LinkedKube
Posts: 3,385 +55
Yes apparently your psu cant support more things, with no more connectors that should be a sure fire tale tell that you need to upgrade the psu.
So you only have PCI slots and want to game?
- Thread starter vnf4ultra
- Start date
Yes apparently your psu cant support more things, with no more connectors that should be a sure fire tale tell that you need to upgrade the psu.
Rage_3K_Moiz
Posts: 5,403 +43
It should, but don't expect it to last very long if you add more HDDs or upgrade your card to a more powerful one like the HD 4850\4870.
Tha General
Posts: 1,105 +0
Not sure about XP, but for Vista yes the 175.16 are the best and does not give you a bottleneck in games. For XP, i gather its the same, the ones that shipped with the disc. They seem to be the most stable , the new drivers aren't for the card. But i guess you could always do some testing with certain games, but as i said the 175.16 are the best because with other drivers, i detect some bottlenecking.
In crysis for example.
Tha General
Posts: 1,105 +0
No its not, and i already prove to you and other people over and over again.
No need to continue proving my point tho.
xpunkdthrice
Posts: 13 +0
Well i never tried the 175.16 drivers for my 8400 gs. I did for my old FX 5500 but thats different. Im currently using the 18x.xx drivers and i think its bottlenecking. With the 18x.xx drivers crysis runs at around 15 fps on low settings w/ 800 x 600 res. My CPU isnt that great ( P4 2.1 GHz 400 fsb)
LinkedKube
Posts: 3,385 +55
It seems like Rage and myself keep coming to this thread to make sure its grounded, most of the things you post I say nothing about because you actually are one of the few people keeping the forum up to date on new pci cards(thanks for that by the way) BUT the pci bus is a huge bottleneck in any system, unless you're running a pIII or similar k8 from amd. The tale tell that it is a bottle neck is the fact.......wait for it
Many many reviews of pci performance, dating to the early 2000's. Oh or the fact that there was an innovation called agp, which is yet faster than pci. Like I said, you do post helpful things, but when you say things, that could clearly be proven wrong by a 9 year old doing a google search, I'm kind of forced to step in.
Tha General
Posts: 1,105 +0
Ok you think the 18xx series is bottlenecking, which it does on my end anyway. I have a BFG 8400GS 512MB PCI. So you tried the 175.16 so what happen?
Try running crysis with the 8400gs and use the 175.16 or the 175.80 drivers at 1280x1024 all low and tell me how it works. Also don't forget to config your nvidia control panel, turn off v-sync, keep the quality at high, turn on gamma aa.
you've proven nothing
electromagnetic
Posts: 211 +0
Try Freedom Force 1 & 2 PC game with new drivers you get some bugs. But roll back to 94.24 or older and it goes away why ?
Is it just with PCI cards, demo available.
Is it just with PCI cards, demo available.
Tha General
Posts: 1,105 +0
The 6200 = 81.98 most stable driver. Anything higher is bad, but the 175.80 are pretty good, second best next to the 81.98. Never tried the 94.24 tho. Older cards works best with older drivers, but with the 175.80 it seems pretty decent, but the 81.98 are the most stable IMO.
Have btw, what card are you planning to buy from the 6200?
electromagnetic
Posts: 211 +0
http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/products/a1062x1y0z1p0s0n0m0
One of those if I can get a picture of the card.
One of those if I can get a picture of the card.
xpunkdthrice
Posts: 13 +0
Well i dont have acess to my computer right now but i will test it soon...
On my FX 5500 the 175.16 drivers gave me the best performance on Source games
Btw are the 175.80 drivers any better than the 175.16 ?
electromagnetic
Posts: 211 +0
Tha General does the glitches that appear in Timeshift and other games stop with your new graphics cards.
Tha General
Posts: 1,105 +0
The only card to get for gaming on that page is the EVGA 9400GT and its right here if you want see how it looks:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130499
The GPU-Z is here:
http://gpuz.techpowerup.com/09/06/24/84n.png
The stats are really good for a PCI card and plus it has 16.0GB the most i seen on a PCI so far.
You talking about artifacts and spots, nope. Only seem to happen when i use the 6200. But with my HD2400 or 8400gs it does not appear. If you buy the 9400gt, you should be able to run the game with ease and without problems.
Tha General
Posts: 1,105 +0
Well i haven't use the FX5500 in a while, but i never had any issues running the new drivers with that old card. I was really talking about the 6200 cards. The fx5500 card i have, ran more than perfect using windows 98se tho. Never bother to use it using xp or vista. When i ran windows 98se and use the FX5500, i was using the Version: 56.64 or Version: 81.98. But i did test them out once using XP, with the 175.80 and i didn't have any trouble.
xpunkdthrice
Posts: 13 +0
Well i dont use the fx 5500 anymore ever since i got the 8400 gs. I havent tested any drivers for the 8400 gs
I dont think the 6200 is a big increase in performance compared to the fx 5500 is it?
