• Index » 
  • Community » 
  • Tech » 
  • Anyone running dual opterons? Not dual core but dual processor.
vjs
Member
+19|6742
One of my machines is a dual barton with 2G of ram.

Recently I installed BF2 on it. Not too bad considering the 133 Mhz fsb and registered memory non dual channel.

Just curious what dual processors each with dual channel ram would do to load times.
SniperF0x
Member
+49|6496
Maybe by a little bit, few seconds but not mutch.
2gig of ram or faster ram or a HD with 10k RPM will take away loading time.

Btw, opterons are made for servers if you didn't know .
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6687
dual processors are useless... dual core just made them kinda obselete.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Psycho
Member since 2005
+44|6747|Kansas, USA
It won't do anything for your load times since BF2 is not dual processor/dual core aware.
FathomsDown
Member
+19|6622|England

Psycho wrote:

It won't do anything for your load times since BF2 is not dual processor/dual core aware.
BF2 isn't but it will fun faster as the other Windows/AV/etc processes will run on the other core. More cores = more timeslices even for single threaded apps.

Saying that a single Athlon would probably be faster than dual Opertons for gaming as they are not optimised for graphics processing (they are grunt processors so lack the registers that the Athlon and Athlon FX have).
Hurricane
Banned
+1,153|6601|Washington, DC

I saw a quad-processor motherboard but it was for servers, so no PCI-E.
FathomsDown
Member
+19|6622|England

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

dual processors are useless... dual core just made them kinda obselete.
Not unless you want four cores in a system

BTW there are now eight core processors comming in to the server space. Useless for gaming unless you run a BF2 server on them though.
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6687

FathomsDown wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

dual processors are useless... dual core just made them kinda obselete.
Not unless you want four cores in a system

BTW there are now eight core processors comming in to the server space. Useless for gaming unless you run a BF2 server on them though.
wait till kentsfield 4 cores FTW.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
slo5oh
Member
+28|6631

FathomsDown wrote:

Psycho wrote:

It won't do anything for your load times since BF2 is not dual processor/dual core aware.
BF2 isn't but it will fun faster as the other Windows/AV/etc processes will run on the other core. More cores = more timeslices even for single threaded apps.

Saying that a single Athlon would probably be faster than dual Opertons for gaming as they are not optimised for graphics processing (they are grunt processors so lack the registers that the Athlon and Athlon FX have).
The first statement is true, but has very little real world use.  I can alt+tab out and back into BF2 faster now with a dual core.  As for Opterons not being good graphics chips you're just dead wrong.  Please read on...
Faster Single core processors are the way to go for BF2 though.  I currently have an opteron 165 clocked just shy of 2.8Ghz and when I'm setting "affinity" or only using 1 processor it's noticably slower than my last chip, an Opteron 146 clocked to 2.85 (2.9 for a while)Ghz.  Before I starting having these "connection" issues and I was using both cores it seemed as fast as the 146.
With the 146 there was NEVER a person that loaded a new map faster than I did.  There was 1 time when someone loaded about the same time as me, but that only happened once.
With my 165 I've had serious "connection to server lost" issues and finally realized the only to avoid them is to set my BF2 to only use 1 processor.  Once I started doing this I've noticed that I start new maps behind a small handful of people on 50 to 64 player maps.  I miss knowing I would be #1.   
In both setups I run a single 7200rpm seagate drive so my advantage does not come from a raptor 10k rpm drive.
I'm not trying to be a PITA, I'm just giving my real world experience for those debating between an A64, X2, opteron single or dual core.  Sorry to hijack the thread...

OP, maximum PC magazine built a DUAL EVERYTHING system several months back.  It had 2 dual core processors with 2 7800GTX cards in SLI.  It was a great idea, but looked like c$#) and I was not impressed.
BigglesPiP
Whirlybird Guy
+20|6519|Windermere, GB
It would normally work like Dual core.


But the Soket 940 chips are weedy.

A single 939 (170 and upwards) or AM2 Operton (Dual Core) is better.
  • Index » 
  • Community » 
  • Tech » 
  • Anyone running dual opterons? Not dual core but dual processor.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard