• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Graphics Card Upgrade For Dell Dimension E520

  • Thread starter Thread starter TSD
  • Start date Start date

TSD

TSD

TSD

Associate
Joined
5 Jul 2012
Posts
7
I’m running a Dell Dimension E520 brought in June 2007 which has served me reasonably well for the last 5 years. It has an Intel Core 2 Duo processor (6320) running at 1.86GHZ and an ATI RADEON X1300 PRO 256MB graphics card, both original to the system. I’ve upgraded most other components over the years so the system now has 4GB DDR2 800MHZ memory, Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit and a Samsung Spinpoint 1TB Hard Drive, all of which were worthwhile upgrades. I get a 4.1 Windows Experience score (Processor 4.9, Memory 5.4, Graphics 4.7, Gaming Graphics 4.1, Primary Hard Drive 5.9). The graphics is the Achilles heal, and this is where I’m now struggling.

I don’t use the computer for gaming, but I’ve recently brought a Sony digital camera and can’t get the HD videos (1080p .MTS files) to play back properly. They play back best in Windows Media player but are noticeably juddery. They’re unwatchable with VLC media player. Previously I’ve noticed BBC iPlayer playback to be slightly juddery but don’t use this on the computer now I’ve got an internet enabled TV, which plays iPlayer perfectly.

I’ve been considering upgrading the graphics card to rectify the problem, using the comparison tool at http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php as a guide. I’d prefer a passively cooled card like the one I have now both to keep things quiet and avoid any unnecessary strain on the PSU, and have come up with 3 possible candidates:

Sapphire HD 5450 1GB DDR3, currently around £25. 4 times as much memory but most specs only marginally better than my card, except for memory bus which is actually worse (64 bit down from 128 bit)

Sapphire HD 6570 1GB Ultimate, currently around £50. Double the price but would comfortably outperform my card in every way.

Sapphire HD 7750 1GB GDDR5 Ultimate, currently around £100. Higher spec still, but more than I would ideally like to pay.

It’s worth noting that I’ll probably be replacing my system completely within the next 12 to 18 months, so I would rather not go too overboard. If the cheaper 5450 card would solve the issues I’m having then I’d happily opt for this as my preferred option, but if it would make little or no difference then I might be tempted to opt for the 6570, but only if I would see a significant improvement. I think I’d only really consider the more expensive 7750 if I were to consider using it in my new system, but if it isn’t towards the end of next year when I eventually upgrade I’ll probably want to be looking at something newer.

My other option is just to live with it for now if the cheaper card isn’t likely to fix things.

The next consideration is how far I can go with my system before I hit the next bottleneck, which I’d imagine would be the processor, so I don’t want anything too higher spec if my system wouldn’t be able to take advantage of the extra power of a more expensive card versus a cheaper one. I really don’t want to be upgrading the processor or anything else, I’d rather save the money for when I get a new computer when I wouldn’t mind spending more.

Any information or advice would be gratefully appreciated as well as suggestions for alternatives.

Thanks.

Tim
 
Last edited:
The GT640 looks like a nice card, but at the moment I’m tending towards the HD 6570 because it’s cheaper and I’d really prefer an air cooled card. Looking at the specs I think the cheapest HD 5450 would probably not gain me much over my current card and the HD 7750 is really too much as I’m thinking of replacing my computer anyway soon, at which point I’ll be prepared to spend more.

So the big question is would getting a HD 6570 significantly improve my graphics performance enough to play HD videos?

Tim
 
Go for the 6570, it's a good card for playing HD content.

Also, give Media Player Classic Home Cinema a go, I find it to be better playing 1080p content than VLC.
 
I think I'm definately swinging towards the 6570. I think the cheap 5450 won't be powerful enough and the 7750 is more than I want to pay and a bigger drain on PSU resources.

I think I'll probably go for that unless anyone else wants to add anything that might make me re-consider?

Tim
 
That really is the dilemma I’ve got. If I decide to upgrade I want the upgrade to be worthwhile, but I don’t want to buy more than what I need as it’s an old system.

On paper, the specs of the 5450 look only marginally better than my X1300 Pro, which performs badly at playing my HD videos to the point where they’re virtually unwatchable. For example the memory bandwidth is the same at 12.8 GB/sec and memory bus width actually down to 64 bit from 128 bit. Pixel fill rate is up only very slightly from 2400 to 2600 MPixels/sec and texture fill rate up from 2400 to 5200 MTexels/sec, texture units up from 4 to 8 and raster operations the same at 4. A 6570 on the other hand would more than double the memory bandwidth to 28.8 GB/sec and retain the 128 bit memory bus width, pixel and texture fill rates would raise considerably to 5200 MPixels/sec and 15600 MTexels/sec, and texture units and raster operations would be up to 24 and 8 respectively.

