| Lineage 2 Game PMfun Forum https://forum.pmfun.com/ |
|
| dual and quad core https://forum.pmfun.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=5870 |
Page 1 of 5 |
| Author: | atlant448 [ Mon May 11, 2009 6:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | dual and quad core |
any1 here had dua and quad core processor ? and when u play l2 if the ghz are same there is there a big diference ? and where u see it most ? |
|
| Author: | Atreyu [ Mon May 11, 2009 7:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
i couldn't resist i've voted 4 hardcore!!! i have dual core in my room and core 2 duo in the notebook, and i don't find great differences.... afaik this 2 processors are different... but i'm not really sure |
|
| Author: | atlant448 [ Mon May 11, 2009 7:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Atreyu wrote: i couldn't resist i've voted 4 hardcore!!! core 2 duo is 2 dual cores in 1 = 4 cores .. but isnt same like quad core
i have dual core in my room and core 2 duo in the notebook, and i don't find great differences.... afaik this 2 processors are different... but i'm not really sure anyway thx for reply 
|
|
| Author: | Icarus [ Mon May 11, 2009 7:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
It does like this. Quad cores are not WAY better for gaming, contrary to popular belief. Why? Most new games only support two cores, so only two cores will be assigned for the game. The other two cores may be used by windows for other processes. The only way a quad core vs a dual-core will help the processes of a game is only by relieving the amount of calculations for the operating system. And that's just a very low increase in performance. And as I've heard, windows xp sp2 can only keep 2 threads functional, so bye quad-cores for sp2. I think this issue and the maximum RAM of 2.3 GB issue were fixed in sp3. But I'm not sure. Don't go for quads... They're not worth it, not even now. |
|
| Author: | atlant448 [ Mon May 11, 2009 8:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Icarus wrote: It does like this. im interested only in l2 for next ~3 years
Quad cores are not WAY better for gaming, contrary to popular belief. Why? Most new games only support two cores, so only two cores will be assigned for the game. The other two cores may be used by windows for other processes. The only way a quad core vs a dual-core will help the processes of a game is only by relieving the amount of calculations for the operating system. And that's just a very low increase in performance. And as I've heard, windows xp sp2 can only keep 2 threads functional, so bye quad-cores for sp2. I think this issue and the maximum RAM of 2.3 GB issue were fixed in sp3. But I'm not sure. Don't go for quads... They're not worth it, not even now. i have xp sp3 and i think i will use it on the new pc too what u mean with 2.3gb ram max lol ? that sux hard |
|
| Author: | Motorhead [ Mon May 11, 2009 8:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
10 bit nintendo processor rlz |
|
| Author: | atlant448 [ Mon May 11, 2009 9:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Motorhead wrote: 10 bit nintendo processor rlz what should i say to this ?
|
|
| Author: | Motorhead [ Mon May 11, 2009 9:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
yoy should buy it only 5$ maybe even less
|
|
| Author: | atlant448 [ Mon May 11, 2009 9:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Motorhead wrote: yoy should buy it only 5$ i know u can be a good guy dont spam on my topic ^^ maybe even less
|
|
| Author: | Motorhead [ Mon May 11, 2009 9:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
atlant448 wrote: Motorhead wrote: yoy should buy it only 5$ i know u can be a good guy dont spam on my topic ^^ maybe even less |
|
| Author: | GoDs3nD [ Mon May 11, 2009 9:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Icarus wrote: It does like this.
Quad cores are not WAY better for gaming, contrary to popular belief. Why? Most new games only support two cores, so only two cores will be assigned for the game. The other two cores may be used by windows for other processes. The only way a quad core vs a dual-core will help the processes of a game is only by relieving the amount of calculations for the operating system. And that's just a very low increase in performance. And as I've heard, windows xp sp2 can only keep 2 threads functional, so bye quad-cores for sp2. I think this issue and the maximum RAM of 2.3 GB issue were fixed in sp3. But I'm not sure. Don't go for quads... They're not worth it, not even now. FUKING AGREE HERE man i know a dude that rly knows many things about that crap and imagine.. even with bios tunning u cant make some games use more than 1 core u can ofc make other programs transfer to a different core for example video formating takes gigaloadz of ur CPU and u can divide itD: when cpu usage goes up to 50% u get the other core activated and now u dont get to max cpu usage on the first but still software has to run after the hardware for kilometers to support perfectly the newer machines i have hardcore 1.6 ghz amd ofc single core imagine wtf happens when i port to giran on dex for example.. i cant move my pc has l2 program "not responding" on the task manager @icarus btw u know that there IS a way of making 2+gb random access memory work properly on win XP ?:D there are system files of VISTA that get copied to the XP files and tadam u have something of the sort of 8 gb ram working on good old XP BUT u have a penalty:Dsystem loading takes 1-2 minutes longer:D btw the same dude told me that there is new windows edition WINDOWS 7 and it works PERFECTLY even better than vista and in his opinion its better than XP |
