Why don't I see any difference from my Phenom X3 8650 to a Phenom 2 X4 955?

So, I installed the processor with the stock heatfan, etc. The clock speed on my Triple Core (8650) was at stock (2.3GHz), as well as my Quad Core (X4 955 - 3.2GHz). So since the clock speed is now higher and I have an extra core, why don't I see any speed difference when opening programs such as Windows Media Player, iTunes or even Firefox? 1080P Blu-Ray Video Processing was already fine with my Triple Core. I've tried setting different programs to use certain cores; i.e. I set the Affinity for WMP to CPU 0 and CPU 1 (2 CPUs), whereas I set the Affinity for the video converter for my iPhone to CPU 2 and CPU 3. Yet, no difference. Why is that?

Opening programs is more about hard drive speed. You should definitely get faster encoding with your media files though. Just let the program use the affinity it wants to.

The more potential core support, the better.

Your HDD is the bottleneck!

for blue ray & Movie player it more related of the GPU also it say you have only integrated gpu : when you do video editing and stuff it more Video & GPU & ram Related then processor : but processor will help : you say you don't see any different then get more ram / a GPU (instead of IGP) it should help

If that don't then there someting wrong cause it as no choice to better in every aspect the Phenom II is Superior of Phenom by Lot
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/01/08/amd-phenom-ii-x4-940-and-920-review/12

So I shouldn't set the Affinity for any programs? Also, I only set the Affinity because I really didn't notice a speed difference when I hadn't set it.

also if your HDD are 2-3 Year Old there quite slower then newest hard Drive such as Black Caviar / Seagate 7200:12 : Samsung F1 spinpoint

You need more ram and better hard drivesGTR2addict

also if your HDD are 2-3 Year Old there quite slower then newest hard Drive such as Black Caviar / Seagate 7200:12 : Samsung F1 spinpointmarcthpro

in 7200rpm HDD It Seem Seagate 7200:12 According Bit-tech : : But for 10,000RPM : Velociraptor (but not really worth it it expensive)
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/storage/2009/04/13/seagate-1tb-7200-12-review/6
How ever if you ever come to gaming ? do you have any video card beside Integrated Video card coming with mobo

in 7200rpm HDD It Seem Seagate 7200:12 According Bit-tech : : But for 10,000RPM : Velociraptor (but not really worth it it expensive)
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/storage/2009/04/13/seagate-1tb-7200-12-review/6
How ever if you ever come to gaming ? do you have any video card beside Integrated Video card coming with mobo

marcthpro

Your drives arent the issue, you were expecting alot more with day to day stuff with the cpu upgrade which wasnt going to happen because you had a descent cpu to start off with. Getting the GTX 275 will improve gaming,playback etc.

there isn't a huge difference for normal operations on a pc vs a 2 core, 3 core, 4 core with single programs. they'll be less slow down if you decide to run more programs simultaniously or if your using very cpu intensive programs ( media encoding, physics simulation). You don't really need a gpu for video editing, unless your doing 3d rendering portion of the editing, if your just cutting and putting videos together an igp should be more then you need. The speed of hardware is increasing faster then software's needs, basicly most software can't take advantage of the newer stuff. For the most part your hardware needs are already being met.

and for the people who are about to flame me cuase all they care about is beeting every one else in micro seconds, no one cares. The newer stuff will help, but its not going to be so profound anymore.

If your using cpu intensive programs you'd notice the difference though.

if its not for gaming, then a cheap gpu might make the biggest difference, nothing excessive though if your not doing gaming, $50 card would be enough

Your drives arent the issue, you were expecting alot more with day to day stuff with the cpu upgrade which wasnt going to happen because you had a descent cpu to start off with. Getting the GTX 275 will improve gaming,playback etc.

04dcarraher

there isn't a huge difference for normal operations on a pc vs a 2 core, 3 core, 4 core with single programs. they'll be less slow down if you decide to run more programs simultaniously or if your using very cpu intensive programs ( media encoding, physics simulation). You don't really need a gpu for video editing, unless your doing 3d rendering portion of the editing, if your just cutting and putting videos together an igp should be more then you need. The speed of hardware is increasing faster then software's needs, basicly most software can't take advantage of the newer stuff. For the most part your hardware needs are already being met.

and for the people who are about to flame me cuase all they care about is beeting every one else in micro seconds, no one cares. The newer stuff will help, but its not going to be so profound anymore.

