|
The Official Graphics Card and PC gaming Thread
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 12:39 |
Link to this message
|
Yayayayaya want!
This excites me far more than the Ares, because look at the innovations Sapphire have produced in the past, versus the innovations Asus have produced. Asus have genuinely produced some remarkable stuff I've been impressed with, there is no doubt about that at all, but look at it. The ROG Ares, a limited edition with a 1000 euro price tag estimated. The ROG MARS, a £1000 limited edition card with very poor driver performance, the HD3850X3, an as -yet unbested technical achievement, but by the time of release using a hopelessly outdated GPU and thus performing in the areas of mediocrity.
Sapphire on the other hand are slightly less ambitious, but far more successful, their recent products include stuff like the 2GB versions of the HD4870 and HD4890 with Vapor-X coolers. It wouldn't surprise me if Sapphire do not choose to go full clock speed with their 4GB HD5970, but somewhere in between, such that they don't need excessive power and cooling, and probably not excessive power connectors either (though they may resort to two 8-pin connectors instead of 8+6). Most importantly, none of Sapphire's modifications have ever been stupidly expensive. With luck, this will be no different.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 13:37 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
My £40 worth 9200 from 6 years ago could take it on and probably win, and G210s cost more than that now...
I don't think I'd go quite that extreme. But yes the card is mediocre even compared to the lowest end offerings of the past several generations. I'd put it about equal to a 7100GS.
Quote:
I'm gonna come to hate the 210 at this rate... LOL!
There's absolutely nothing wrong with the card per-se, but don't expect to run any games on it.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388 |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 13:44 |
Link to this message
|
Because I feel stupid for jumping in too quickly to the 210 purchase. Which is fine. "Stupid is as stupid does" eh LOL!
I guess I was hoping for light to mediocre gaming. I really should have done SOME reading on the 210. Had I ran even 1 search on the subject, it would have put up a red flag. I remember Sam mentioning its dire performance NOW, that this situation has come up. I guess before it went WAYY over my head LOL! I have rather selective hearing, selective memory...
I'm still ok for now though. As I said, his PS3 will no doubt be his rig of choice for months. If a game is released on PC that intrigues him, we'll deal with the situation at that time. Perhaps next time, I'll have the Cojones to try ATI on a board that seems to not like several series of.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 16:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
So if the 210 is no good for gaming, why in the Frick does it insist on a 300W power supply? Sure wants a bit of power for not doing any gaming...
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 16:18 |
Link to this message
|
|
Because some PC systems could be using 250W just for the CPU and other components. Not too hard, if you run 6 hard drives and several burners with a massively overclocked 130W quad core you'll pull that off.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 16:32 |
Link to this message
|
Ahh, ok. So basicallly, since the standard HTPC comes with 250-270W they recommend that I have a few more watts to spare an add-in card. Good lord, if I go with an actual gaming card then, I may not be able to find a suitable PSU. Though the 300W seasonic may be able to handle a moderate card...
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 17:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
If you used a molex to PCIe adapter, you could run a 5770 off a 250W PSU no worries, as long as it's a good brand. I wouldn't recommend doing so with a 95W TDP CPU though, just in case :)
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 17:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
Its an 89W CPU, and a 300W seasonic, so I should be good. Feels like a very good PSU :D
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 17:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
You'll be fine. Could run a 5850 off that! :P
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 18:48 |
Link to this message
|
I realize this is not the best or accurate test for testing a GPU, but I was curious :p
It had me scared for a moment. When I first opened the test, it had already done it, and was scoring a big fat one! But said that it need updated. Probably due to my installing the GPU drivers LOL! If im not mistaken, the 210 just scored almost as good as my old 8600GT. If thats true, than its not nearly as bad as I thought...
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 18:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
and my four 4870s score 6.3.
Still trust the system?
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. February 2010 @ 18:51
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 19:19 |
Link to this message
|
|
Excellent example! You've just proved the point LOL!
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
|
Red_Maw
Senior Member
|
27. February 2010 @ 20:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sweet my 8800GTS scores a 6.8, I'll be sure to use this "benchmarking" system if I ever try to sell it ;)
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 21:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
6.8 over sams 6.3? Must be favoring Nvidia then...
