So you only have PCI slots and want to game?

Oh alright. I bought the pny version myself the first time, but had to take it back because it wouldn't fit good in my pentium III when i had it. I paid 82 dollars for it lol.
Anyways, if you want to do some benchmarks say with the crysis demo, you know in game benchmarks, r_displayinfo 1, sure. I am installing xp in a few mins.
 
I'm mostly doing benches with vista, I'll do some with win7 when I get it, but I'm doing it so I can send the data to vn4 and he can update the first page. If I cant achieve acceptable results then no one can coming to this thread. That is if they have the intention to play games like crysis.
 
Are you doing your benches with your Core i7 machine? That may defeat the point, as most people looking to buy PCI cards will not be using anything close to that powerful. Or will the system be so GPU bottlenecked that the CPU won't make a noticeable difference?
 
I'm looking for the best results. If I cannot achieve the same results as the general with my setup, having the same setting as he has posted then it wouldn't be possible for him to. I'll also underclock my cpu, to be comparable to an entry level core2quad, I'd have to do a lot of searching to find specific cpu bench programs and statistics and try to tune my cpu clock to those. Then try to fit my cpu somewhere in there and run some more crysis benchmarks.

The 8400gs is a highly recommended card here. If the frame rates arent acceptable with my cpu clocked to a comparable and more affordable cpu and then to the extreme then I think and hope that will give people a better idea of what they're pc is capable of.

Although people can't afford the best cards, it doesn't mean they dont want to play the best games(graphically). I know I'd hate for people to come to this thread and make an ill purchase based on some things that were said, oppose to saving money and upgrading to something more current.
 
Alright i have xp install, i will post some benchmarks tomorrow with the 8400gs, using the 185.85 drivers. Win 7 which i did use, is the same gaming wise like vista IMO.
 
Hello to all. I've been following this thread for quite sometime as I'm one of the many that has only the PCI option and I've been dealing with it for quite a while. I recently purchased an Evga GeForce 9400 GT 1 GB video card for my Dimension 3000 to replace my tried and true Chaintech GeForce 5200 FX 256 MB card which I put into my fiancee's Dimension 3000. Our computers are identical with the exception of the CPU. I have a 3 ghz P4 w/HT and she has a 2.4 ghz Celeron D. The only newish game we play is WoW and the results were shocking to me. The 9400 is playing the game at lower fps than my old 5200 did. All settings are on low for both comps but she is consistently pulling a couple more fps than I do. I also suffer severe drops now, as low as 5-6 fps in some areas, while her comp never drops below 10 fps no matter how intense the area is. My first thought was that the stock Dell 250w psu was not able to handle the new card so I upgraded to a PC Power&Cooling 500w unit.........no difference. Tried a few older drivers and a tweaked driver as well which also yielded no gain over the current Nvidia 190.62 driver. I then thought that perhaps the bus was being saturated so I disabled my sound card and yet again there was no difference in fps. I should add that both cards are oc'd with the 9400 running at 750 mhz core, 550 mhz mem, and 1750 mhz shader and has proven stable at those speeds. The 5200 is running at 310 mhz core and 523 mhz mem. I know Aquamark scores don't mean a whole lot but I wanted to benchmark anyways. 9400 GPU scored 2943 and ran at 25.21 fps while the 5200 GPU scored 1500 and ran at 12.3 fps. All signs point to the 9400 being a superior card but real world results prove otherwise. I open to any suggestions but I thought I'd throw this out there for people considering purchasing this card as an "upgrade" to their older PCI cards. Pretty frustrating to have spent around $160 for a PCI card and PSU only to get a drop in performance.

On a side note to Tha General........I have no idea how you were getting any playable fps on your P3 system. Even at the best I could pull an average of about 18 fps on WoW with my 5200 with all settings on low.
 
Breech said:
Hello to all. I've been following this thread for quite sometime as I'm one of the many that has only the PCI option and I've been dealing with it for quite a while. I recently purchased an Evga GeForce 9400 GT 1 GB video card for my Dimension 3000 to replace my tried and true Chaintech GeForce 5200 FX 256 MB card which I put into my fiancee's Dimension 3000. Our computers are identical with the exception of the CPU. I have a 3 ghz P4 w/HT and she has a 2.4 ghz Celeron D. The only newish game we play is WoW and the results were shocking to me. The 9400 is playing the game at lower fps than my old 5200 did. All settings are on low for both comps but she is consistently pulling a couple more fps than I do. I also suffer severe drops now, as low as 5-6 fps in some areas, while her comp never drops below 10 fps no matter how intense the area is. My first thought was that the stock Dell 250w psu was not able to handle the new card so I upgraded to a PC Power&Cooling 500w unit.........no difference. Tried a few older drivers and a tweaked driver as well which also yielded no gain over the current Nvidia 190.62 driver. I then thought that perhaps the bus was being saturated so I disabled my sound card and yet again there was no difference in fps. I should add that both cards are oc'd with the 9400 running at 750 mhz core, 550 mhz mem, and 1750 mhz shader and has proven stable at those speeds. The 5200 is running at 310 mhz core and 523 mhz mem. I know Aquamark scores don't mean a whole lot but I wanted to benchmark anyways. 9400 GPU scored 2943 and ran at 25.21 fps while the 5200 GPU scored 1500 and ran at 12.3 fps. All signs point to the 9400 being a superior card but real world results prove otherwise. I open to any suggestions but I thought I'd throw this out there for people considering purchasing this card as an "upgrade" to their older PCI cards. Pretty frustrating to have spent around $160 for a PCI card and PSU only to get a drop in performance.
Click to expand...

Not sure why you are getting lower fps with the 9400gt vs the fx5200, a fx5200 out performing in wow over a 9400gt???????????
Have you tried other games?
also, for my 8400gs, the only 190 driver that works good is the 190.38.

Breech said:
On a side note to Tha General........I have no idea how you were getting any playable fps on your P3 system. Even at the best I could pull an average of about 18 fps on WoW with my 5200 with all settings on low.
Click to expand...

I don't have a P3 anymore. But i was getting " pretty good fps " with my bfg 6200 and 8400gs when i had the rig. Btw, you should stop OC, leave everything at stock. I see no performance difference when overclocking any of my cards and they seem to perform worse when OC.
 
Tha General said:
Not sure why you are getting lower fps with the 9400gt vs the fx5200, a fx5200 out performing in wow over a 9400gt???????????
Have you tried other games?
also, for my 8400gs, the only 190 driver that works good is the 190.38.
Click to expand...

I have tried other games but they are all very old and wouldn't be a challenge for this card. Needless to say it handles them fine. I've also tried several drivers going back to the early 180's all the way up to the current 190 and it doesn't seem to make any difference which one I use.

Tha General said:
I don't have a P3 anymore. But i was getting " pretty good fps " with my bfg 6200 and 8400gs when i had the rig. Btw, you should stop OC, leave everything at stock. I see no performance difference when overclocking any of my cards and they seem to perform worse when OC.
Click to expand...

I have to oc the card. When left at stock settings it performs much worse and almost makes wow unplayable.
 
Well if a fx5200 is beating wow in performance over a 9400gt, something is wrong with your setup. I am not too sure what the problem is to be honest with you
 
Tha General said:
Well if a fx5200 is beating wow in performance over a 9400gt, something is wrong with your setup. I am not too sure what the problem is to be honest with you
Click to expand...

I thought that was the case as well but I've gone over everything I can think of probably 10 times now and I've tried so many software combos that I've probably almost killed my poor driver sweeper. I'm convinced at this point that the issue lies within the graphics rendering ability (or lack thereof) of the 9400 gt. It's not a very good card in the PCI-E x16 slot and it chokes down many times over running in standard PCIx1. I imagine it's probably a really good card for a HTPC or very light gaming rig but it seems to really struggle with any type of moderate to above graphics rendering work load.

I was hoping that this card would allow me squeeze another year or so from my old Dell as I didn't want to upgrade until the price of the core I7's and DDR3 came down . People can say all the bad things in the world about Dells but that fact is that this thing has been worked hard for nearly 5 years now and has never once complained. With regular maintenance it has performed flawlessly but the lack of expandability does eventually become a factor. At this point my 7 year old daughter has expressed interest in having her own computer and I think that this setup would do everything she could ask of it with no problems. I was over on the egg's site yesterday piecing together my new build but ran across a deal that just may prove to good to pass up. newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883229115 (sorry, can't post direct links yet) AMD Phenom II x4 955 3.2 ghz, 4gb DDR3, PCI-E x16 Evga GeForce 9800 GT 1gb ..........all prebuilt with Vista 64 installed and a free upgrade coupon to Windows 7 (which I've heard good things about) all for less than the price of doing it myself by about $100-200 depending on the brands you use. Only negative reviews on these comps seem to be the occasional person booting up only to get BSOD's but is usually due to the cheap RAM used........so hit or miss on that part. The only other bad part is the Gigabite mb only has 1 PCI-E x16 slot so that would eventually require an upgrade if you wanted to run dual GPUs. Sure would be nice to step up to a quad core and a real vid card though.
 
