AMD's Cool & Quiet tech and Gaming

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am an Intel to AMD convert and I just received my first AMD processor today. I have the 3200+ socket 939 and the Asus motherboard for it. Now from what I understand, the cool and quiet technology slows down the processor until the apps need the extra power. I play games on my PC. Specifically I play World of Warcraft. Now I also have a MAC that has the feature that slows down the processor when the apps are not too demanding. This degraded the performance in World of Warcraft somewhat heavily. When I turned this feature off, performance increased. Now from those of you with AMD experience, does the cool and quiet feature degrade performance in games? Should I turn it off in the BIOS? I'm at work so I haven't had a chance to mess with any of it yet. Thanks for the help.
 
do you really need to cool your cpu? the cpu will be cooler anyway when not much is going on. do you know your cpu's average temp?
 
QnC

I am a gamer or an assasin as the my name my implie... QnC is still being developed on the PC form factor I have found ALL QnC apps for PC to be very Buggy, and at times for somereason even killing Antivirus software and or bogging down Windows Startup time. I have had errors due to QnC that were about the same as trying to run Norton 2002 on a 64 bit Rig... and I made that misstake, buy the way Norton 2002 and 2003 will Bug out if you run then on 64 bit systems I am told 2004 will to but others say it works fine. Norton has mad a comeback with 2005 if you have a 64 bit system. I have noticed you sould uninstall Norton 2005 on a 64 bit if you are moving from a 32 bit o/s to 64 then reinstall... Back to QnC Don't use it, it sucks! :knock:
 
Thanks for the posts guys. I didn't get to read them until now. The default setting in my BIOS had set the CnQ tech to off. I will just keep it off as my processor runs very cool. It's so much better than my Prescott 3ghz. The performance increase is substantial as well.
 
Just my $.02, I run cool-n-quiet on my pc... none of my games lag (Doom 3, far cry, splinter call, halo, etc.) The time it takes to switch from "low speed" to "full speed" is crazy low anyway. My advice... play with it off, then play with it on. If you notice a difference, I commend you, sir, for being attentive. With cool-n-quiet, the CPU is just that... cool... and quiet. My CPU at idle runs in the very low 30's as in 32 most of the time. Without CnQ, it is a pretty standard 40 deg Idle. Anyway, that's all I got.
 
My Prescott loving friend has made his mind up that his next upgrade will be a s939 system. :) He's running a 3.0Ghz.
 
I will again say, try it... and, if you think it sucks, turn it off. It isn't like there is a commitment there. You have nothing to loose.
 
I do understand your concern with the gaming thing, i built the same system for my friend and he plays CS:S and HL2 which can be very demanding. What i found works best with that kind of system is just an array of fans. The QnC technology is mainly used in servers or computers used as servers so that the processor doesn't have to work hard at all times. I would say turn it off, and buy urself some decent fans. If you buy a new case, you should be able to fit around 6-8 fans in there. I know this sounds alot but you have to remember this cools everything else down. But thats just me, if you find another way to go about this then i'm all thumbs. :grinthumb
 
6-8 fans.... Talk about going the extreme other way. From cool and quiet to cool and "HOLY CRAP THIS IS LOUD!". There comes a point were another fan is counter-productive. If you "need" 8 fans to keep things cool, you might want to look into why it is so freakin hot in the first place. Maybe try watercooling. Anyway, I'm a fan of cool-n-quiet (hope it wasn't to obvious) because it works as advertised. While the CPU isn't under load, it is cool... it is quiet... My PC is in my room where I sleep. I wouldn't want to have to listen to something that sounds like a 747 taking off all the time. Just my opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back