any core 2 duo gaming problems

C

coolpurplefan

Gawd
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
547
I was wondering if the new Intel cores suffer from any weird effects like the Benny Hill gaming effect or whatever.
 
I'm having weird problems that could be mistaken for Windows or software issues (i.e, Windows has encountered a problem, HungApps, etc) which I never had in my pre Core 2/DS3 rig. Re-installed XP but still same.
 
coolpurplefan said:
I was wondering if the new Intel cores suffer from any weird effects like the Benny Hill gaming effect or whatever.
Click to expand...
I have never experienced the Benny Hill effect on my X2, so I would guess that it may be related to the games you play as well as your setup w.r.t. EIST/ CnQ.
 
drizzt81 said:
I have never experienced the Benny Hill effect on my X2, so I would guess that it may be related to the games you play as well as your setup w.r.t. EIST/ CnQ.
Click to expand...

Nah, just a comment from things I read. I didn't like reading the X2 fixes because some eliminated multit-threading. I didn't make sense to me (like to shut off one core).
 
coolpurplefan said:
Nah, just a comment from things I read. I didn't like reading the X2 fixes because some eliminated multit-threading. I didn't make sense to me (like to shut off one core).
Click to expand...
Wow, I have never heard of those fixes before. Would you mind giving me a link to them?
 
really^ there in the AMD forum here in the X2 fix guide.
There are 4 solutions and all explained.

For now, I'm content with my 3700+. Thank goodness I only play UT2004 and BF2. :p
 
It's funny... I've never heard of any "fixes" for Intel dual core... but have for AMD's dual core. Wonder what that means? :D
 
coolpurplefan said:
really^ there in the AMD forum here in the X2 fix guide.
There are 4 solutions and all explained.
Click to expand...
Fix #1 is aimed at problems that stem from CnQ slowing a single core down. Fix #2 is aimed at problems caused by CnQ slowing an inactive core down. Fix #3 is similar to #1 and #2 and only happen when "demand-based switching" is enabled. Fix #4 sets the processor affinity of a process to a single Core and Fix #5 talks about video drivers, which are very, very unlikely going to "eliminate multit-threading" on your PC
I am still having a hard time following? Are you talking about manually setting processor affinity?

After reading the article and the MS hotfix, it is pretty clear that the issue stems from the fact that
Windows XP processor power management implements DBS by using the adaptive processor throttling policy. [...] When single-threaded workloads run on multiprocessor systems that include dual-core configurations, the workloads may migrate across available CPU cores. This behavior is a natural artifact of how Windows schedules work across available CPU resources. However, on systems that have processor performance states that run with the adaptive processor throttling policy, this thread migration may cause the Windows kernel power manager to incorrectly calculate the optimal target performance state for the processor. This behavior occurs because an individual processor core, logical or physical, may appear to be less busy than the whole processor package actually is. On performance benchmarks that use single-threaded workloads, you may see this artifact in decreased performance results or in a high degree of variance between successive runs of identical benchmark tests.

This hotfix includes changes to the kernel power manager to track CPU use across the processor package. These changes enable visibility into the true activity level of a CPU complex and therefore help correctly calculate an increased target performance state.
Click to expand...

Given that this apparently is an OS process scheduler problem, why do you think that Intel or AMD processors would be any better at handling it?

Poncho said:
It's funny... I've never heard of any "fixes" for Intel dual core... but have for AMD's dual core. Wonder what that means? :D
Click to expand...

  • Intel processors do not report ACPI level correctly
  • Intel processors do not implement ACPI states correctly
  • Intel people turn off EIST on desktop machines
  • Intel users are more likely to run F@H on all cores, which also eliminates the problem, since all CPUs are always at full load
  • ...
I do not recall ever having to resort to ANY multicore fix on my AMD based dual core PCs.
 
drizzt81 said:
  • Intel processors do not report ACPI level correctly
  • Intel processors do not implement ACPI states correctlyWanna back these 2 points up with some hard data?
  • Intel people turn off EIST on desktop machines I don't
  • Intel users are more likely to run F@H on all cores, which also eliminates the problem, since all CPUs are always at full load I don't
  • ...

I do not recall ever having to resort to ANY multicore fix on my AMD based dual core PCs.
Click to expand...

I've never done anything other than chipset drivers and windows update. I've also never seen a SINGLE thread in this forum that lists a fix for dual corebut if you go to the AMD forums you'll see "fixes" for dual core gaming specifically for AMD.
 
For what its worth Everquest doesnt like my core 2 duo in my laptop, i had to set it to use just 1 core and its fine then. SOE has said they dont support dual core procs though.
 
I've never heard of issues like the problems expierienced with X2's on the Core 2 Duo processors.
 
drizzt81 said:
Fix #1 is aimed at problems that stem from CnQ slowing a single core down. Fix #2 is aimed at problems caused by CnQ slowing an inactive core down. Fix #3 is similar to #1 and #2 and only happen when "demand-based switching" is enabled. Fix #4 sets the processor affinity of a process to a single Core and Fix #5 talks about video drivers, which are very, very unlikely going to "eliminate multit-threading" on your PC
I am still having a hard time following? Are you talking about manually setting processor affinity?

After reading the article and the MS hotfix, it is pretty clear that the issue stems from the fact that

Given that this apparently is an OS process scheduler problem, why do you think that Intel or AMD processors would be any better at handling it?



  • Intel processors do not report ACPI level correctly
  • Intel processors do not implement ACPI states correctly
  • Intel people turn off EIST on desktop machines
  • Intel users are more likely to run F@H on all cores, which also eliminates the problem, since all CPUs are always at full load
  • ...
I do not recall ever having to resort to ANY multicore fix on my AMD based dual core PCs.
Click to expand...