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
|
harvrdguy
Senior Member
|
27. February 2010 @ 21:02 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sam:
If you can live without AA (which, at 2560x1600, a lot of people can - needless to say, I still want it) if you can wait for them to arrive, plop two 5970s in and play Crysis Warhead maxed out on a 30" monitor, it won't lag very much, if at all.
Well, that is exciting news then. With the SSD, $3000 probably won't quite handle the whole thing with twin 5970s - you're recommending an i7 board, right? .. with full 16x pci-e bandwidth for each 5970 card, as I recall from prior posts.
Originally posted by Rich still likes DFI:
With 12gb of Ram for Vista, as you are recommending, that would max out a DFI H8 board, as I recall, whereas the Biostar goes to 24gb I think.
However, I still like the extra slot of spacing on the DFI mobo, and with a full height tower case the lower graphics card would be still well up from the bottom of the case, so now that I am no longer thinking of a Raid controller, I might end up with DFI after all.
I invested some time on the Biostar forums, and I got the feeling, although as we know they DID achieve some speed records for the 920 cpu, that in general the Biostar guys encountered more problems getting to those 4ghz run rates, than the H8 DFI guys.
Wow, no I hadn't see your latest 3dmark6 - 27,150!! Hahaha.
I see you cranked your cpu up past 3700 to 3920 - virtually 4ghz! (Correction, over 4ghz, 4116 to be exact with turbo-booster, as I now read the rest of the post.) I recall you saying something a few months ago about targeting 27000. Congratulations!!
Wow, Shaff, the PC walkthrough trailer of BC2 was awesome!!
And Omega is still killing Niko!! Hahahaha. So other than that, Kevin, have you started stealing cop cars yet and shooting the "most wanted." That was the most fun I was having at my 10-12 fps, lol. (There's a corner police station that's easy to get to and easy to memorize where it is on the map, where one black veteran cop waits outside on a cigarette break, looking in the other direction, and doesn't bother you too much as you swipe a patrol car. As I recall from the map, the top of the map being the strip club, if the total map is 10" high, the station is about 1" below the bridge that goes to the strip club island, about 60% over to the right - look for a triangular intersection.)
Hey guys, what are the ramifications of 4gb of memory on that new sapphire 5970 card? - it holds more texture information? -less need as in crysis to stream textures to the card, since there's room to leave them there once you first streamed them? I know that more memory is always better than less, but what benefit will we actually see from that much memory on the card?
- Rich
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 21:09 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
you're recommending an i7 board, right? .. with full 16x pci-e bandwidth for each 5970 card, as I recall from prior posts.
That would be best, since there's a lot of bandwidth required to run four GPUs. I haven't gone i7 as there's no other performance gain from it, and for X2s at least, the lack of bandwidth is not much of an issue. I'm hoping the same is true of 5970s. Using an i7, other than costing me an extra £150 I don't have, would raise my power usage substantially, to the extent that overclocking a pair of 5970s would push me too close to my PSU's limit. At 4.12Ghz, it would take an i7 920 to be 4.2-4.25Ghz to be as good in games, which is a tricky speed to reach without a huge voltage, heat output and power consumption.
As for graphics memory, there is a certain amount of info a graphics card can store in memory before it will have to swap it around, which cuts performance hugely. 1GB is fortunately masses of video memory, but some games at 2560x1600 (or worse, in eyefinity setups) with high levels of AA (which ups texture memory usage a lot) use a lot of memory. In GRiD, a 512MB HD4870 will only get 4-5fps at 2560x1600 with 4x, whereas the 1GB version of the same card will get 40+. There are almost no games for which 1GB is insufficient with 4xAA or less yet, but that may soon change. GTA4 is the only current game I can recall that requires more than 1GB of video memory. It does not require as much memory as stated (if it says you need 1100MB, you actually need about 450-500) but at max settings (which require you to disable the limiter bar) you will need around 1200MB.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
27. February 2010 @ 21:22 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'm afraid I started the missions over. I achieved enough last time to enter into vigilante missions, but I only did it once or twice. I plan on playing a bit this weekend though. Right after one of my shows :D Caprica
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
|
harvrdguy
Senior Member
|
28. February 2010 @ 01:28 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sam:
Using an i7, other than costing me an extra £150 I don't have, would raise my power usage substantially, to the extent that overclocking a pair of 5970s would push me too close to my PSU's limit. At 4.12Ghz, it would take an i7 920 to be 4.2-4.25Ghz to be as good in games, which is a tricky speed to reach without a huge voltage, heat output and power consumption.
