So you only have PCI slots and want to game?

[PCIGamer]

Doom 3 is silky smooth on an 8400GS. Compared to a FX5200 PCI which was a slideshow.

But I know what you mean, considering dual-core/PCI-E CPU's and MBs are dirt cheap these days.

However, If someone had a PCI only system and they only wanted to spend $30-$40 dollars on an upgrade i would probably recommend the 8400GS

 

[electromagnetic]

My FPS from Tomb Raider Legend. I get about 30fps in 800 x 600, 60GHz.

About the same for Tomb Raider Anniversary.

 

[Tha General]

I don't know if you guys read my post about my performance i got in games and overall system performance. But my computer was being bottleneck with the external HD hook up in the wrong place, now that its in the right place, there is no more bottlenecking in gaming. So with that being said, something must be wrong with you guys computer( for the ones who was benchmarking crysis ).

I just ran crysis at 1280x1024 medium to low and got 10-22fps. i can walk through the level without having to look down sometimes, its like my computer is free now.

Here is 2 screens:

http://www.filecram.com/files/CrysisLS1.jpg
Looking up at the skies, i get 18+ fps

http://www.filecram.com/files/SLCRYSISAA.jpg
1280x1024 Medium to Low, With AAX2. 10fps.+

I also notice that when saving games now, it only takes 1-2 seconds, where it use to take over 3 mins. Still using my 2400HD card , with Catalyst 8.12 in Windows 2000.

http://www.filecram.com/files/CrysisSL3.jpg
1280X1024 medium to low, no AA.

The settings which i am playing at is 1280x1024, Shader, Post Processing, Water, Physics and Volumetic effects at medium and the rest at low. Seems like since the bottlenecking is gone, my Pentium III and my 2400HD is running at its full power now.

Some more random shots at 1280x1024 medium to low, resize to 1024x768

http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/crysissl6-qDMku.jpg
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/dsx-3zXmd.jpg
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/crysissl-35q2Y.jpg

 

[Tha General]

My FPS from Tomb Raider Legend. I get about 30fps in 800 x 600, 60GHz.

About the same for Tomb Raider Anniversary.

Thats good man, however you should up the resolution. I can play Tomb Raider legend with my 6200 and 2400HD at 1280x1024 full screen effects, no AA, water reflections, etc full. And get between 25-50.

 

[PCIGamer]

I don't know if you guys read my post about my performance i got in games and overall system performance. But my computer was being bottleneck with the external HD hook up in the wrong place, now that its in the right place, there is no more bottlenecking in gaming. So with that being said, something must be wrong with you guys computer( for the ones who was benchmarking crysis ).

There is nothing wrong with my computer for benchmarking Crysis. Try running the official Crysis benchmark tool and let us know the numbers that come out of it. It will report average FPS and not the fabricated numbers you are telling people.

 

[Tha General]

Not something wrong with your computer, i meant the drivers you may be using or something else. You or someone else said you couldn't play crysis at 1280x1024 or you said not very good. The game doesn't drag at all on my end at that resolution. Nevertheless, does the crysis benchmark tool work for the demo?
Whats the link to the tool btw.
I have to download the demo again and post results later.

 

[PCIGamer]

I said it was a slideshow at 1280x1024. And it is.

the Benchmark Tool can be found at http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?det=1791

it works fine with the demo

 

[Tha General]

I am going to benchmark using Crysis Warhead , i just hope this tool works on windows 2000. lol.
I will have results later.


EDIT: DOES NOT WORK IN WIN2K.
Oh well.

 

[FusilliJerry82]

10-18 FPS is abysmal.

 

[Tha General]

Hey teklord if you are around, you mention that the X1550 was 64bit
http://www.gpureview.com/radeon-x1550-pci-card-506.html

Is the Visiontek and diamond version the only versions with 128bit?
I think you said that, or someone else did, can't remember? I am going to buy a X1550 as a backup radeon card for this computer soon. 64bit is cool tho, so if i can't get a 128bit version, i will just grab the HIS x1550 over at newegg.

 

[FusilliJerry82]

For the $73 you're spending on one, you could literally have almost a new system.

 

[MetalX]

For the $73 you're spending on one, you could literally have almost a new system.

In fact, that's true. $73 could probably buy a faster system than what Tha General is running now

But I think it's admirable that in this consumer society with the manufacturers of hardware and software wanting us to upgrade every year, he is still getting by just fine on a Pentium 3.

 

[FusilliJerry82]

That would be true if he had the same Geforce 256 that probably originally came with it. But he's probably spent more on PCI cards to satisfy the companies plenty.

 

[hrlow2]

Hey General. Your rig is getting downed again.
I personally happen to like the P3s. Had several in my time. In the right setup and configuration,they can be the brains of a really nice machine, regardless of what some people think.

 

[FusilliJerry82]

You're losing sight here;

Nice for what? Common tasks and light gaming? Sure.

NOT txt removed CRYSIS!