Breech said:
It's not a very good card in the PCI-E x16 slot and it chokes down many times over running in standard PCIx1. I imagine it's probably a really good card for a HTPC or very light gaming rig but it seems to really struggle with any type of moderate to above graphics rendering work load.
Click to expand...

Wait, you said PCIEX16 alot? you do have a PCI card right??????????????????
you also said PCIEX1 ???????????????????????????
I am confused. I just think maybe the 9400gt doesn't work good with certain games, can you post your GPU-Z shot?

I tell you this tho, my 8400gs worked about 5x times better in my Pentium III and Celeron D then it does on my Emachine amd le-1620. oNLY because i am using a nvidia board and there is a issue with nvidia boards and geforce + pci cards. Thats why i am going to stick to my word and get always use Gateway or acer with intel boards and chips.

Breech said:
I was hoping that this card would allow me squeeze another year or so from my old Dell as I didn't want to upgrade until the price of the core I7's and DDR3 came down . People can say all the bad things in the world about Dells but that fact is that this thing has been worked hard for nearly 5 years now and has never once complained. With regular maintenance it has performed flawlessly but the lack of expandability does eventually become a factor. At this point my 7 year old daughter has expressed interest in having her own computer and I think that this setup would do everything she could ask of it with no problems. I was over on the egg's site yesterday piecing together my new build but ran across a deal that just may prove to good to pass up. newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883229115 (sorry, can't post direct links yet) AMD Phenom II x4 955 3.2 ghz, 4gb DDR3, PCI-E x16 Evga GeForce 9800 GT 1gb ..........all prebuilt with Vista 64 installed and a free upgrade coupon to Windows 7 (which I've heard good things about) all for less than the price of doing it myself by about $100-200 depending on the brands you use. Only negative reviews on these comps seem to be the occasional person booting up only to get BSOD's but is usually due to the cheap RAM used........so hit or miss on that part. The only other bad part is the Gigabite mb only has 1 PCI-E x16 slot so that would eventually require an upgrade if you wanted to run dual GPUs. Sure would be nice to step up to a quad core and a real vid card though.
Click to expand...

Good luck with your build, even tho i do prebuilts.
the amd phenom is good tho, and a evga 9800gt will be very nice with vista 64bit. If you going 64bit, i would upgrade to 12GB
 
If you going 64bit said:
That would be completely useless unless you would use the machine for complex 3d modeling, huge photoshop files, and other similar tasks. For games and general use it would have absolutely zero impact. Not to mention extremely expensive: For that you would need a 2x 4 GB set and a 2x 2 GB set, the first of which is very expensive.
Click to expand...
 
Tha General said:
Wait, you said PCIEX16 alot? you do have a PCI card right??????????????????
you also said PCIEX1 ???????????????????????????
I am confused. I just think maybe the 9400gt doesn't work good with certain games, can you post your GPU-Z shot?

I tell you this tho, my 8400gs worked about 5x times better in my Pentium III and Celeron D then it does on my Emachine amd le-1620. oNLY because i am using a nvidia board and there is a issue with nvidia boards and geforce + pci cards. Thats why i am going to stick to my word and get always use Gateway or acer with intel boards and chips.
Click to expand...

Let me clear this up a bit. My current system has only 3 standard PCI slots, no PCI-E at all. The 9400 GT is derived from a PCI-E card and is converted to use a standard PCI connection. I was trying to say that it doesn't get very good reviews in it's PCI-E form so naturally it's even worse when used in the considerably slower standard PCI slot. Funny that your 8400 GS worked better with your P III than the AMD as it's considerably slower.
Gateway, Acer, Dell......probably will work fine for most people but the locked bios and lack of upgradability due to proprietary components can frustrate people who want to maximize their systems. The prebuilts do offer the advantage of rarely having software conflicts which I found refreshing when I bought my Dell.

Tha General said:
Good luck with your build, even tho i do prebuilts.
the amd phenom is good tho, and a evga 9800gt will be very nice with vista 64bit. If you going 64bit, i would upgrade to 12GB
Click to expand...

