Hey guys,

My current machine:
Core2duo 2.6Ghz
Intel SSD
2gb RAM
Windows7 64bit (clean system - almost no junk-apps)

I play 24 tables on PokerStars with HoldemManager, TableNina, tableselection-software and 6 AutoHotkey scripts running on a 30" and 20" monitor.

With just PokerStars running (no HUD), it runs at top-speed with no lag at all.
When i turn on all my Software, my tables frequently "hang" for about 300milliseconds when i click action-buttons on the tables. Since i stack my tables and have to play 9 hours per day for SNE, i always get annoyed if it doesnt work supersuper-fast.

My question: Would upgrading my Core2Duo 2,6Ghz to a i5-750 2,6Ghz improve that issue? I'm asking because both have the same Ghz-value and since most software probably isnt optimized for quadcores, will it make any difference at all?

Money doesnt really matter... Should i rather go with super-expensive Intel highspeed-CPUs?

----
Computer is used for poker only - no 3D games.

I can't say for certain that it would resolve your issues since they could be badly coded software hangups rather than some fundemental hardware limit but the i5 750 will vastly out perform a core 2 duo in pretty much any benchmark you care to throw at it. It is a much more recent and better architechture.

The i5 750 is a native quad core which will help if you are running a lot of stuff, has an interated memory controller which will improve memory throughput if you are throwing a lot of data around.

What kind of actual difference that will translate to with your particular set of software running is not something I can answer though.

Does the i5 performance gain depend on the motherboard?

Yes, i5 is a significant upgrade from core2-quad but you'll also need to replace the motherboard.

Indeed the core 2 quad will be a LGA 775 motherboard where as the i5 would be LGA 1156.

if you want to use your system a little longer, upgrade to 4gb ram. 2gb ram for a 64-bit windows system is a bit marginal (you should have used 32-bit windows instead) given you run quite a few applications simultaneously.

but yeah, an i5-750 would be a very significant upgrade. comparing clock frequencies between different processor architectures ("they both are 2.6GHz") is silly. you're comparing apples and oranges. as has been said, upgrading to an i5 means you essentially buy a new system. you'd have to get a new mobo and ram at the same time.

Good advices.

4gb ram is minimum requirement you want here , ram is cheap enough these days might as well stick 6-8gb in with me recommending 8gb

get a faster hard drive on the primary will help

Thank you guys.

Sorry, i didn't mean "upgrading" by just changing the CPU - i think about buying a completely new machine...

One question about RAM:
I currently have 2gb. The windows task manager shows that 1,5gb physical memory is used when i run all software. Will upgrading my old machine from 2 to 4gb change anything? (Just asking because there is only 1,5gb in use)

yes upgrading your ram from 2gb up to 4gb will make a big difference especially since your running windows 7 64bit the minimum ram you should have using 64bit is 4gb although microsoft says 2gb will do the job.

For the price you can get an extra 2gb of ram for(very cheap) then its definatly worth the upgraded and you ll notice more of a difference if you upgrade your ram and leave your processor alone than what you would if you upgraded your processor and never changed your ram.

Its always great to have more RAM, but I HIGHLY doubt that upgrading from 2gb to 4gb of ram has even 20% of the impact the cpu upgrade would have. Seriously, that's not traceable logically in any way.

depending what processor he goes for

I guess its about going from Core2Duo 2,6Ghz to a i5-750?

My 20% figure is only a guess tho, and its probably hazy, but seriously, the speed in a pc system comes from good written software that makes good use of all the new functions such new infrastructures deliver. It's basically a behind the scenes thing.

Although you're right, especially for db-use lots of RAM is very useful, but I would trade 1mb L3 cache for 1gb of ram anytime.

Hes CPU is probably not anywhere close to maxed running that software, and if he is using close to all of his RAM, then he is probably taking a performance hit when his computer is using the pagefile instead of physical ram. Since upgrading to 4GB of RAM is not only much cheaper but also significantly easier than changing boards to get a newer process architecture, I think that a RAM upgrade makes the most sense here.