I remember when the i5 family came out - there was talk at that time, as I recall, that the i7 family would primarily be for servers. But I forget why.
So which i5 do you have, Sam, and why is your i5 faster than an i7 for gaming? (It uses less power also, is that right?)
Quote:
I achieved enough last time to enter into vigilante missions, but I only did it once or twice.
Are you talking GTA4, Kevin? I was referring to looking up the Most Wanted criminals on the police car computer, then going after them, lol.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
28. February 2010 @ 01:29 |
Link to this message
|
|
I have the i5 750, the only quad core i5 at present. They are faster CPUs for gaming (only slightly) due to the lack of all the server-grade bonuses i7s get, and the lack of hyperthreading.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
28. February 2010 @ 01:30 |
Link to this message
|
Oh wow. using the police computer? Maybe I'm remembering San andreas missions then. Now I don't believe I entered vigilante missions on GTA IV
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
Member
|
28. February 2010 @ 09:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
Wow my single 512mb 4850 gets a 7.3 this makes noooo sense haha.
I could put something funny here but I cant be arsed. Now GO AWAY! |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
28. February 2010 @ 21:59 |
Link to this message
|
Well sam, I'm officially at a loss here. The Overscan issue...
Windows 7 at least offers a resolution that allows us to manage for the time being. I forget what the resolution is now, but I believe it was somewhere around 1768 x 992. They were nearly jumping up and down at how nice a blu ray file played at that resolution. Even with black bars on all sides...
At the full 1080P resolution, it crops out a good deal of the task bar, as well as horizontally(Overscan). I tried finding settings for dealing with this issue on both the Nvidia control panel, as well as settings on the tv. The tv is a complete mystery. It WON'T allow for PC settings, though it has them. They seem to be disabled in the menu. Why, I do not know. And another thing that's funny, is HDMI 1 port, also has a Audio in port for situations like this. So basically, it is supposed to allow for audio through that port and video through the HDMI port, SIMULTANEOUSLY! Unfortunately, when I attempt to run it that way, the video signal seems to override the audio. If I remove the video signal, there is then audio. NOT the way that should work. Obviously, this tv is not the best HDTV for PC solutions LOL! I corrected the audio issue, by simply running the signal to a Stereo receiver. It works good :) As well it should!
But there HAS to be a way to correct the overscan, without using utilities like Powerstrip?
Ha ha! By the way, Now the athlon X 2 5200 only averages 8% while playing BD files. Though I had to enable hardware acceleration ;) So now it won't run nearly as hot. Which is very good given the HTPC's environment...
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. February 2010 @ 22:39
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
28. February 2010 @ 22:52 |
Link to this message
|
Many TVs don't allow PC settings unless using VGA, which is poor resolution. However, overscan is set on the PC and not on the TV.
You correct overscan in the graphics panel, or at least you should. You do with ATI cards. If you can't with nvidia cards, then that renders them very poor for HTPC use.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
28. February 2010 @ 23:20 |
Link to this message
|
It has the PC settings, though disabled. It has no VGA connection to speak of. So it should KNOW that HDMI connections COULD be a PC connection. So being HDMI should have nothing to do with it. I even tried the DVI to HDMI dongle to see if that effected it in any way. It did not. I'm beginning to wonder if the tv is defective. Not because of the overscan, but because of the other problems. I think I'll try Powerstrip tomorrow to see if that can help any.
I'll probably contact magnavox as well...
Interestingly, I'm seeing more settings in the nvidia panel on my PC, then on the htpc. Very curious.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 28. February 2010 @ 23:21
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
2. March 2010 @ 15:45 |
Link to this message
|
Turns out the poor performance of Battlefield Bad Company 2 was due to the AA!
DirectX9
Minimal: Geforce 7800GS/8600GT/9500GT/GT220 or above, Radeon X1800XT/X1950 Pro/HD2900GT/HD3690/HD4650/HD5570 or above
Reduced: Geforce 8800GS/8800GTS G80/9600GSO (G92)/GT240 or above, Radeon HD3850/HD4750/HD4830/HD5570 or above
Moderate: Geforce 8800GTS G92/9800GT/GTS250 or above, Radeon HD4770/HD4850/HD5750 or above
Good (No AA): Geforce GTX260-216 or above, Radeon HD4870X2/HD5830 or above
Good (2x): Geforce GTX275/GTX280 or above, Radeon HD4870X2/HD5850 or above
Optimal (No AA): Geforce GTX260 SLI or above, Radeon HD4890 Crossfire/HD5970 or above
Optimal (4x): Geforce GTX285 SLI or above, Radeon HD4870QCF/HD5870 Crossfire or above
Extreme (No AA): Geforce GTX280 Tri-SLI or above, Radeon HD4890QCF/HD5850Tri-CF or above
Extreme (8x): N/A
DirectX11
Minimal: Radeon HD5570 or above
Reduced: Radeon HD5670 or above
Moderate: Radeon HD5770 or above
Good (No AA): Radeon HD5830 or above
Good (2x AA): Radeon HD5870 or above
Optimal (No AA): Radeon HD5830CF/HD5970 or above
Optimal (4x AA): Radeon HD5870CF/HD5830 Tri-CF or above
Extreme (No AA): Radeon HD5850Tri-CF/HD5830QCF or above
Extreme (8x AA): N/A
Make no mistake, Bad Company 2 is still an exceptionally demanding game for a multiplayer-favouring FPS. Fluid frame rates (M60) are beyond the grasp of almost every gamer at remotely pleasant graphics settings.
Single cards are able to achieve this without AA, for instance at 1440x900 an HD5850 can pull it off, but would you really use a card that powerful with such a small screen?
At 1680x1050, an HD5870 is sufficient to attain M60, but it's worth noting that the game is nvidia-favouring in terms of frame rates. A GTX285 can hold its own against the HD5870 just about, which is very rare outside the most biased tests.
It is also worth mentioning that the minimum frame rates are low compared to the average in BC2, with the average frame rates around 2.2x the minimums. Without a continuous graph, the frequency of these minimums is not known, and it may simply be a very brief part of the game where this occurs, and smooth performance can, for the most part, be achieved with lesser cards.
Anti-Aliasing is the bane of good performance, however. At the lowly resolution of 1280x1024, an HD5850 can cope with normal max settings, yet enable 8x AA and even the HD5970 is overwhelmed. Indeed, you need more graphics horsepower to pull off M30 with 8x Anti-Aliasing than you do for M60 without any, by a factor of HD5870 vs HD5850.
DirectX11 (when AA is enabled at least) fortunately has little impact on the game's performance, lowering frame rates by approximately 5-7%.
To give you an idea of how the game scales, a 9600GT plays the game as well at 1280x1024 as an HD5870 does at 1920x1080 with 8xAA enabled, both in DirectX10.
Brushing 30" monitors (and heaven forbid eyefinity) aside for the moment, at 1920x1200, achieving M60 without any AA will require a pair of HD5830s, less than $500 worth, but a bit hard to swallow for a more mainstream resolution, especially with no AA. Adding 8x AA pushes this to a requirement of three HD5850s at the least, so a whopping $900.
If you were optimistic enough to expect even M40 on a 30" monitor, while again, the HD5830 pair or HD5970 could do it without AA, 8x AA would be beyond the abilities of any dual GPU pairing, and 4x probably would be as well.
In the unlikely event of Fermi cards proving particularly powerful, however, this is a game that is likely to do well with them. Given that nvidia already attain a 15-25% lead by comparison, if their AA performance is up to scratch, they could prove quite successful as Bad Company 2 cards.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. March 2010 @ 19:04
|