This computer is actually prebuilt........I won't be touching any hardware. After pricing it all out it would cost me more to build it myself than to purchase this package which already has all hardware and software installed and ready to run. It originally ships out with Vista Home Premium 64 bit installed but it includes a coupon for a free upgrade to Windows 7 which I will utilize as soon as possible as I hear it is much improved over Vista. I'm hoping the 4gb of DDR3 will suffice in the mean time.

Overall I'm still saddened as I didn't want to upgrade right now. I don't play Crysis or COD 4 or anything that warrants a massive gaming system........although that may change once I have one that can actually do it. I really wanted to see just how far I could push the PCI BUS with one of these big time cards but in the end it was just a bunch of wasted money. I mean, I had to buy a PCI card anyways in order for both Dell's to do anything and I would have been alright if the 9400 could have at the least matched the previous performance I had...........a bit better would have been nice. To actually lose performance was a shock. At this point I either have to purchase another proven PCI card that will give me playability at lowest settings on moderately older games or just bite the bullet and get with the times. I'll see about getting you that GPU-Z shot but there isn't anything that I can see in it that would shed any light on the performance loss.
 
Here is my GPU-Z:

GPU.gif
 
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883229115

Kinda expensive, but amazing system. Love the case too and specs on it.
You pay 800 dollars for it, you should game without any trouble.

Breech said:
Let me clear this up a bit. My current system has only 3 standard PCI slots, no PCI-E at all. The 9400 GT is derived from a PCI-E card and is converted to use a standard PCI connection. I was trying to say that it doesn't get very good reviews in it's PCI-E form so naturally it's even worse when used in the considerably slower standard PCI slot.
Click to expand...

Wait, so the only game you have trouble is wow?
I mean, explain to me what games you are playing and what games you are having trouble playing. People with high end computers have trouble playing WOW also, i read about it alot of times over at guru3d.

Breech said:
Funny that your 8400 GS worked better with your P III than the AMD as it's considerably slower.
Click to expand...

Well it worked better, in a sense. But " overall " the 8400gs is working better about 10x more better then my pentium III, and celeron D. But my 8400gs right now is being slightly bottleneck because of a bug with nvidia mb's and geforce pci cards. But overall the 8400gs is playing games really really good, but the demanding 3d games like Crysis, SOF3, is running horrible to what it ran with my p3 or Celeron D.

Games like L4D is running perfect, i have it running at 1280x1024 AFX16, very high to high to low settings, and i am getting a solid 25-40fps. If i put it on 1024x768 high to high to low i get 35-75fps.

Breech said:
Gateway, Acer, Dell......probably will work fine for most people but the locked bios and lack of upgradability due to proprietary components can frustrate people who want to maximize their systems. The prebuilts do offer the advantage of rarely having software conflicts which I found refreshing when I bought my Dell.
Click to expand...

Yea i never really have a software problem and i just love buying prebuilts, i really don't have time ordering parts and stuff or putting stuff together, i just like buying a system and adding what i want in it, mostly just a card and a sound card. We just have to find something that we want in a prebuilt and there you go. I am replacing this single core with a Dual core soon, gateway or acer and later buy a quad core by gateway, most likely a Q9300.

Breech said:
It originally ships out with Vista Home Premium 64 bit installed but it includes a coupon for a free upgrade to Windows 7 which I will utilize as soon as possible as I hear it is much improved over Vista. I'm hoping the 4gb of DDR3 will suffice in the mean time.
Click to expand...

I use win 7 on my computer for about 2 months, its ok, but more demanding then Vista. As for gaming, seems to be same performance IMO. Also i notice the some apps and games which work fine on vista, does not work on win 7. Infact, alot of stuff which i use on vista does not work on win 7 at all. But then again, i notice some old winx9 apps and games that work on win 98 , does not work on xp, but works on vista.
 
Tha General said:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883229115

Kinda expensive, but amazing system. Love the case too and specs on it.
You pay 800 dollars for it, you should game without any trouble.
Click to expand...

Yeah, like I said, I priced it all out and I could not build this system and buy the software for that amount. It's pretty cheap as far as a true gaming rig is concerned but I'm sure some of the components aren't of the greatest quality. My first "modern" gaming rig used an AMD Athlon 750mhz cpu, Asus mb, and a GeForce Ti400 AGP vid card and I loved it. Wasn't the fastest thing around but at the time it would play anything that was available.