Moderator Edit:
It's good to have a healthy debate
But lets make sure it's friendly too

 

[Tha General]

I spent a few hundreds of dollars on PCI cards, my last pci buy was the 2400HD which i am using now, i spent 135 dollars on it. Is it worth that much? no, say 80, but hey thats the past now. The X1550 will cost me only 60 dollars tho, because i am not buying it from newegg, the 8600GT PCI is only 80 dollars. Hey what i can say, i love pci

Hey General. Your rig is getting downed again.
I personally happen to like the P3s. Had several in my time. In the right setup and configuration,they can be the brains of a really nice machine, regardless of what some people think.

If you read my other thread about my performance boost, i get no more bottlenecking, my computer and my 2400HD card seems to be running at its full power now. Timeshift for example, runs at 18-35fps, and this is at very high settings at 1024x768. So i am happy with my rig which i have been using since 2000.

Everyone needs to understand tho, i am buying a new rig soon, when i get ready too. Its going to be a Intel pentium dual core with 2.4ghz on it, and i am buying the 8600GT PCI as the main card, and as a backup the 1GB 4670 by diamond which is my fav company.

 

[FusilliJerry82]

If you are soon, then why get the x1550? And where are you getting the 8600GT PCI? That could be the only PCI card worth anyone's time. A 4670 will kick the crap out of it though, that's the card to put in the forefront.

And a phonetic spelling-out of a curse abbreviated to only its first letter is taboo here? That's PG stuff. Whatever, no ill-intent here, won't do it again I guess.

 

[electromagnetic]

If you are soon, then why get the x1550? And where are you getting the 8600GT PCI? That could be the only PCI card worth anyone's time. A 4670 will kick the crap out of it though, that's the card to put in the forefront.

And a phonetic spelling-out of a curse abbreviated to only its first letter is taboo here? That's PG stuff. Whatever, no ill-intent here, won't do it again I guess.

FusilliJerry82 What are your specs you don't say. So one question do you work for a PC company ?

 

[FusilliJerry82]

E4300 @ 3.42Ghz, 2GB DDR2-800, GTX260.

Are you being serious with that question? Like I'm being such a salesman trying to encourage someone to move beyond a technology that is dying? No I don't. I don't work for a DVD player company either, so you can hold on to your Betamax without pressure.

 

[Tha General]

People should be able to use what they like, and thats what i am doing. Since my computer has been bottleneck free, i know for a fact now that pci cards are not bottlenecks and they perform very good with the right setup. PCI cards are old yes, wait a min, i meant old technology, however they are good with gaming and other things to do.

So for the pci users, thanks for the support I for one will keep using them until they stop making them!

If you are soon, then why get the x1550? And where are you getting the 8600GT PCI? That could be the only PCI card worth anyone's time. A 4670 will kick the crap out of it though, that's the card to put in the forefront.

I am buying a His X1550 as a backup Radeon card for this rig my P3. I have the geforce 6200, but it has issues with playing games, issues as in some of the old games do not work well with game, crashes and stuff, but radeon cards work just fine with it. And the X1550 will be perfect for it.
You ask where i am getting the Albatron 8600GT, that i can't tell you, not right now anyway. Wait until i get it, then i will let everyone know. What i can tell you, you have to fly out of the states to be able to buy it, which i am doing.
Its nice to have 2 different cards , nvidia and geforce. I fav the 4670 card over the 8600GT, however i fav PCI over PCIE.

peace.

 

[Tha General]

Here is the correct infomation to what these new pci video cards using
[ PLX Technology ExpressLane PEX 8111 PCI Express-to-PCI Bridge ]

Device Properties:
Device Description PLX Technology ExpressLane PEX 8111 PCI Express-to-PCI Bridge
Bus Type PCI
Bus / Device / Function 1 / 8 / 0
Device ID 10B5-8111
Subsystem ID 0000-0000
Device Class 0604 (PCI/PCI Bridge)
Revision 21
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions Not Supported

Device Features:
66 MHz Operation Supported
Bus Mastering Enabled

from my 2400HD

[ PCI Express 1.0 x16: ATI Radeon HD 2400 (RV610) ]

Graphics Processor Properties:
Video Adapter ATI Radeon HD 2400 (RV610)
BIOS Version 010.059.000.004.000000
BIOS Date 12/11/07 04:31
GPU Code Name RV610
Part Number 113-AB19003-100-IT
PCI Device 1002-94CC / 1545-3250 (Rev 00)
Transistors 180 million
Process Technology 65 nm
Die Size 82 mm2
Bus Type PCI Express 1.0 x16 @ x1
Memory Size 256 MB
GPU Clock 520 MHz (original: 525 MHz)
RAMDAC Clock 400 MHz
Pixel Pipelines 4
TMU Per Pipeline 1
Unified Shaders 40 (v4.0)
DirectX Hardware Support DirectX v10
Pixel Fillrate 2080 MPixel/s
Texel Fillrate 2080 MTexel/s

Memory Bus Properties:
Bus Type DDR2
Bus Width 64-bit
Real Clock 396 MHz (DDR) (original: 400 MHz)
Effective Clock 792 MHz
Bandwidth 6336 MB/s

Miscellaneous:
Fan Speed 30%
Utilization 5%

ATI PowerPlay (BIOS):
State #1 GPU: 525 MHz, Memory: 400 MHz (Boot)
State #2 GPU: 525 MHz, Memory: 400 MHz (OverDrive)
State #3 GPU: 525 MHz, Memory: 400 MHz


Took this from everest

 

[FusilliJerry82]

People should be able to use what they like, and thats what i am doing.

Fine. Just don't mislead others into thinking they're going to get a good gaming experience with new games, because it isn't happening.

Since my computer has been bottleneck free, i know for a fact now that pci cards are not bottlenecks and they perform very good with the right setup. PCI cards are old yes, wait a min, i meant old technology, however they are good with gaming and other things to do.

Yes, PCI is most certainly a bottleneck. The fact that Albatron themselves advertise the 8600GT as getting a mid 1000's score in 3DMark06 (in a setup most certainly better than a P3) when the PCIe version scores in the mid 4000's is a boldface demonstration of that.

I am buying a His X1550 as a backup Radeon card for this rig my P3.

Exactly; why buy a "backup" card right before buying a new computer and demoting the P3 to a secondary role?

I fav the 4670 card over the 8600GT, however i fav PCI over PCIE.

Why? There's absolutely no basis for it! It's one thing to keep buying PCI to keep an older PC alive while half-justifying the expense as tinkering with something that few others do, but its absolute denial to have a PCIe slot and yet still favor PCI. In PCIe, an 8400GS you could get for $20-30 would beat the 8600GT in PCI by a fair margin.

 

[PCIGamer]

I kinda compare it to my old Amiga 3000 computer. I still have one and have kept upgrading over the years. It even has a PCI Graphics board addon card in there Even though in todays age, and for the last 12 years its absolutely dog-slow in everything, i guess there is a love affair with keeping older hardware alive.

Personally I have no issue with it and I am as guilty of spending money on PCI graphics cards as other people in this thread.

My old P4 PC is about as tricked out as you can get. It went from Onboard Intel Graphics->FX5200->FX5500->Geforce 6200->Geforce 8400gs. Thats quite a bit of cash to put down on an upgrade path that probably renders 15%-30% improvements for each upgrade. Heck I will probably pick up the 8600GT if i can find it for a reasonable price point.

The 8400gs that I use on that machine works like a charm. The fact that it can "play" (your mileage may vary ) Crysis, COD4, Fallout 3 etc makes it an easy out for people who dont want to upgrade their computer. To go PCI-E is cheap sure, but you will need to put cash down on a new motherboard, cpu, RAM, video card, PSU upgrade and case. This will set you back at least $500 for something low/mid-range.

Do I use that machine for serious gaming? Heck No, its a Windows MCE machine that talks to my Xbox 360. I run the occasional benchmark on there but thats about it

What I have an issue with is this "benchmarking" of these cards by The General. I couldnt reach 20fps average at 800x600 on Crysis at Low. I couldnt reach 20fps at 800x600 at Fallout 3 at Low and COD4 at 640x480 at Low. And thats on a P4 2.8Ghz system with an overclocked 8400gs, not his P3, ATI 2400 PCI system that runs faster than my rig apparently.

I appreciate his enthusiasm to PCI graphics cards, but I suggest people keep an open mind when they look at his benchmarking numbers

 

[FusilliJerry82]

For a lowish PCIe card, you wouldn't need a new PSU or case. You can get a new motherboard, RAM and processor for about $150 that would eat a P3.

Do you still use the Amiga for your main computer? If you have something modern and are tinkering with an older machine as a hobby, I'm all for that. But it makes absolutely no sense to spend so much money to keep upgrading an ancient machine for your use as your main PC. There's a point where "squeezing" out of a machine simply stops becoming thrifty and crosses into fiscally illogical.

 

[direwolf007]

I don't know if you guys read my post about my performance i got in games and overall system performance. But my computer was being bottleneck with the external HD hook up in the wrong place, now that its in the right place, there is no more bottlenecking in gaming. So with that being said, something must be wrong with you guys computer( for the ones who was benchmarking crysis ).

The is nothing wrong with my computer, or with drivers, or with the benchmark.

The only thing wrong so far in this thread are your results: Your rig "outperforms" two systems (Three, if you count my Via C7-D HTPC - which is also superior to your P3 rig), each being several generations ahead of your ancient P3 ! I don't know who it makes sense to, but it sure isn't me.

I love old-tech. I have more computers than I can count and more spare parts than I can find anything to do with. I have four P3 rigs, ranging from two P3 550Mhz Slot 1 systems controlling some stuff in the house, through a Coppermine 1.1Ghz and my Tualatin Celeron 1.4Ghz. I have three working P4 rigs (3.0Ghz, 2.8Ghz and 2.6Ghz) and a ton more of P4s lying around (10 Celeron Williamette-128s 1.7Ghz, two 1.8Ghz P4As and two more P4 2.4Ghz CPUs). I love all that old trash, because it can perform a lot of tasks very well (And it is always nice to able to provide a friend/relative with a simple office computer, or bargain SD HTPC as a replacement for a downed system, or simply as an extra computer for those who need it), but I don't go running around, spewing wrong/misinterpreted/made up results and telling how great my nearly-decade old P3 runs games.

Why ? Because it doesn't.

Argh.