WindWaker FPS problems

[kinkinkijkin]

(01-07-2014, 12:09 AM)Anti-Ultimate Wrote: And even if you overclock it, the performance gain isn't that much.

Mine was more than substantial, and I haven't even pushed it to the limit yet.

(01-07-2014, 12:29 AM)admin89 Wrote:

Quote:Athlon II is amazing at overclocking, I didn't even have to touch my voltage too much to get it at my current stable OC, and I could bring it higher if I wasn't afraid of exploding my power supply.

I lol that
You're just a lucky guy that be able to get your hand on a very good chip . Most Athlon II users i know can't do that
Some guy are able to overclock i5 4670k @ 4.7GHz with 1.2Vcore (1.3GHz OCed) . Does that mean Intel i5 4670k is extremely good at overclocking ? No , not even close . Most people are only able to bump it up to 4.2GHz stable ( or 4.3-> 4.4GHz though i do not recommend to do that)
This is explained in the forum by @NaturalViolence . So i leave it to him if he bother to explain it to you

Well, I guess I haven't really checked overclocks for more than just my own Athlon II, and mine IS actually just a Phenom II with reduced cores and removed L3 cache.
Jumped to a bit of a conclusion there, sorry, hadn't let the breakfast kick in yet.

[NaturalViolence]

Anti-Ultimate Wrote:And even if you overclock it, the performance gain isn't that much.

I disagree with this. I've seen plenty of applications gain a significant speedup from it. It just depends on the applications cache usage.

kinkinkijkin Wrote:Still stands that the series is good for overclocking, even without an unlocked multiplier.

The properties of a statistical outlier don't really say much about the overall curve. Just because your chip overclocks well doesn't mean they all do. So this logic doesn't really work. That doesn't necessarily mean that your conclusion is wrong however, just that your logic for reaching it is wrong.

admin89 Wrote:This is explained in the forum by @NaturalViolence . So i leave it to him if he bother to explain it to you

Where is it explained by me?

I would really like people to stop assuming they know what I think about something unless they have a quote where I actually said it. Because half the time they're wrong and I don't end up agreeing with them.

Athlon II is just a brand name for "low end alternative to phenom II" used by amd for a wide range of different chips with vastly different properties. Some of which, especially the black edition models, do overclock quite well. Some of them are literally just phenom IIs (as in the exact same physical chips) with certain cores and/or the L3 cache disabled. I do however agree that in his particular case it had more to do with luck as his chip is exhibiting electrical/thermal properties far better than what is typical for that particular model.

In addition to that I would like to ask both sides of this "debate" what you consider to be a "good overclock"? How do you quantify that? Is 20% good? 30%? 40%? Is good measured by percent or by frequency increase? How does performance and power scaling factor into what is a good chip for overclocking?

[kinkinkijkin]

A good overclock is one that a user can gain an easily-measurable performance from without pulling out the extreme cooling solutions, or making their power supply/vrms explode. (my overclock is a very good example of this; I can now play games at high speeds with CPU-heavy settings cranked up that used to be almost entirely unplayable for me)

And, I didn't exactly state my own logic to the conclusion, just lacked the proper logic to not say anything, in a half-asleep state. Got quite irked by his statement that Athlon II doesn't overclock well, felt the need to satisfy my sleep-induced egotism and attempt to contradict his statement with the story of my Athlon II.

[Anti-Ultimate]

(01-08-2014, 02:20 PM)kinkinkijkin Wrote: or making their power supply/vrms explode.

If you manage to do that, you'll get a cookie. The PC will shutdown long before that happens