Tha General said:
Wait, so the only game you have trouble is wow?
I mean, explain to me what games you are playing and what games you are having trouble playing. People with high end computers have trouble playing WOW also, i read about it alot of times over at guru3d.
Click to expand...

Right, I've seen those issues too. The thing is though is that I was playing just fine on the 5200 with no issues other than I had to use low settings across the board. Nothing other than my vid card and driver changed and now it becomes a slide show. Since the only variable was the graphics card I have to say that it's the culprit. Their wasn't a new patch or anything else that caused a problem with WoW. To verify I bought a really cheap game the other day at some discount store called "The Settlers: Rise of an Empire" as it looked to have some decent graphics to test with. Certainly not anything crazy but enough to put the GPU to use. At medium settings I was getting 5fps with the 9400, with low settings it bumped up to about 10fps. Pretty sad.

Tha General said:
Well it worked better, in a sense. But " overall " the 8400gs is working better about 10x more better then my pentium III, and celeron D. But my 8400gs right now is being slightly bottleneck because of a bug with nvidia mb's and geforce pci cards. But overall the 8400gs is playing games really really good, but the demanding 3d games like Crysis, SOF3, is running horrible to what it ran with my p3 or Celeron D.
Click to expand...

That seems funny to me considering GeForce cards use Nvidia chipsets.......you'd think that they would run really well on one of their own boards.

Tha General said:
Games like L4D is running perfect, i have it running at 1280x1024 AFX16, very high to high to low settings, and i am getting a solid 25-40fps. If i put it on 1024x768 high to high to low i get 35-75fps.
Click to expand...

Those are very respectable fps. I haven't seen that kind of performance for myself for years. I've gotten so used to gaming on PCI that anything over 20fps and I'm excited.

Tha General said:
Yea i never really have a software problem and i just love buying prebuilts, i really don't have time ordering parts and stuff or putting stuff together, i just like buying a system and adding what i want in it, mostly just a card and a sound card. We just have to find something that we want in a prebuilt and there you go. I am replacing this single core with a Dual core soon, gateway or acer and later buy a quad core by gateway, most likely a Q9300.

I use win 7 on my computer for about 2 months, its ok, but more demanding then Vista. As for gaming, seems to be same performance IMO. Also i notice the some apps and games which work fine on vista, does not work on win 7. Infact, alot of stuff which i use on vista does not work on win 7 at all. But then again, i notice some old winx9 apps and games that work on win 98 , does not work on xp, but works on vista.
Click to expand...

Yeah, again, I don't have anything bad to say about prebuilts unless you want to tinker with them. These companies just lock them down and severely limit how far you can push them. I'll never have a bad word to say about Dell, it's been the most reliable comp I've ever owned. I'll keep what you've said about Vista and 7 in mind. I've never used anything beyond XP so this will all be new to me.
 
Breech said:
Yeah, like I said, I priced it all out and I could not build this system and buy the software for that amount. It's pretty cheap as far as a true gaming rig is concerned but I'm sure some of the components aren't of the greatest quality.
Click to expand...
Yea good luck with your new rig, let us know when you get it, that rig should last you for years. :)

Breech said:
To verify I bought a really cheap game the other day at some discount store called "The Settlers: Rise of an Empire" as it looked to have some decent graphics to test with. Certainly not anything crazy but enough to put the GPU to use. At medium settings I was getting 5fps with the 9400, with low settings it bumped up to about 10fps. Pretty sad.
Click to expand...

This person has a 9400gt also, he says he gets around 80fps in wow.
http://forums.guru3d.com/member.php?u=194858

You could ask him about things if you want. Btw, i wouldn't advise on overclocking, you only get what 3% to 5% increase, i really never seen the point in overclocking, when you really don't get that much of a difference unless you want to risk frying your card. And btw, it just sounds like your computer and the card is not a good match. You could also try vista, i was using XP for a long time, but vista in gaming performance is a huge jump in performance , trust me. I always thought that xp was the fastest overall, but Vista is faster in gaming performance, and seems to be overall. But xp is not bad tho , just slower then vista.

Breech said:
That seems funny to me considering GeForce cards use Nvidia chipsets.......you'd think that they would run really well on one of their own boards.
Click to expand...

Well over at fudzilla there was some info about it,
http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/10274/37/

They say the issue has been fixed, obviously not, because when i use my Visiontek 2400HD card, the problem does not exist and the 2400 doesn't become bottleneck at all.