Tha General
Posts: 1,105 +0
Use the 175.16 , seems to be the best. But it may be different in XP. But if the 175.16 works good in vista, should be even better in XP.
Um yes, about 4x more powerful. I was using my FX5500 for about 3 years, but when i got the 6200, what a difference a card makes. The BFG OC anyway. Don't bother with Overclocking.
Then I've proven Russel's Teapot exists. The amount of handwavium utilized in both cases is about equal.
You haven't proven anything, because you've never shown a comparison between a PCI card and its PCI-E counterpart - Which is the only valid proof in this case.
However, I can easily prove PCI is a bottleneck even on something like the HD4350. How ? Simple, I have one running at PCI-E x1 (Which has more bandwidth than PCI) and I have compared it to running at PCI-E x16.
Read all about it here:
Link to techPowerUp! discussion thread
Oh and also, it happens to bury any of your Crysis arguments in the dust. The HD4350 is more powerful that the 8400GS (Holding its own against the 9400GT) and running at the lowest settings at 1680x1050 yielded an average FPS of 16.5 at PCI-E x16 bandwidth, and 13.6 FPS when running at PCI-E x1 bandwidth.
The test was run on a Q9650 overclocked to 4Ghz on the DFI LanParty JR P45-TR2S motherboard, with 6Gb of DDR2 RAM running at around 892Mhz.
In other words, stop spreading FUD all over the place. You've been proven to provide false or misrepresented results twice now.
Tha General
Posts: 1,105 +0
I am not even using the 8400gs, i am using the 2400HD. I read that post, i post over there if you didn't know already.
Anyways, lowest settings at 1680x1050 16.5fps with pcie 13.6fps with pciex1 hmmm
You should lower your resolution.
But um you may want to look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4TcKDhOdqU
My lastest video using my 2400HD, look at the stats to the right and look at the displayinfo running in the game. PCI is not a bottleneck, because if it was, at those settings i should of got mayb 1-5fps, but clearly i do not.
Let me take a guess, i edit the video stats right? lol hahaah
This post is harsh, beware:
Tha General, you are beyond hope, and far beyond being even remotely worthy of an argument on my part at this point, because you are a waste of time. Thus, I'll focus on something more productive than arguing with a brick wall.
Everyone else can appreciate your videos for the bullshit they are (You're not getting an average of over 12-13 fps over there, so stop claiming playable framerates of "15-30" or whatever your latest line of bullshit is).
Good day.
Tha General, you are beyond hope, and far beyond being even remotely worthy of an argument on my part at this point, because you are a waste of time. Thus, I'll focus on something more productive than arguing with a brick wall.
Everyone else can appreciate your videos for the bullshit they are (You're not getting an average of over 12-13 fps over there, so stop claiming playable framerates of "15-30" or whatever your latest line of bullshit is).
Good day.
xpunkdthrice
Posts: 13 +0
i will try using the 175.16's for my 8400 gs.. But you mentioned something about bottlenecking with other drivers?
And have you had any luck with overrclocking your 8400 gs card?
Also would my P4 2.1 Ghz CPU cause bottlenecking with the 8400 gs in Source games? L4d cant seem to go higher than 30 fps for me..
Tha General
Posts: 1,105 +0
Yes slightly bottleneck and yes stable. The games did not run as smooth like it does with the 175.16. My advice do some testing with one game vs the 175.16 and the new drivers.
567/333 to 650/400 , but didn't make one bit of a difference, i don't OC anymore, seems pointless and dumb and a waste of time. I get better performance with stock settings and besides when i buy a card, i like to keep the card forever, OC is risky.
The only way you will get a performance boost with any card if you OC at extreme levels, but you need a super PSU and good cooling to do it.
I know i am getting to catch heat saying this, but i stick to my word. Video cards do not get bottleneck by your CPU. I ran a Pentium III/600MHZ with 512MB and a 90watts PSU and i ran the 8400gs in it and the 2400hd and i still got amazing performance in games.
Your computer is fine, your card shouldn't cause any bottleneck " unless " you have something in your computer that is causing it. My Pentium III was bottleneck and the card took a huge hit, but it wasn't my CPU that was doing it, it was my External HD being hooked up to the USB 2.0 card. When i remove the eXTERnal hd to the back of my mb, my video cards and system was running better and i got a huge performance increase. So make sure you don't have alot of junk in your computer.
What settings are you running it on? resolution, settings? etc
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Apple could increase iPhone prices, but won't blame Trump's tariffs- dirtyferret replied
-
Mexico sues Google for renaming Gulf of Mexico to Gulf of America- scavengerspc replied
-
Ransomware can now run directly on the CPU, researcher warns- brucek replied