The only downside is that if the RAM upgrade doesn't give you the performance increase you are hoping for, it probably becomes a sunk cost because you'll most likely want DDR3 RAM if you end up specing out a whole new computer and you wouldn't want to buy DDR3 for your current board.

The CPU you currently have should handle the kind of workload to seem to be describing it has been said several times memory is the main issue and 2GB is not sufficient for a lot of tasks ESP w/SQL running. You sound prepared to upgrade nothing wrong there get a new system 6GB DDR3 minimum, preferrably triple channel. Get a new SSD or just migrate onld one into new system and save some $.
If you can swing getting an i7 I'd opt for that it should give many years of acceptable service.

Exactly

Ya, sounds all great in theory and if you don't ditch deep into that topic.

First of all, you would need a huge database to even have the possibility to read it all from your memory. If your saved hands is "only" 2gb, there's no difference at all between 4gb and 6gb of memory.

Then, while playing, you don't need every hand saved in your memory, postgres does a pretty good job in administrating these priorities as you only need the files relating to the players your hud does display.

Don't get me wrong. I/O throughput is basically the most important factor for database performance, and by having all of the db loaded into your ram you improve your I/O throughput by the factor 10^3 because of ms/us.

OP also has an SSD as main drive so for him the improvement is less drastic.

HEM, which is responsible for the HUD is written in C# and does make ok use of the new architecture features such an CPU upgrade would provide. As OP is complaining about HUD performance, the impact of adding 2gb of ram compared to switch the complete infrastructure, even if the cpu has the same core clock as the old one and only uses one core too, is still a fraction of it.

You know what has really good access times? Cache on the cpu, that's what you really want to have.

I'm not against a RAM upgrade of course, it just won't have the desired impact.

OP, while loading up your tables, open the task manager and look for use of RAM and CPU and tell us all please which is maxed out first ...

thank you guys for your help!
i will buy 2gb ram for the old machine tomorrow since it dosn't cost that much. (and i will give the computer away to family/friends when i buy a new one - so a small investment is no waste if it doesnt work out for me)

wellju: taskmanager looks like this all the time:

a ram upgrade will make a difference to the overall running your machine.

And of course

That's very high CPU utilization. What MB are you running exactly? you might want to spend ~150 to get a http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...5207&Tpk=Q8300 and double your CPU power on top of upgrading the RAM.

It's a stop gap measure but it will give you enough power to extend the life of your machine by two years.

And cache on the CPU won't do you much good if your computer is using your hard drives for paging files (this is the biggest performance bottleneck)

@OP
In your system specs you didn't mention anything about your video controller.
If it is onboard then it is going to slow your system down somewhat even if you are not gaming, the number of windows you have open and the HUD directly writing to those windows. Onboard video is using system RAM which is low in your case, uses memory bandwidth as well as CPU cycles.
Onboard sound controllers in most cases suck performance wise, you didn't mention if you listen to music as you played if you do then you might want to consider a sound card to remove the sound burden from your CPU.
As for your Video card a ATI Radeon 43xx/45xx card with 512MB of RAM would be fine and cost under $60.
If you listen to music a Sound Blaster XI-FI audio card around $45, assuming you have decent speakers, will improve the quality vs the onboard sound and free up CPU cycles.

After looking at your utilization graph, I revise my original suggestion. Upgrade your system (i.e., CPU+mobo+RAM) now, it looks like it'd be well worth it. I still think merely adding 2GB of RAM to the existing system would help. But that might not be enough--at least not for long.

Of course, the i5-750 you mention is a pretty good processor and a decent value. But also look at AM3 and at LGA1155 if your budget is tight and you're looking for good value.

Also, those utilization numbers are high. Without knowing more about your exact hardware/software setup, idk what's going on. But those utilization figures seem somewhat large... You're sure your system is free of malware + bloatware?

Can you post a shot of the processes and filter it by what is using the most resources?

Just click on the CPU header, you probable need to do it twice and scroll to the top.

You may have some virus software doing scans that is slowing you down.

thank you guys for your help.

Beavis: I dont think i have much junk running.



localhostr: lightweight screenshot application
tablescan: tableselection tool
rest should be clear.