Breech said:
Those are very respectable fps. I haven't seen that kind of performance for myself for years. I've gotten so used to gaming on PCI that anything over 20fps and I'm excited.
Click to expand...
Yea it stays way above in fps, and moves really surreal. But i do have a problem with recording. I notice when using XP, recording gameplay is smoother over Vista. But i gather once i start using pcie cards soon, i will be able to record soon.
You can check out my youtube channel also:
http://www.youtube.com/user/MysteryRidahz
I only use the 8400gs and 2400 tho, but is using the 8400gs right now.

20fps is fine, if you get a solid 20fps and up depending on the game , well thats just fine. When i play Jericho, it moves at 18fps, to 35fps, at 18fps its moving really fast IMO.

Breech said:
Yeah, again, I don't have anything bad to say about prebuilts unless you want to tinker with them. These companies just lock them down and severely limit how far you can push them. I'll never have a bad word to say about Dell, it's been the most reliable comp I've ever owned. I'll keep what you've said about Vista and 7 in mind. I've never used anything beyond XP so this will all be new to me.
Click to expand...

I had a dell in the past, they are cool, but the bio and setting up drivers is really confusing. I like to have everything very simple when i set up things or go into my bios. I had a dell GX280 i think it was, OMG the bios are so confusing setting up motherboard drivers was a pain haha. But overall dell is pretty good.

Vista is abig leap over xp , only took me about maybe 2 days to get use to everything hahah. Win 7 is ok , but nothing great IMO, i mean its just like vista, so i would never spend over 200 bucks on t, 100 is fine i guess, but anything over will never happen
 
Hey guys, i am buying my first pcie card next weekend YAY.........
And i will scan the card once i get it. Sorry i don't have a camera lol.

MY next computer buys are 2 pcie cards, one this month and one next month or soon after and next i plan to buy a new computer system, a Dual Core, and i plan to use pcie on it forever.

electromagnetic said:
Evga 9400GT PCI.

Gets low FPS in some games.

PNY 8400GS PCI. Read it's bad for gaming but ?
Click to expand...

Wait, all because someone gets bad fps in certain games, doesn't mean everyone else does. I am sure the 9400gt will worked well with any game depending on how your rig is. My 8400gs is like 50/50, it plays some games superior, and others like crap , only because my setup is wrong, but the 8400gs is not that good anyway, but good enough.

electromagnetic said:
Will not buy yet. Until I sold PNY 6200 Geforce Nvidia 256MB PCI.
Click to expand...

Cool, i will just grab a 9500GT tho.
 
I'd also recommend the 9500 GT over the 9400. It doesn't cost much more and has 32 stream processors vs 16 for the 9400. I should have gone with it but I thought that the 9400 would play games well and so far I haven't had very good luck with it.

So, as an update, I downloaded both Crysis and Bioshock demos just to see if I could play them. I was using EVGA precision 1.8 to monitor fps and card temp on both games. Crysis actually played half way decent with all settings to low and no AA. I'm guessing an average fps of around 20 with some dips into single digits during heavy action but that was rare. Bioshock was a different story. Also had graphics set to lowest possible and although the game did run it was much worse during heavy action. It became almost impossible to play as it went into slide show mode when action got heavy. I was suprised as I thought if the card could handle Crysis on low then Bioshock wouldn't be as much of a challenge for it. BTW, just for fun I cranked Crysis up to the "High" setting (max allowed on the demo) with AA at 2X. It was of course unplayable at about 6-7 fps but man did it look good. I mean like different game good. I don't think I'd be willing to play it at low settings after seeing all the detail that is available. As for card temp..........my 9400 GT idles around 52-53° C and I saw a max of 61° C in game. CPU usage was also fairly low on both games.

Just for some proof here is a screenshot from WoW taken in the city of Stormwind at the canals. Nothing intense here as I was just facing a building.
WoWScrnShot_090709_152855.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Daniel Sims
GPUs are so bulky now that Asus is using gyroscopes to detect sagging
2
Replies
36
Views
281
harm9963
harm9963
midian182
Amazon restricts some Nvidia RTX 50 and AMD Radeon 9070 GPU sales to Prime members
Replies
6
Views
112
poohbear
P
midian182
Game developers warn GeForce RTX 4000 and 3000 owners to roll back Nvidia drivers
2
Replies
37
Views
469
All2surreal
A

Latest posts

Back