If your using cpu intensive programs you'd notice the difference though.

if its not for gaming, then a cheap gpu might make the biggest difference, nothing excessive though if your not doing gaming, $50 card would be enough

savagetwinkie

[QUOTE="GTR2addict"]You need more ram and better hard drivesATLReppa770

but if he on low money at very Least someting as GTS 250 1GB / 4850 512 meg Beside as far i seen Phenom X3 8430 & 8690 is merely different in performances of Best X2 (7750 Kuma) replaced by Phenom II X2 250

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2008/12/15/amd-athlon-x2-7750-7550-cpus-review/6
The Phenom X3 (the first not the Phenom II) is also very simiarly of 6000x2 in performances

but if he on low money at very Least someting as GTS 250 1GB / 4850 512 meg Beside as far i seen Phenom X3 8430 & 8690 is merely different in performances of Best X2 (7750 Kuma) replaced by Phenom II X2 250

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2008/12/15/amd-athlon-x2-7750-7550-cpus-review/6
The Phenom X3 (the first not the Phenom II) is also very simiarly of 6000x2 in performances

marcthpro

Why dont they compare the older X2 6000 which had 2x the cache over the the newer X2 6000?

940 (Socket am2) Because of DDR2 & New motherboard it do Perform Better Then Socket 939 Athelon X2 in most of the case You should know that ... they compared longtime ago Socket am2 Vs Socket 939

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-socket-am2_19.html#sect0
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64-x2-6000_4.html#sect0
My 4600x2 ad 1MB cache But If i ad bough 6400x2 id have 2MB but then i seen how Intel Core 2 duo where dominating against AMD
so I offered the pc my father bough with is own money the 4600x2 + Asus M2N-32 Sli Deluxe + 7600GT XXX Edition + 2x1GB 800mhz 4-4-4-12


Then I went with the build i have : i knew Amd Ad nothing to me to offer enthusiast gaming performances at 1920x1200
http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=770&p=9
http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=775&p=15

If socket am3 (Phenom II X4 955 was to buy when i Bough my pc At September 2008 : I would have Being With Amd knowing that 3.94Ghz OC Phenom II X4 955 Is a Match to E8600 4.3Ghz+ OC and is maximum of E8600 OC with a Water cooling is 5.2Ghz From 3.3Ghz Stock

When new game will come out it possible i see Lose in FPS (And not getting 55-60fps stable 24/24 7/7 when it happen il perform overclocking :D
http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=807&p=14


we may have gone a bit off-topic but as far i remember ? i don't remember X2 6000 being lower then 2X1024KB =2MB But I could ask all about Amd to this guy in this pc shop around here in is free-time he did ask me how much time i think did that processor X2 get Revision
i did reply 4 : he said at last 6 and maybe 7 I was like really ?

Um The old X2 6000 is AM2,

really ? hmm i wonder anyway i search benchmark : when processor keep get revision it not easy to find them :-/ But i said he should see performances : X3 8650 which is sort of 6400x2 But with 1 more core (with no extra performances gain really) The X3 Phenom was Weaker then Athelon X2 7750 Kuma (am2+)

The Phenom II X2 250 is Better then 7750 Kuma which was am2+ (not am2) and did perform better in all benchmark then previous Socket am2 Processor I say I don't know much About Athelon Socket am2 Revision : i know they where about 6-7 According what said this guy on shop he know lot

would be Great if there would be a Wikipedia for processor : Current Wikipedia don't count Revision & miss processor in list

So if I overclock my CPU by a few 100MHz, I still won't notice a difference unless I'm video encoding or using another CPU heavy application? [QUOTE="GTR2addict"][QUOTE="ATLReppa770"][QUOTE="GTR2addict"]You need more ram and better hard drives04dcarraher

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] So if I overclock my CPU by a few 100MHz, I still won't notice a difference unless I'm video encoding or using another CPU heavy application? [QUOTE="GTR2addict"] How much more RAM can I get though? Vista Home Premium 32-Bit only allows 3GB of RAM, doesn't it? I already have 2GB. Also, better hard drives, such as.. faster RPM?ATLReppa770

Any 32bit OS will only support up to 4GB of memory - which includes Vista 32bit and Windows 7 32bit. So, if you have 4GB installed and a video card with 512MB on it, about the most your OS will be able to utilize out of the 4GB is roughly 3.5GB - it'll be less if you have other things installed; sound card, wireless card and such.

When I was using XP 32bit, I had a 512MB video card, sound card and wireless card installed. I also had 4GB installed - the most my OS would utilize would be 3.25GB.

[QUOTE="ATLReppa770"]

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"] it allows 4, but cut down, not much, since you have integrated graphics, get a good GPU and youll have alot better performance... that GTX 275 will improve alot... i wold suggest a 4890, its even and is cheaper in most placesneatfeatguy

Any 32bit OS will only support up to 4GB of memory - which includes Vista 32bit and Windows 7 32bit. So, if you have 4GB installed and a video card with 512MB on it, about the most your OS will be able to utilize out of the 4GB is roughly 3.5GB - it'll be less if you have other things installed; sound card, wireless card and such.

When I was using XP 32bit, I had a 512MB video card, sound card and wireless card installed. I also had 4GB installed - the most my OS would utilize would be 3.25GB.

[QUOTE="neatfeatguy"]

[QUOTE="ATLReppa770"] I would get that graphics card, but it's ATi and I have support for only SLi. I plan to SLi my GTX 275 in the future. Also, 3GB is the most Windows Vista 32 Bit will recognize. Windows 7 is supposed to be able to support up to 4GB.

ATLReppa770

Any 32bit OS will only support up to 4GB of memory - which includes Vista 32bit and Windows 7 32bit. So, if you have 4GB installed and a video card with 512MB on it, about the most your OS will be able to utilize out of the 4GB is roughly 3.5GB - it'll be less if you have other things installed; sound card, wireless card and such.

When I was using XP 32bit, I had a 512MB video card, sound card and wireless card installed. I also had 4GB installed - the most my OS would utilize would be 3.25GB.

Using Vista 32 or 64 yea having 3Gb+ will help smooth things out.04dcarraher

[QUOTE="04dcarraher"]Using Vista 32 or 64 yea having 3Gb+ will help smooth things out.ATLReppa770

DDR 3 vs DDR 2 isnt enough difference yet to upgrade for soley DDR3 when you already have DDR2. Just pick another 2 Gb of ram for under $60 and it will improve vista's overall feel of opening and closing stuff.04dcarraher

I would pick up two 1 Gb sticks so you can run them in dual channel mode.04dcarraher

Take a look, http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=40000147&Description=gskill%20ddr2%20800&name=Desktop%20Memory

Take a look, http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=40000147&Description=gskill%20ddr2%20800&name=Desktop%20Memory

04dcarraher

Depend DDR2 with lowest cas / better overclocking headroom can be better by a small 2% such as 47.9fps become 48.3fps from switching from high-cas from low cas : but again perhap benchmark aren't that accurate for memory
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/memory/2008/10/27/low-latency-ddr2-800mhz-versus-1066mhz/6
So it pretty much anything on the list will do take the cheapest :P

but i heard that if ur memory are 4-4-4-12 (you better find 4-4-4-12) or the timing won't be spread to the other according the same memory are the same voltage such as 1.8V instead of 1.9V for running at 4-4-4-12 : as it Seem brand don't matter you could be Running OCZ 800mhz platinium at 1.8V 4-4-4-12 with G-skill 1.8V 4-4-4-12 800mhz as long you ain't OC they would perform the very same since everything almost the same

Depend DDR2 with lowest cas / better overclocking headroom can be better by a small 2% such as 47.9fps become 48.3fps from switching from high-cas from low cas : but again perhap benchmark aren't that accurate for memory
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/memory/2008/10/27/low-latency-ddr2-800mhz-versus-1066mhz/6
So it pretty much anything on the list will do take the cheapest :P

but i heard that if ur memory are 4-4-4-12 (you better find 4-4-4-12) or the timing won't be spread to the other according the same memory are the same voltage such as 1.8V instead of 1.9V for running at 4-4-4-12 : as it Seem brand don't matter you could be Running OCZ 800mhz platinium at 1.8V 4-4-4-12 with G-skill 1.8V 4-4-4-12 800mhz as long you ain't OC they would perform the very same since everything almost the same

marcthpro