This problem I believe is indeed a software one. I agree with that completely. I had very few problems with my dual Opteron setup. A few individual games had issues with it, such as Star Wars Battlefront 2, which had documented problems on SMP and dual core systems alike.

Windows XP Professional x64 Edition was also largely unaffected and the MS Hotfix in question wasn't needed for that OS which does have a different kernel than it's 32bit counterpart. Again this points to SOFTWARE, not hardware.

Considering Intel helps to establish and set these types of standards, I'd like to see some data proving Intel CPU's have the issues listed above.
 
Dan_D said:
Considering Intel helps to establish and set these types of standards, I'd like to see some data proving Intel CPU's have the issues listed above.
Click to expand...
I don't think that any of the issues are true. I expect the whole "dual core" problem to be a software issue. However, it appears that Poncho disagrees with my analysis. If Intel chips are indeed immune to the "dual core issue" that has been "plaguing" us poor AMD f4nbois ever since the X2 was introduced and Microsoft's hotfix documentation is indeed correct, I have a hard time imagening any other workaround that Intel may be using. I am open to be educated on the difference between AMD and Intel's ACPI implementation and how this affects their susceptibility to the "dual core issues".
 
I doubt there is a problem with either CPU. Considering some of Microsoft's operating systems don't seem to have this issue and others do, tends to lead me to that conclusion.
 
AMD dual core's problem was caused by the drift of the the time stamp counters between each core due to CnQ. Intel had gone to a time stamp counter that would not vary with clock cycles before it produced the Pentium D.
 
Summoner said:
For what its worth Everquest doesnt like my core 2 duo in my laptop, i had to set it to use just 1 core and its fine then. SOE has said they dont support dual core procs though.
Click to expand...

thanks for posting that. I guess that means I will keep my keep a single core machine just in case (with Win XP Pro SP2).

Later on, I'll build a machine with Vista and a quad core.
 
coolpurplefan said:
thanks for posting that. I guess that means I will keep my keep a single core machine just in case (with Win XP Pro SP2).

Later on, I'll build a machine with Vista and a quad core.
Click to expand...

There is no reason not to go dual core now. Every game I can think of has a work around if it has dual core problems.
 
Well peeps, I got a strange one, amd 4400 x2 was a pain in the ass to me and most games needed some sort of fix, admittedly this was like 1 week after they were launched and better drivers have since appeared, but my 4800 x2 has never had any problem with games like my 4400 had, both cpu's used in the exact same rig and setup, so one was a pain in the ass while the other isnt, and it wasnt a faulty cpu, just that I got the 44 when x2 first came out and I got the 4800 6 months later, maybe the problem with the 44 could be put down to immature amd cpu drivers for the x2 range at the time, i dunno, but i had a nightmare of a time with the 4400....

I think most if not all dualcore problems for games have been ironed out or can be fixed by setting affinity, things have come along way since i first got my 4400 back in the middle of last year, games seem less likely to have problems with dualcore cpu's now than what i experienced back then....
 
EVIL-SCOTSMAN said:
Well peeps, I got a strange one, amd 4400 x2 was a pain in the ass to me and most games needed some sort of fix, admittedly this was like 1 week after they were launched and better drivers have since appeared, but my 4800 x2 has never had any problem with games like my 4400 had, both cpu's used in the exact same rig and setup, so one was a pain in the ass while the other isnt, and it wasnt a faulty cpu, just that I got the 44 when x2 first came out and I got the 4800 6 months later, maybe the problem with the 44 could be put down to immature amd cpu drivers for the x2 range at the time, i dunno, but i had a nightmare of a time with the 4400....

I think most if not all dualcore problems for games have been ironed out or can be fixed by setting affinity, things have come along way since i first got my 4400 back in the middle of last year, games seem less likely to have problems with dualcore cpu's now than what i experienced back then....
Click to expand...

I understand you all want to be helpful. But, I've gotten to a point where I no longer want to spend time to adjust this and tweak this over and over again to get a fully working machine. I learned how to build a computer last year and it took me months to figure out exactly what I wanted after changing motherboard, RAM, CPU etc then finally selling everything and building a completely new machine after I moved to another province in Canada.

The way I see it, I'll be happy to build another machine in 2 years with Vista, quad core and DDR3 RAM. All I have to do now is change my graphics card. I have 2 GB OCZ Platinum RAM, an AMD 3700+ and a Geforce 6600.
 
Dan_D said:
I doubt there is a problem with either CPU. Considering some of Microsoft's operating systems don't seem to have this issue and others do, tends to lead me to that conclusion.
Click to expand...

Not much to do with Dual Core when Dual Processor rigs had some of the same software glitches. They (DC and DP) have thread hangs and glitches. A simple patch and most games respond well. One that still cause problems is WOW. Even Hyperthreading caused "Collisions". I linked Chris Morley to Microsoft and Intel explaining what the problems were.

Since I've had my E6600/DS3, all of my old Games love this processor, 2GB, X-Fi and X1800XT. I have all of the MoH series, CoD 1 & 2, HL2, Painkiller, Halo, Even cranked up Mech Warrior, old UT, Doom3-Quake 4, Far Cry, and benchmark apps like Aqua mark, X2 the threat, Gun Metal and Sandra. I also have other games I didn't bother to mention. I have other games on my 2nd rig, an A64-3500+. Dewd, straight butter! Just got through paying about 2 hours BF2 on line.

I have nothing like EIST disabled in the BIOS:) Except I turned off the Fan Control since mine is quiet anyway.
 
drizzt81 said:
  • Intel processors do not report ACPI level correctly
Click to expand...


  • Now remember Tom's video of the burning Athlon? Power Now couldn't do what Intel's did, namely, protect the processor. So correct reporting or not, it at least worked. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top