Building a poker computer

[wacki]

Does a dual core run pokertracker faster than a single processor? Has anyone benchmarked this? Or do you have to go w/ a ram drive for blazing speed. :-( Pokertracker is slow as hell on my computer and I've got all the updates, postgreSQL, etc....

My current setup is an:
AMD 2400+
Asus A7n8x deluxe
756 mb ram


I'm thiking about building an:
Asus A8N-SLI Premium
2xCorsair PC3200 1gig ram
AMD Athlon 64 (939) 3200+ 90nm
Antec P180 Mid Tower Case
Thermalright XP-120
MSI RX300HM-TD128E Radeon X300SE 128MB with HyperMemory


I still need to do research but that is what I'm looking at. I don't play video games, but I don't want any delays when running poker tracker!

[jnalpak]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm thiking about building an:
Asus A8N-SLI Premium
2xCorsair PC3200 1gig ram
AMD Athlon 64 (939) 3200+ 90nm
Antec P180 Mid Tower Case
Thermalright XP-120
MSI RX300HM-TD128E Radeon X300SE 128MB with HyperMemory


I still need to do research but that is what I'm looking at. I don't play video games, but I don't want any delays when running poker tracker!

[/ QUOTE ]

This may be overkill for a "poker pc" but it will last you at least 2 years of solid performance

[obsidian]

Go dual core. The X2 3800+ is nice. It won't make poker tracker run any faster but you generally don't run poker tracker by itself. It will make multitasking so when you are running poker tracker + poker ace + party poker + absolute things will be more smooth. Else it looks fine. I use that same MB and it is great.

[send_the_msg]

i would really drop in a super fast hard drive in there. something like this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16822144160

should do the trick. also new egg is having a "spooky sale" on it

[MrMoo]

My understanding of dual core processors was that the capability of running multithreaded apps was improved. I don't believe PokerTracker is multithreaded. That being said, I'm guessing you would still see some speed improvement because other applications could be handed off to the other processor while PokerTracker was using another core. I guess it largely depends on how the dual core technology works. I'll admit I don't have a lot of knowledge in this area so I'm taking logical guesses. Ultimately I'd guess you'd see some improvement but no where near 2x.

I'm running same mobo, 3200+ and a gig of ram and I don't have a noticable speed problem with PokerTracker until I start to switch between screens. Even then it's not too bad. I should also mention that I'm not yet running PostgreSQL and I also have probably only 100,000 hands in my db.

I will say the video card is overkill if you're not playing video games. If you wanted to save some money you could probably use what you're already using.

Another post mentioned getting a faster harddrive. It's a great suggestion and probably worth checking out. You could also consider using a decent raid card and speeding things up even more. If you've got the cash and your really serious, consider getting a ram drive off of Ebay.

Sorry to say I don't have any benchmarks to share. Just some logical assumptions. If you do decide to benchmark things, please post the results as I would be very interested.

Good luck.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]

I will say the video card is overkill if you're not playing video games. If you wanted to save some money you could probably use what you're already using.

[/ QUOTE ]

The video card is $50. It will be powering 2 dell 2001FP's running 1600x1200

[MyMindIsGoing]

I advice you not to get the A64, get a P4 with an Intel mobo instead.

[wacki]

Ya, I worded my comments wrong. I was just wondering if anyone had any history of running PT on a dual core vs. single core and noticed a difference. PostgreSQL is multithreaded, but I don't know how that translates to real world performance and all. Even if it's not faster, avoiding stalls may be worth the extra loot.

As for the raptor, I'll think about it. I'm trying to balance speed and noise. Hence the super duper heatsink and the Antec P180... (which may be overkill but gosh darnit I love thermalright. :-P)

[MyMindIsGoing]

See it this way: If you are running ONE program and it is not threaded it will not be faster on either HT or Dual core cpus. If you run TWO programs that might both need alot of cputime, then both will benefit, threaded or not. So if you run PT, datamine and do all sort of things that are cpu intence, dual core will benefit you.

[obsidian]

[ QUOTE ]
Ya, I worded my comments wrong. I was just wondering if anyone had any history of running PT on a dual core vs. single core and noticed a difference. PostgreSQL is multithreaded, but I don't know how that translates to real world performance and all. Even if it's not faster, avoiding stalls may be worth the extra loot.

As for the raptor, I'll think about it. I'm trying to balance speed and noise. Hence the super duper heatsink and the Antec P180... (which may be overkill but gosh darnit I love thermalright. :-P)

[/ QUOTE ]
Thermalright makes damn nice heatsinks. I also use a XP-120. If you want to cut the noise I would suggest a Panaflo L1A 120mm fan for it. Also, the Nexus 120mm fans are great quiet case fans. Highly recommended from Silent PC Review (http://www.silentpcreview.com/).

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
See it this way: If you are running ONE program and it is not threaded it will not be faster on either HT or Dual core cpus. If you run TWO programs that might both need alot of cputime, then both will benefit, threaded or not. So if you run PT, datamine and do all sort of things that are cpu intence, dual core will benefit you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know all about the theory. I have programed multithreaded aps in Java, C++, scheme, perl.....

Theory does not always translate into real world performance. For instance, Intels hyperthreading feature will often slow programs down. The same goes with dual cpu mobo's. I understand the theory better than the vast majority of the people on this board do. I was simply wondering if anyone had any real world experience. I explained this in the post you replied to. Often the common user has more to share in that department than a full time computer scientist that has only read the label on the box.

Also, I disagree with your low content intel post.

[ThePinkBunny]

I have that exact motherboard and ram. Get a couple of hard drives and set up either a raid 0+1 or a raid 5... or just a raid 0, if you regularly back stuff up another way.

I have the 4600, and I can tell a big difference between it and my old 3.2 GHz pentium computer I had. With my old computer I felt some lag running Pokertracker, gametime, poker, depending on which sites I was running.

[kyleb]

I have a dual Xeon 2.8ghz machine utilizing RDRAM still, and I can personally say that multi-processor machines have significantly decreased lag time and allowed for very smooth operations of PartyMine, PokerTracker, and multiple other server applications that run full time. I highly recommend a SATA-150 hard drive and a dual processor setup.

Good luck!

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm running same mobo, 3200+ and a gig of ram and I don't have a noticable speed problem with PokerTracker until I start to switch between screens.

[/ QUOTE ]

What kind of a hard drive setup do you have?

[wacki]

kyleb, how much ram and what hard drives do you have?

[astroglide]

raid 0 isn't going to improve service time, it's just going to increase your sustained transfer rates. this is useful for large sequential loads (e.g. copying a 2GB file back and forth) but for random access it's not going to do anything for you.

if you hit ctrl-shift-esc you can look at your peak commit charge to see what the most amount of ram that you've simultaneously used is since your last reboot. odds are it's not anywhere close to 2GB.

[kyleb]

[ QUOTE ]
kyleb, how much ram and what hard drives do you have?

[/ QUOTE ]

2 GB of RDRAM with a pair of SATA-100 Western Digital HDs, 200 GBs each. I will be upgrading to a pair of SATA-150s eventually. No RAID set-up, even though my board supports it (giant waste, as you no doubt know).

[astroglide]

[ QUOTE ]
a pair of SATA-100 Western Digital HDs, 200 GBs each. I will be upgrading to a pair of SATA-150s eventually.

[/ QUOTE ]

a faster drive interface doesn't innately mean a faster drive. i don't know if this is what you actually believe, but it's one of the most common myths in storage performance.

[kyleb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
a pair of SATA-100 Western Digital HDs, 200 GBs each. I will be upgrading to a pair of SATA-150s eventually.

[/ QUOTE ]

a faster drive interface doesn't innately mean a faster drive. i don't know if this is what you actually believe, but it's one of the most common myths in storage performance.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I know.

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
raid 0 isn't going to improve service time, it's just going to increase your sustained transfer rates. this is useful for large sequential loads (e.g. copying a 2GB file back and forth) but for random access it's not going to do anything for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never considered raid 0. Right now I've been thinking about getting a reasonably priced 160 GB Seagate barracuda 7200.9 which has a read/write time of 13.7 and 14.9 via IPEAK SPT. The raptor's times are about half of that according to storage review. Right now I'm just wondering if the raptor is worth it as I still not sure how that will effect real world PT performance. I have no special urge to buy one but I've seen so many people go nuts over it.

All I know is I never look at my stats because it takes several minutes to switch between windows. PT always goes into "not responding" mode via the task manager when the computer is plugging away. When accessing my stats CPU is only around 8% usage so I'm guessing the raptor is probably the way to go.

[ QUOTE ]
if you hit ctrl-shift-esc you can look at your peak commit charge to see what the most amount of ram that you've simultaneously used is since your last reboot. odds are it's not anywhere close to 2GB.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have and it's 1.05 GB. Considering the cost of value ram I figured going for 2 GB is a no brainer. I guess I could get a 1 gig and a 512 but I've found good package deals on 2x1 GB's.

Thanks for the advice astro.

[astroglide]

pokertracker is io-bound, and the raptor isn't that expensive. if you're sweating pt performance at all i'd suggest buying one. don't expect a performance miracle compared to a modern drive in terms of typical use, though.