On the positive side the 5450 has 4 times the amount of dedicated graphics memory as my current card and it’s a much newer chipset, so maybe even though it doesn’t really look much better on paper it will suffice? I’m not a graphics card expert so I don’t know how important these figures all are in the real world.

I’ve already ruled out a 7750, a bit too overkill for what I want it for. So now I have to decide risking a 5450 having enough extra power for my needs, or going for a 6570. What I don’t want to do is find a 5450 still isn’t good enough and getting a 6570 anyway, whereas from the outset a 6570 is only £25 dearer so not a major setback…

Tim
 
There's no point looking at the numbers, what you really want to look at is reviews which gives it a proper rundown on how the cards perform. So ignore how much memory it has, the memory bandwidth, core speed, etc. You should never use these to compare cards.

The 5450 will work fine. It contains UVD 2.2 (Unified Video Decoder) which helps it decode HD media. The 6570 has UVD 3 which can even decode 3D media. The X1300 Pro doesn't have UVD hence why it's probably struggling to help decode 1080p stuff.
 
TSD said:
That really is the dilemma I’ve got. If I decide to upgrade I want the upgrade to be worthwhile, but I don’t want to buy more than what I need as it’s an old system.

On paper, the specs of the 5450 look only marginally better than my X1300 Pro, which performs badly at playing my HD videos to the point where they’re virtually unwatchable. For example the memory bandwidth is the same at 12.8 GB/sec and memory bus width actually down to 64 bit from 128 bit. Pixel fill rate is up only very slightly from 2400 to 2600 MPixels/sec and texture fill rate up from 2400 to 5200 MTexels/sec, texture units up from 4 to 8 and raster operations the same at 4. A 6570 on the other hand would more than double the memory bandwidth to 28.8 GB/sec and retain the 128 bit memory bus width, pixel and texture fill rates would raise considerably to 5200 MPixels/sec and 15600 MTexels/sec, and texture units and raster operations would be up to 24 and 8 respectively.

On the positive side the 5450 has 4 times the amount of dedicated graphics memory as my current card and it’s a much newer chipset, so maybe even though it doesn’t really look much better on paper it will suffice? I’m not a graphics card expert so I don’t know how important these figures all are in the real world.

I’ve already ruled out a 7750, a bit too overkill for what I want it for. So now I have to decide risking a 5450 having enough extra power for my needs, or going for a 6570. What I don’t want to do is find a 5450 still isn’t good enough and getting a 6570 anyway, whereas from the outset a 6570 is only £25 dearer so not a major setback…

Tim
Click to expand...

Raw hardware specs will not tell you anything about the capability to decode HD video - All of the AMD HDxxxx cards can because of the UVDx engines they contain, which Orcvader mentioned. The 5450 is more than up to the job and they are as good at decoding video as my 5850 is.

The only reason to get a 6x or 7x series card is for 3d playback.
 
Last edited:
So either card should be fine, the explanation about UVD makes perfect sense, thanks!

I need to decide now whether to go for the 5450 to rectify my problem until I upgrade, or pay an extra £25 for the 6570 to give me a bit more headroom should I ever need to do more graphic intensive tasks in the future, and maybe even play the odd game, something I’ve not done for many years!

I think ultimately how this upgrade goes could determine when I eventually upgrade my system, for which it needs to continue to satisfy all my requirements. No point in fixing something that isn’t broke.

I need to think about it for a few days and will look at placing an order for whatever I decide on early next week.

Btw I’ve tried Media Player Classic Home cinema, playback was better than VLC, probably on par with Windows Media player, but the sound periodically freezes, so Windows Media player is still the best for me at the moment.

Thanks for all the help.

Tim
 
Hmm, try MPC-HC with my settings. Download this as well: http://code.google.com/p/lavfilters/

Then in MPC-HC, do the following changes:


This is to ensure it's using the GPU to help decode:
3DdgT.png


This is to tell MPC that you don't want to use the inbuilt codecs, just basically untick everything:
iuLCw.png


This is to set MPC to use the LAV filters, both on prefer:
E5vvf.png


With this combination I find it much smoother and better than Windows Media Player.
 
I’ve tried your settings for MPC-HC which have improved things. It’s now slightly better than Windows Media player but there’s not a lot in it.

The pictures are still noticeably juddery and the sound occasionally freezes. I’ll try again and see what I prefer after upgrading my graphics card.

Cheers.

Tim
 
It’s a case of either live with it as it is or upgrade, something I’ve been thinking over for the last few months. I’ll let you know what happens, should be in about a week’s time.

Cheers.

Tim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom