like I said I'm sure 2600 does not mean 2600mhz, it's just the product number in the series of amd processors.
And Damarus is not trying to get it to run at 2.6ghz, he's actually helping me get it up to speed at 2.0-2.1ghz.
Anyway Damurus, the multiplier also has to be set via jumpers. Problem is my mobo did not come wth any spare jumpers...
Guess I'll have to check ebay.
Like I said I'm sure 2600 does not mean 2600mhz, it's just the product number in the series of amd processors.
And Damarus is not trying to get it to run at 2.6ghz, he's actually helping me get it up to speed at 2.0-2.1ghz.
Anyway Damurus, the multiplier also has to be set via jumpers. Problem is my mobo did not come wth any spare jumpers...
Guess I'll have to check ebay.
It's true what I said though
you WILL not get an Atlon processor running at the speed it states.
it is impossible.
your motherboard will stop you putting too much voltage though the processor to avoid frying it, otherwise you'd need about 4 volts and extreme cooling
it will not work
Let Damarus change your multiplier settings and your FBS if you're not careful your fcuk your computer.
you will not hit 2.6 ghz
you WILL not get an Atlon processor running at the speed it states.
it is impossible.
your motherboard will stop you putting too much voltage though the processor to avoid frying it, otherwise you'd need about 4 volts and extreme cooling
it will not work
Let Damarus change your multiplier settings and your FBS if you're not careful your fcuk your computer.
you will not hit 2.6 ghz
Robiow wrote:
> you will never get a 2.6 processor running at 2.6 I'm afraid.
I might not be the shiniest spoon in the drawer when it comes to computer components, but I'm very sure that the Amd processor version numbers don't stand for the mhz they run at.
And as for saying I can't get my processor to run any faster than 1.92ghz, I've just read a few overclocking sites where people have had 2600's running at 2.3ghz+
Obviously I won't be overclocking as I lack any extra cooling devices, but it would be nice to get the normal speed out of my processor.
Ok thanks for the advice Damarus, I'll try that out later and I'll post the results.
> you will never get a 2.6 processor running at 2.6 I'm afraid.
I might not be the shiniest spoon in the drawer when it comes to computer components, but I'm very sure that the Amd processor version numbers don't stand for the mhz they run at.
And as for saying I can't get my processor to run any faster than 1.92ghz, I've just read a few overclocking sites where people have had 2600's running at 2.3ghz+
Obviously I won't be overclocking as I lack any extra cooling devices, but it would be nice to get the normal speed out of my processor.
Ok thanks for the advice Damarus, I'll try that out later and I'll post the results.
Page: