Anyone playing games with a high-end video card on a low-end system?

Hello!

I cannot seem to find benchmarks, articles, stories, etc. on how
high-end video cards (e.g., NVIDIA 8800 GT with 512 or so MB of memory)
run on low-end systems like an Athlon 4600+ X2 system (nothing is
overclocked) with Windows XP Pro. SP2 (IE6.0 SP2 and all updates).

I am currently using a EVGA eForce 7950 GT KO (512 MB; PCIe) with
1280x1024 native resolution (hate going lower due to stretching option
that look like crap on LCD monitors via VGA connections), no FSAA (0X),
and eveything at the maximum (details, features, 16X anisotropic, etc.).
It does almost fine for older games like Oblivion, C&C3, Orange
Box/Half-Life 2, Call of Duty 4, etc. However, not so well with
current/newest games like Crysis (see http://pastebin.ca/884075 for
Crysis v1.1's island GPU benchmarks), World in Conflict (I think 11 FPS
average), etc.

Is it still OK for me to get a faster video card (one of the newer ATI
or NVIDIA cards [8800 GT?]) on my old system? I don't know if the
bottleneck is my CPU, video card (GPU), or both for the newer games. My
detailed computer specifications can be found here:
http://alpha.zimage.com/~ant/antfarm.../computers.txt (primary computer).

Thank you in advance.
--
"Really. And do these lions eat ants?" --John Cleese in Monty Python's
Flying Circus
/\___/\
/ /\ /\ \ Phil/Ant @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org (Personal Web Site)
| |o o| | Ant's Quality Foraged Links (AQFL): http://aqfl.net
\ _ / Remove ANT from e-mail address: philpi@earthlink.netANT
( ) or ANTant@zimage.com
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on his home computer.

Ant wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I cannot seem to find benchmarks, articles, stories, etc. on how
> high-end video cards (e.g., NVIDIA 8800 GT with 512 or so MB of memory)
> run on low-end systems like an Athlon 4600+ X2 system (nothing is
> overclocked) with Windows XP Pro. SP2 (IE6.0 SP2 and all updates).
>
> I am currently using a EVGA eForce 7950 GT KO (512 MB; PCIe) with
> 1280x1024 native resolution (hate going lower due to stretching option
> that look like crap on LCD monitors via VGA connections), no FSAA (0X),
> and eveything at the maximum (details, features, 16X anisotropic, etc.).
> It does almost fine for older games like Oblivion, C&C3, Orange
> Box/Half-Life 2, Call of Duty 4, etc. However, not so well with
> current/newest games like Crysis (see http://pastebin.ca/884075 for
> Crysis v1.1's island GPU benchmarks), World in Conflict (I think 11 FPS
> average), etc.
>
> Is it still OK for me to get a faster video card (one of the newer ATI
> or NVIDIA cards [8800 GT?]) on my old system? I don't know if the
> bottleneck is my CPU, video card (GPU), or both for the newer games. My
> detailed computer specifications can be found here:
> http://alpha.zimage.com/~ant/antfarm.../computers.txt (primary
> computer).
>
> Thank you in advance.

You may find your memory is also part of the problem
i looked at your system specs and noticied you are running 2 x 512
sticks and 1 x 1024 stick
Running the memory in this config means you are not making use of the
double data rate you get when running them in pair's
you would get better performance if you were to run 2 x 1024Mb sticks or
even 4 x 512Mb sticks

However changing your card to one of the newer Nvidia 8800 models will
increase your fps by a good bit if your getting extreamly low fps after
that then your CPU will be the main bottleneck

On 1/30/2008 5:08 AM PT, Sir-Les-MP typed:

>> I cannot seem to find benchmarks, articles, stories, etc. on how
>> high-end video cards (e.g., NVIDIA 8800 GT with 512 or so MB of
>> memory) run on low-end systems like an Athlon 4600+ X2 system (nothing
>> is overclocked) with Windows XP Pro. SP2 (IE6.0 SP2 and all updates).
>>
>> I am currently using a EVGA eForce 7950 GT KO (512 MB; PCIe) with
>> 1280x1024 native resolution (hate going lower due to stretching option
>> that look like crap on LCD monitors via VGA connections), no FSAA
>> (0X), and eveything at the maximum (details, features, 16X
>> anisotropic, etc.). It does almost fine for older games like Oblivion,
>> C&C3, Orange Box/Half-Life 2, Call of Duty 4, etc. However, not so
>> well with current/newest games like Crysis (see
>> http://pastebin.ca/884075 for Crysis v1.1's island GPU benchmarks),
>> World in Conflict (I think 11 FPS average), etc.
>>
>> Is it still OK for me to get a faster video card (one of the newer ATI
>> or NVIDIA cards [8800 GT?]) on my old system? I don't know if the
>> bottleneck is my CPU, video card (GPU), or both for the newer games.
>> My detailed computer specifications can be found here:
>> http://alpha.zimage.com/~ant/antfarm.../computers.txt (primary
>> computer).
>>
>> Thank you in advance.
>
> You may find your memory is also part of the problem
> i looked at your system specs and noticied you are running 2 x 512
> sticks and 1 x 1024 stick
> Running the memory in this config means you are not making use of the
> double data rate you get when running them in pair's
> you would get better performance if you were to run 2 x 1024Mb sticks or
> even 4 x 512Mb sticks
>
> However changing your card to one of the newer Nvidia 8800 models will
> increase your fps by a good bit if your getting extreamly low fps after
> that then your CPU will be the main bottleneck

How much FPS am I expecting from a high-end video card like a 8800 GT on
my low-end system? 30 FPS more? I hope it's not a measely 5 FPS. I can't
get both CPU and GPU upgrades at this time. So I am trying to figure out
which upgrade would be the hit for the newer games. I am not planning to
get Vista, so Vista's DirectX 10 is irrevelant to me at this time.
--
"We are anthill men upon an anthill world." --Ray Bradbury
/\___/\
/ /\ /\ \ Phil/Ant @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org (Personal Web Site)
| |o o| | Ant's Quality Foraged Links (AQFL): http://aqfl.net
\ _ / Remove ANT from e-mail address: philpi@earthlink.netANT
( ) or ANTant@zimage.com
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on his home computer.

On 1/30/2008 5:08 AM PT, Sir-Les-MP typed:

>> I cannot seem to find benchmarks, articles, stories, etc. on how
>> high-end video cards (e.g., NVIDIA 8800 GT with 512 or so MB of
>> memory) run on low-end systems like an Athlon 4600+ X2 system (nothing
>> is overclocked) with Windows XP Pro. SP2 (IE6.0 SP2 and all updates).
>>
>> I am currently using a EVGA eForce 7950 GT KO (512 MB; PCIe) with
>> 1280x1024 native resolution (hate going lower due to stretching option
>> that look like crap on LCD monitors via VGA connections), no FSAA
>> (0X), and eveything at the maximum (details, features, 16X
>> anisotropic, etc.). It does almost fine for older games like Oblivion,
>> C&C3, Orange Box/Half-Life 2, Call of Duty 4, etc. However, not so
>> well with current/newest games like Crysis (see
>> http://pastebin.ca/884075 for Crysis v1.1's island GPU benchmarks),
>> World in Conflict (I think 11 FPS average), etc.
>>
>> Is it still OK for me to get a faster video card (one of the newer ATI
>> or NVIDIA cards [8800 GT?]) on my old system? I don't know if the
>> bottleneck is my CPU, video card (GPU), or both for the newer games.
>> My detailed computer specifications can be found here:
>> http://alpha.zimage.com/~ant/antfarm.../computers.txt (primary
>> computer).
>
> You may find your memory is also part of the problem
> i looked at your system specs and noticied you are running 2 x 512
> sticks and 1 x 1024 stick
> Running the memory in this config means you are not making use of the
> double data rate you get when running them in pair's
> you would get better performance if you were to run 2 x 1024Mb sticks or
> even 4 x 512Mb sticks

How much speed loss did I have? 50%? Are you saying my games would be
two times faster than this memory setup? Non-gaming seems OK to me (fast
enough for me).
--
"For me, the smartest animal's a pigeon." "Huh?" "1,000 cars on the
turnpike, they find mine." "My vote goes to the ants." "How do you
figure that?" "Know those farms they build? They build those things
without plans. To ants! For all you do, this one's for you." --Cheers
(unknown episode)
/\___/\
/ /\ /\ \ Phil/Ant @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org (Personal Web Site)
| |o o| | Ant's Quality Foraged Links (AQFL): http://aqfl.net
\ _ / Remove ANT from e-mail address: philpi@earthlink.netANT
( ) or ANTant@zimage.com
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on his home computer.

My brain doesn't remember well. I got the FPS wrong for World in
Conlict. I ran the benchmark and got the results:

Resolution: 1280*1024
Detail Level: High
Average fps: 20
Min fps: 8
Max fps: 29
TotalFrames: 1018


On 1/30/2008 12:25 AM PT, Ant typed:

> Hello!
>
> I cannot seem to find benchmarks, articles, stories, etc. on how
> high-end video cards (e.g., NVIDIA 8800 GT with 512 or so MB of memory)
> run on low-end systems like an Athlon 4600+ X2 system (nothing is
> overclocked) with Windows XP Pro. SP2 (IE6.0 SP2 and all updates).
>
> I am currently using a EVGA eForce 7950 GT KO (512 MB; PCIe) with
> 1280x1024 native resolution (hate going lower due to stretching option
> that look like crap on LCD monitors via VGA connections), no FSAA (0X),
> and eveything at the maximum (details, features, 16X anisotropic, etc.).
> It does almost fine for older games like Oblivion, C&C3, Orange
> Box/Half-Life 2, Call of Duty 4, etc. However, not so well with
> current/newest games like Crysis (see http://pastebin.ca/884075 for
> Crysis v1.1's island GPU benchmarks), World in Conflict (I think 11 FPS
> average), etc.
>
> Is it still OK for me to get a faster video card (one of the newer ATI
> or NVIDIA cards [8800 GT?]) on my old system? I don't know if the
> bottleneck is my CPU, video card (GPU), or both for the newer games. My
> detailed computer specifications can be found here:
> http://alpha.zimage.com/~ant/antfarm.../computers.txt (primary
> computer).
>
> Thank you in advance.
--
"I don't know how good ants are at swimmin', but I'd be willing to bet
that a good fire'd get their attention." --MacGyver in Trumbo's World
episode
/\___/\
/ /\ /\ \ Phil/Ant @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org (Personal Web Site)
| |o o| | Ant's Quality Foraged Links (AQFL): http://aqfl.net
\ _ / Remove ANT from e-mail address: philpi@earthlink.netANT
( ) or ANTant@zimage.com
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on his home computer.

In article <47a08f44$0$30014$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, Ant says...

> How much FPS am I expecting from a high-end video card like a 8800 GT on
> my low-end system? 30 FPS more? I hope it's not a measely 5 FPS. I can't
> get both CPU and GPU upgrades at this time. So I am trying to figure out
> which upgrade would be the hit for the newer games. I am not planning to
> get Vista, so Vista's DirectX 10 is irrevelant to me at this time.
>
Well I run a X2 4800 with 7800GT but I have 2GB RAM and it flies like a
bastard.

--
Conor

As a Brit I'd like to thank the Americans for their help in the war
against terror because if they'd not funded the IRA for 30 years, we
wouldn't know how to deal with terrorists.

On 1/30/2008 7:28 AM PT, Conor typed:

>> How much FPS am I expecting from a high-end video card like a 8800 GT on
>> my low-end system? 30 FPS more? I hope it's not a measely 5 FPS. I can't
>> get both CPU and GPU upgrades at this time. So I am trying to figure out
>> which upgrade would be the hit for the newer games. I am not planning to
>> get Vista, so Vista's DirectX 10 is irrevelant to me at this time.
>>
> Well I run a X2 4800 with 7800GT but I have 2GB RAM and it flies like a
> bastard.

What newest games (not old ones) do you play and what type of settings
(e.g., resolution, everything cranked up?) do you use?
--
"Number fourteen. The naughty bits of an ant." --Monty Python's Flying
Circus
/\___/\
/ /\ /\ \ Phil/Ant @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org (Personal Web Site)
| |o o| | Ant's Quality Foraged Links (AQFL): http://aqfl.net
\ _ / Remove ANT from e-mail address: philpi@earthlink.netANT
( ) or ANTant@zimage.com
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on his home computer.

On 1/30/2008 7:33 AM PT, James typed:

>>> I cannot seem to find benchmarks, articles, stories, etc. on how
>>> high-end video cards (e.g., NVIDIA 8800 GT with 512 or so MB of memory)
>>> run on low-end systems like an Athlon 4600+ X2 system (nothing is
>>> overclocked) with Windows XP Pro. SP2 (IE6.0 SP2 and all updates).
>>> I am currently using a EVGA eForce 7950 GT KO (512 MB; PCIe) with
>>> 1280x1024 native resolution (hate going lower due to stretching option
>>> that look like crap on LCD monitors via VGA connections), no FSAA (0X),
>>> and eveything at the maximum (details, features, 16X anisotropic, etc.).
>>> It does almost fine for older games like Oblivion, C&C3, Orange
>>> Box/Half-Life 2, Call of Duty 4, etc. However, not so well with
>>> current/newest games like Crysis (seehttp://pastebin.ca/884075for
>>> Crysis v1.1's island GPU benchmarks), World in Conflict (I think 11 FPS
>>> average), etc.
>>> Is it still OK for me to get a faster video card (one of the newer ATI
>>> or NVIDIA cards [8800 GT?]) on my old system? I don't know if the
>>> bottleneck is my CPU, video card (GPU), or both for the newer games. My
>>> detailed computer specifications can be found here:
>>> http://alpha.zimage.com/~ant/antfarm...rs.txt(primary
>>> computer).
>
> I'm not running Crysis or World in Conflict, but I am running
> Battlefield 2 and Half Life 2 in 1600x1200 mode with not maxed out
> settings but 4x aa, and most detail set to high. I run an older CPU
> (3.2 Xeon) and an X850XT(256 MB), and 2GB of dual channel RAM. I get
> frame rates of between 50 - 70 in BF2, and while I haven't benchmarked
> it with Half Life 2, they are more than acceptable in single player
> mode. Call of Duty 4 demo also plays well at 1600x1200 with most
> detail high.
>
> As another poster said, I'd really look at your RAM. My system is
> roughly comparable in processor, older slower video card with less
> VRAM, and I still get high frame rates.

Those games you mentioned run fine on my machine as well. BF2 is very
smooth, but it's an old game.
--
"After World War III, the ants will still be around." --unknown
/\___/\
/ /\ /\ \ Phil/Ant @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org (Personal Web Site)
| |o o| | Ant's Quality Foraged Links (AQFL): http://aqfl.net
\ _ / Remove ANT from e-mail address: philpi@earthlink.netANT
( ) or ANTant@zimage.com
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on his home computer.

Does anyone here know why Nvidia have removed a much used function for the
secondary display?
Or know of a way around it?

https://nvidia.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/...ted=1169076830


Just bought myself a lovely fully featured custom built computer with most
of the best stuff, included was the Geforce 8800gt and much to my
disappointment it didn't do what my Geforce2 could in the old computer.

I feel like someone who just won a nice summer holiday to Venus!
What were they thinking?
The card is now virtually useless - I don't use it to play games - I wish to
use it to make videos, via archiving my huge VHS tape collection on to DVD.
Something I did mention to the boffins I bought the puter from.


Regards
Robert McCurdy

On 1/30/2008 8:10 AM PT, Robert McCurdy typed:

> Does anyone here know why Nvidia have removed a much used function for
> the secondary display?
> Or know of a way around it?
>
> https://nvidia.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/...ted=1169076830
>
> Just bought myself a lovely fully featured custom built computer with
> most of the best stuff, included was the Geforce 8800gt and much to my
> disappointment it didn't do what my Geforce2 could in the old computer.
>
> I feel like someone who just won a nice summer holiday to Venus!
> What were they thinking?
> The card is now virtually useless - I don't use it to play games - I
> wish to use it to make videos, via archiving my huge VHS tape collection
> on to DVD. Something I did mention to the boffins I bought the puter from.

Return the card, get a lower end video card like a GeForce 6800 since
you don't play games. 7xxx has its, but its aspect ratio is all wrong!
You can see all the complaints in NVIDIA's forum like
http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?showtopic=49636&st=0 ...

BTW, shouldn't this be a new newsgroup thread, not a reply to my thread?
--
"News Headline: Ants Take A Long Time To Cook In Microwave" --unknown
/\___/\
/ /\ /\ \ Phil/Ant @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org (Personal Web Site)
| |o o| | Ant's Quality Foraged Links (AQFL): http://aqfl.net
\ _ / Remove ANT from e-mail address: philpi@earthlink.netANT
( ) or ANTant@zimage.com
Ant is currently not listening to any songs on his home computer.