Re: Wow CPU Utilization and Video Cards

dont think it actualy runs 100% but has 100% of its power available.
greetings!

"Kzak" <josephwcox@xxxxxxxxxxx> schreef in bericht
news:TVJlf.7869$xg1.4233@xxxxxxxxxxx
> "gaf1234567890" <gaf1234567890@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1133984063.018237.117360@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Kzak wrote:
>>> Now that I am using my new Logitech G15 keyboard, I noticed that my CPU
>>> utilization is 100% when I am in the Wow game. I have an Athlon-64
>>> 3200+
>>> CPU with 1GB of memory and a (weak) Nvidia GeForce FX 5500 which came
>>> with
>>> the system. So I am wondering if I upgrade to say a Nvidia GeForce
>>> 7800
>>> will I see the CPU utilization drop as a result of the video card doing
>>> more
>>> of the work? Also, would I see much improvement in the game (it seems
>>> fine
>>> now)?
>>
>> It depends on what's really going on.
>>
>> Before Windows NT / 2000 / XP the most common Windows programming
>> technique to accomplish something as a background task was to spin in a
>> tight message loop, using explicit Yields when there was nothing for
>> your forground task to do and then posting itself an asynchronous
>> message to keep spinning. This was before real multitasking in the OS.
>>
>> But when you ran one of these older Windows Apps on NT / 2000 / XP it
>> was very common to see CPU go to 100%. In essence a program still
>> written like that is acting the exact same way as the "System Idle
>> Task" that you always see in the Task Manager. If so, your CPU isn't
>> really pegged. You just have something running that's "eating up" any
>> leftover cycles.
>>
>> Bring up the Task Manager and figure out what process it is. Since you
>> say that the game runs fine, I bet it's one of the Logitech utilities
>> or drivers. It's probably hooked into the default keyboard message
>> stream somehow, and that's how they accomplish their macro/scripting
>> capability (without being tied to a specific game).
>>
>
> Ok, I checked this out. I installed Wow on another computer which does
> not have Logitech, never has. Wow is still driving the CPU utilization
> rate to 100% continuously while in the game. One of these computers uses
> Intel while the other uses AMD.
>
> Now to reply to Dr Richard Cranium who posted this reply in the wrong
> thread:
>
>>Now granted - AMD's cpu's sure drive the task manager to 100% but that is
>>the difference imho between the intel engine and the AMD engine.
>>further, I don't really care what the hardware is doing these days, as
>>long
>>as my game is running great with high FPS. (and it is).
>
> Well you should care. When Intel went to 90nm manufacturing, Intel ran
> into a high heat dissipation problem when increasing the Mhz on their
> Pentium processors. This was the beginning of Intel moving away from the
> Mhz marketing to a processor-features marketing and multicore strategy.
> High heat is death to processors. Enough heat and a processor will
> literally fry in seconds (removing the heat sink will cause a Intel
> processor to shutdown in seconds due to its built-in high temperature
> sensor.)
>
> In this case of Wow driving one of the AMD/Intel's leading edge processors
> to 100% for extended periods of time, this is not going to fry the
> processor in seconds, but it will reduce the life of the processor. Both
> Intel and AMD have tried to address this problem by installing heat
> reducing techniques in their processors. Let's take AMD's solution. AMD
> uses a feature called Cool N Quite in its processors. This technology
> reduces the voltage on the processor in increments from say 1.6V down to
> 1.3V in proportion to the load on the CPU. At 100% CPU utilization AMD
> would drive the processor at 1.6V while at 40% utilization AMD would drive
> the processor at 1.3V. The reduction in voltage causes the processor to
> perform slower but generates less damaging heat. Intel uses a similar
> technique to reduce heat within its processors. The reason both AMD and
> Intel have gone to these heat-reducing techniques is: less heat = longer
> CPU life, especially with the current high-performance, high-heat
> generating processors.
>
> In the old days driving a CPU to 100% for hours meant nothing. Today that
> has changed and in fact can be damaging. Maybe Blizzard needs to rethink
> their approach to performance and let up a little bit on the processor
> when the work load is not high. Of course Blizzard would probably say
> their primary concern is performance and they are not responsible for CPU
> manufacturers' problems, but that is ignoring the damage that may be
> happening to their customers' systems in the form of reduced life
> expectancy.
>
> Oh well, its just a game.
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What if Nvida bought AMD next year????
    ... Why would you think AMD has no good reason to continue? ... I know AMD/ATI have not been as quick in coming out with new chips lately, and it to some degree seems like they are now trying to play "catch up" with Intel. ... The future is to integrate the GPU and CPU into one chip, which will basically be a multi-core GPU with some firmware to allow it to function as a multi-core CPU. ...
    (alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt)
  • AMD or Intel: performance, price and ethics
    ... The first thing to decide is obviously whether to use a AMD or Intel ... CPU. ... so why pay the extra price? ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: Time for a new PC, which motherboard?
    ... AMD setup, but intel is good too. ... after I get the CPU and motherboard chosen. ... Whether to go AMD or Intel CPU? ...
    (alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt)
  • Re: Time for a new PC, which motherboard?
    ... AMD setup, but intel is good too. ... I get the CPU and motherboard chosen. ...
    (alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt)
  • Re: AMD vs. Intel
    ... >Although, AMD give more heat, as I am sure you are aware. ... >Intel CPUs on my desktop. ... As far as hardware is concerned, ...
    (Debian-User)