|
| Author: | atlant448 [ Mon May 11, 2009 9:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
GoDs3nD wrote: Icarus wrote: It does like this. Quad cores are not WAY better for gaming, contrary to popular belief. Why? Most new games only support two cores, so only two cores will be assigned for the game. The other two cores may be used by windows for other processes. The only way a quad core vs a dual-core will help the processes of a game is only by relieving the amount of calculations for the operating system. And that's just a very low increase in performance. And as I've heard, windows xp sp2 can only keep 2 threads functional, so bye quad-cores for sp2. I think this issue and the maximum RAM of 2.3 GB issue were fixed in sp3. But I'm not sure. Don't go for quads... They're not worth it, not even now. FUKING AGREE HERE man i know a dude that rly knows many things about that crap and imagine.. even with bios tunning u cant make some games use more than 1 core u can ofc make other programs transfer to a different core for example video formating takes gigaloadz of ur CPU and u can divide itD: when cpu usage goes up to 50% u get the other core activated and now u dont get to max cpu usage on the first but still software has to run after the hardware for kilometers to support perfectly the newer machines i have hardcore 1.6 ghz amd ofc single core imagine wtf happens when i port to giran on dex for example.. i cant move my pc has l2 program "not responding" on the task manager on ma server there is 10x more ppl in aden than in giran and i have 2 hardcore 3ghz atm but i lag only on teleport and than works normaly |
|
| Author: | GoDs3nD [ Mon May 11, 2009 9:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
man i dont lag my pc goes crazy not responding l2 client:D i cant even move when i port to giran ask icarus how many times i have asked him to get me outta fuking giran cuz simply i cant move/chat/cast skills/soe/use unstuck/whatever else u can imagine my pc just cant handel it |
|
| Author: | Motorhead [ Mon May 11, 2009 9:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
atlant448 wrote: GoDs3nD wrote: Icarus wrote: It does like this. Quad cores are not WAY better for gaming, contrary to popular belief. Why? Most new games only support two cores, so only two cores will be assigned for the game. The other two cores may be used by windows for other processes. The only way a quad core vs a dual-core will help the processes of a game is only by relieving the amount of calculations for the operating system. And that's just a very low increase in performance. And as I've heard, windows xp sp2 can only keep 2 threads functional, so bye quad-cores for sp2. I think this issue and the maximum RAM of 2.3 GB issue were fixed in sp3. But I'm not sure. Don't go for quads... They're not worth it, not even now. FUKING AGREE HERE man i know a dude that rly knows many things about that crap and imagine.. even with bios tunning u cant make some games use more than 1 core u can ofc make other programs transfer to a different core for example video formating takes gigaloadz of ur CPU and u can divide itD: when cpu usage goes up to 50% u get the other core activated and now u dont get to max cpu usage on the first but still software has to run after the hardware for kilometers to support perfectly the newer machines i have hardcore 1.6 ghz amd ofc single core imagine wtf happens when i port to giran on dex for example.. i cant move my pc has l2 program "not responding" on the task manager on ma server there is 10x more ppl in aden than in giran and i have 2 hardcore 3ghz atm but i lag only on teleport and than works normaly 1 bad internets 2 failpc 3 server suck |
|
| Author: | atlant448 [ Mon May 11, 2009 9:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Motorhead wrote: atlant448 wrote: GoDs3nD wrote: Icarus wrote: It does like this. Quad cores are not WAY better for gaming, contrary to popular belief. Why? Most new games only support two cores, so only two cores will be assigned for the game. The other two cores may be used by windows for other processes. The only way a quad core vs a dual-core will help the processes of a game is only by relieving the amount of calculations for the operating system. And that's just a very low increase in performance. And as I've heard, windows xp sp2 can only keep 2 threads functional, so bye quad-cores for sp2. I think this issue and the maximum RAM of 2.3 GB issue were fixed in sp3. But I'm not sure. Don't go for quads... They're not worth it, not even now. FUKING AGREE HERE man i know a dude that rly knows many things about that crap and imagine.. even with bios tunning u cant make some games use more than 1 core u can ofc make other programs transfer to a different core for example video formating takes gigaloadz of ur CPU and u can divide itD: when cpu usage goes up to 50% u get the other core activated and now u dont get to max cpu usage on the first but still software has to run after the hardware for kilometers to support perfectly the newer machines i have hardcore 1.6 ghz amd ofc single core imagine wtf happens when i port to giran on dex for example.. i cant move my pc has l2 program "not responding" on the task manager on ma server there is 10x more ppl in aden than in giran and i have 2 hardcore 3ghz atm but i lag only on teleport and than works normaly 1 bad internets 2 failpc 3 server suck 1 nah 2 he said it 3 lol no |
|
| Page 1 of 5 | All times are UTC + 2 hours |
| Powered by PMfun ©2006-2010 | |