Another x1950 AGP Question

[Cairnsey]

Hi,

First post so play nice. I have an ageing AGP system (P4 [email protected]/1Gig ddr400/9700pro on an Abit be7 mobo(agp4x) Was wondering how much I would benefit with buying the sapphire 512MB x1950 AGP card with this system (will system bandwidth cause bottlenecks?) and also whats the PSU requirements, I have an enlight 350W PSU which according to the net - 26a on the 12v. I play a lot of FPS games (FEAR, Doom3, Quake4, HL2, etc) and was wanting to play them the way they're supposed to be played but don't have the £££ to build a new Conroe/PCI-E system.

Please advise. Cheers.

 

[Tetras]

enlight 350W PSU which according to the net - 26a on the 12v

You sure about that? That would imply very powerful +12v rail(s) for a 350 Watt PSU, do you know the combined wattage?

Your right about bottlenecks, an X1950 Pro would be pretty heavily held back by that rig I'm afraid, though you would still see a performance increase (and prolly quite a significant one).

I would say that a 7600 GS or 7600 GT (fair bit faster than the GS) are more suited to your system though, they aren't as fast as an X1950 Pro but don't consume much power and will give you a significant speed jump that isn't over the top for your CPU. I wouldn't worry about 512MB versions of any card since you won't be using those kind of settings (especially with 1GB of RAM), 256MB is plenty on any card you'll buy (though if the price is not much different there is no harm and it will prolly help re-sale value and could be useful if you use the same card in an upgraded rig later on).

 

[Cairnsey]

Thanks, I was looking at the 7600gt as well. with regards to the PSU, I apologise, its enermax not enlight(enlight is my case) here's the manufacturers. link with spec:

http://www.enermax.com.tw/english/product_Display1.asp?PrID=29

The reason I was going to buy the x1950 pro over the 7600gt is price, its only £30ish more. but If you think I would have power probs and bottleneck issues then perhaps I'll go with the 7600gt. Anyone else want to throw their two cents in?

 

[Tetras]

Hmm, you'll be ok with that particular PSU I'd imagine.

The X1950 Pro will bottleneck it is true but so will the 7600 GT and the X1950 Pro will still be the faster card

You have a good point with the prices and the X1950 Pro will prolly still be in high demand when you come to sell it, so for only £30 extra I'd be tempted to get it too (even though you won't be able to make full use of it).

 

[Cairnsey]

Thats the way I saw it too, resale value et al. Don't want to take up much more of your time but can you give me a brief insight into how a cpu/gpu mismatch would affect my FPS in games. cheers

Thanks for your help so far!

 

[SkeeterUK]

Not sure your psu can take the x1950pro mate. 26a on the +12. As i said im not sure.

 

[Cairnsey]

Ok, thanks. Do you think that I would be able to buy one and return it if I have problems? Also am I right in thinking that the x1950 would beat a 7800gs (@£211) which would instantly justify buying one as opposed to the 7600gt?(given that my PSU could power it)

As ever, thanks for the input

 

[SkeeterUK]

Well you could ring ocuk and ask them if the 1950pro can be used on ** system and ask if you have problems ask if they will accept a rma.

To be perfectly honest it is a waste to buy a x1950pro on your system spec. The cpu alone will stop fps going higher on most new games. Especially cpu dependent ones.

I would personally upgrade ** rig first then get one of these cards when you have done.

Up to you tho mate. If you do get one then best of luck man.

 

[Tetras]

can you give me a brief insight into how a cpu/gpu mismatch would affect my FPS in games

Well, basically graphics cards and game engines need a certain level of CPU power to (with graphics cards) get the best out of them and (game engine) handle all the other stuff AI/physics etc to keep it running smoothly.

With your 9700 Pro the CPU can more or less keep up and even if upgraded to a Core 2 Duo it is unlikely you'd see much of a frame rate boost (except in those games which require the CPU to do a lot of work, where it isn't handling it too well).

Generally speaking the graphics card has more influence on the maximum frame rate, just how fast your PC can plough through the game and it will handle all the fancy effects (like water, clouds etc) which would cripple the CPU along with the grunt work of pushing pixels. The CPU on the other hand has more influence on the minimum frame rate and how smooth it'll be (since if it is struggling to handle the game engine it doesn't matter how fast the graphics card is pixel pushing, it'll *still* chug).

If you are getting a graphics card issue but the CPU can cope then you'll find the game chugs when a lot of action is on the screen and particularly in complex areas (like where there is pretties, i.e. special effects, explosions, many characters etc) while a CPU/RAM issue will be a generally uneven frame rate along with periods of unexplained chugginess (where there is no obvious cause like a graphics card has with many characters on the screen) and make the game hard to play most of the time rather than only when there is a lot to render.

The bottleneck comes about when the graphics card can happily render the scene but the CPU struggles to keep up with it, you can usually alleviate the bottleneck by turning on pretties (like AA/AF) and cranking up graphics/detail settings until the graphics card itself begins to chug. The snag is it might still not be very smooth and if the CPU really is much too slow for the game it doesn't matter how powerful the graphics card is, you won't be able to play it.

Usually you will find that games like strategy and RPG (games like Oblivion are more of an FPS-RPG though Oblivion makes heavy use of both the CPU and GPU) are more CPU intensive (you'll see a nice increase, smoother gameplay with a faster CPU) while shooters in particular are graphics intensive (i.e. you'll see a nice improvement with a faster graphics card but not so much with a new CPU).

 

[Cairnsey]

thanks will do

 

[Cairnsey]

thanks tetras, that makes it a whole lot clearer now, maybe i'll go for a x1950 after ringing ocuk like skeeter suggested and if any psu probs return it and if cpu bottlenecks, seek out a faster northy or higher overclock

 

[Tetras]

Also am I right in thinking that the x1950 would beat a 7800gs

It does, the 7800 GS isn't that quick tbh, the bog standard 7800 GS (i.e. not a Gainward go faster version) isn't that much faster than a 7600 GT.

and if any psu probs return it and if cpu bottlenecks, seek out a faster northy or higher overclock

This is in no way scientific but I'd say (depending on the game) you'll get about 40 - 60% of what that card is capable of while the 7600 GT would be about 50 - 70%. Either will still be a lot faster than the 9700 Pro in any case and if your playing on 800 x 600 med, 1024 x 768 med/low you'll be able to get something like 1024 x 768 high + aa/af, 1280 x 1024 med + aa/af in those games you mentioned.

 

[Cairnsey]

To give you a rough idea of what I do with my gfx at the mo, heres my F.E.A.R setup:
I usually set all gfx options to their lowest then turn up res to either 8x6 -2xAA or 10x7 -noAA (the former works better) and set texture detail to med/high. So my games look bland (i.e no fancy lighting, shadows, effects, decals, particles etc) but are fairly crisp with straight lines and high detail textures and most importantly run smooth(ish).

So, does this mean I'm pretty much alleviating the load on the CPU anyway so if I bought the x1950 and tried turning on settings such as max objects , shadows, decals etc. my game would stutter due to the cpu load? i'm off to becnhmark brb...

 

[SkeeterUK]

Turning on effects should no longer cause slow down. But not all effects are purely run on the grx card. They do use some cpu to run.

Althought in short, yes you can turn up the detail but keep the resolution low.

 

[Cyber-Mav]

Thanks, I was looking at the 7600gt as well. with regards to the PSU, I apologise, its enermax not enlight(enlight is my case) here's the manufacturers. link with spec:

http://www.enermax.com.tw/english/product_Display1.asp?PrID=29

The reason I was going to buy the x1950 pro over the 7600gt is price, its only £30ish more. but If you think I would have power probs and bottleneck issues then perhaps I'll go with the 7600gt. Anyone else want to throw their two cents in?

that psu is quite shocking really, over 310w of its 350w is available on the 12v rail is simply amazing.

do note that iv run the system in my sig with a old 431w enermax psu that has 20a on the 12v rail, but the gfx card i had back then was a 6800nu, also ran it with 7600gt and a 7900gs. and seeing as how the x1950pro is nearly on par with the 7900gs when it comes to power consumption according to the graph someone posted in one of the above threads, id say that your psu will easily cope with your system inc the x1950pro.

 

[marc2003]

here's a review of an agp x1950pro on a 300w psu with 18a on the 12v rail....

http://www.lostcircuits.com/video/sapphire_x1950proagp/

We did run the entire system on a 300 W PSU and for what it's worth, the setup was - mostly - as quiet as a church mouse. It is, though, necessary to mention that this was really pushing it. Adding just a Seagate 100 MB Seadisk caused occasional tripping of the PSU fuse. The bottom line, therefore, is that for a system of this caliber, one should at least have a solid 301 W PSU ….

 

[Cyber-Mav]

that settles it then, 350w psu is overkill

 

[marc2003]

that settles it then, 350w psu is overkill

i guess i should have added that i don't recommend a 300w psu for the job..... just that it can be done....

i'm getting an x1950pro at the weekend and i don't even trust my old 400w / 18a psu. i'm getting something new to go with it.

 

[Cairnsey]

cheers guys (off to find credit card!)

 

[Cairnsey]

One final afterthought, Whats better, the 512Mb Sapphire or the 256Mb HIS? (Better clocks and cooling on the HIS) only £6 more for the HIS if the extra clock speeds outweigh the 256Mb.

Cheers