1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

FLASH performance boost?

Discussion in 'General Software' started by hoax32, Dec 25, 2012.

  1. hoax32

    hoax32

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    489 (0.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Location:
    TX
    there seems to be a Rev1 and a Rev2 board for the G585 (google)
    When I put in 2x2GB DDR3 same chip multiple programs report dual chanel and not a single one does not.
    Putting in 2 different dimms doesn't give me that.
    hmmmm

    And as for gaming I think I have proven that it handels more or less modern games even on max --- NOW don't get me wrong here!
    I will never see this thing running BF above 1024x768 xD but if it runns even that smooth on low then I don't see a reason why not enjoy some pixelated Deadspace 2 on it from time to time. :)
     
  2. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,275 (6.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,083
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    Then those "multiple programs" are wrong, because Brazos only sports a single channel. This is the same for all Brazos based APUs.

    Try CPU-Z, and I'm willing to bet it will say single channel. Throw a screenshot up when you try it as well.
     
  3. hoax32

    hoax32

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    489 (0.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Location:
    TX
    like I sayed - I only get this mode with 2x2GB reported!
    2 different 4GB sticks won't do it - has to be the same size and clock.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Dec 26, 2012
  4. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,275 (6.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,083
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    That's unusual that it's reporting that way. I suspect CPU-Z might not have been updated to properly identify it on Brazos 2.0. Either way, yeah, it's going to work but it's really not running dual channel. It's important to realize that even if it is misreporting. The biggest benefit you'll get is the larger amount of memory (vram and system memory are shared,) and the slightly faster clock (assuming same timings.)
     
    hoax32 says thanks.
  5. hoax32

    hoax32

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    489 (0.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Location:
    TX
    hmmm kk :/
    But when I have 2x2GB vs 1x4GB I get about %4 higher troughput in RAM benchmark tests.
    Wird.
     
  6. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,275 (6.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,083
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    That's within error, I would call that the same. Dual-channel should give you a lot more than just 4% if it really had 2 channels.
     
    hoax32 says thanks.
  7. hoax32

    hoax32

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    489 (0.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Location:
    TX
    Hmmm ok. :ohwell:
    well - back to topic :p - any tweaks for faster flash? :)
     
  8. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,275 (6.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,083
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    Not really but I also don't quite understand why it would be going slow to begin with (unless you're running it full screen @ 1080p), if it's going really slow it could be a problem with GPU accelerated flash video. Are you running the latest catalyst drivers or tried disabling GPU accelerated flash (or enabling it if it is disabled)?

    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/891337
     
  9. hoax32

    hoax32

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    489 (0.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Location:
    TX
    yep!
    tryed all!
    And CPU also only capps at %80.
    It's NOT SLOW but it could be better!
    I want the CPU to put %100 into flash but it's only 70-%80 and I get poor 20 FPS on animations.
     
  10. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,275 (6.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,083
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    Not all software will use 100% of your CPU, even more so when you start using more than 1 core. That sounds about right to me. I doubt you'll get that to go much faster.

    If this is @ 1080p, I would try dropping down to 720P, I bet you that it will run better, albeit with jagged edges on a 1080P display, but you know all about that running games at low graphics. ;)
     
    hoax32 says thanks.
  11. hoax32

    hoax32

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    489 (0.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Location:
    TX
    1080p h.264 video plays perfect with only %50 cpu load
    im talking about NON VIDEO flash :)
    .swf files for example - why wont the cpu try HARDER!!??? xD
    It's like a truck that has 300HP but will only go 250HP.
    CPU has %20 - %30 breathing space and I wanna find a way of pushing it higher - setting the process priority to real time got me to %85.
     
  12. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,275 (6.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,083
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    Right, video is GPU accelerated. Vector animation IS NOT and relies on the CPU to do those vector calculations and at higher resolutions it hits the CPU harder. Just try lowing the resolution to see if it makes a difference. As a programmer I can tell you that when you start using multiple threads you have to lock data and there are only certain segments of code that can be made to run in parallel so it's very unlikely that it will hit 100% because that isn't how the application was programmed. This isn't a car where you give it throttle and it goes, it's much more complex than that and it's very important to realize that.
     
    hoax32 says thanks.
  13. hoax32

    hoax32

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    489 (0.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Location:
    TX
    would be nice if Adobe could make that GPU accelerated somehow - but im asking for too much.
    Well thank you for all the info :)
    Seems like I have to tweak the CPU a little with Brazostweker!
    Thanks again!
    If any1 has to add feel free !!! :D
     
  14. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,275 (6.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,083
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    I don't think that you're realizing that this is simply a CPU or memory bandwidth bottleneck (or both), it's not much more complex than that. You didn't get a super fast CPU and it's going to struggle with a lot of things. Just keep that in mind.

    Good luck. :toast:
     
    hoax32 says thanks.
  15. hoax32

    hoax32

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    489 (0.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Location:
    TX
    dont think its the ram!
    my core 2 duo with 533mhz single chanel handles it just fine - pritty sure it's the cpu but I don't even wanna imagine how a atom would run this thing haha
     
  16. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,275 (6.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,083
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    I agree, but it's always a consideration.
    C2Ds aren't that slow, in fact it is most likely faster.
    Hah! Yeah, certainly not better but I wouldn't imagine that it would be that much less if it isn't more (which I doubt it is). Newer atoms aren't that bad in comparison if you don't consider the iGPU.
     
  17. hoax32

    hoax32

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    489 (0.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    48
    Location:
    TX
    Yeah core 2 duos are much faster!
    I would say the E2-1800 is more like Core Duo speed or a AMD Turion64 X2 speed.
    I can tell you that a N270 it slower than a pentium 3 @ 1.4GHz!
    Youtube only runs @240p on that thing.
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page