Terrible 7800 GS performance - help!

[Fx-Overlord]

Is it throttling at all?

 

[Vegeta]

May aswell check temps, if they are low it shouldnt throttle

 

[Five_Star]

Thanks for all the replies, I went for the full format option SP2, nForce drivers then forceware 83.60.

I’d left AA and AF as application preference in the control panel and made sure vsync was off. I’ve just tried the fastwrite option off did make quite a noticeable 15-20fps difference in performance in Far Cry which is a massive help.

Strange thing about temps is that in the nvidia monitor tool it seemed like the GPU was never over 50c from the graph, I though it would get much hotter?

Overall though I think its limited by the CPU. I wanted to avoid some difficult choices over a full upgrade to an A64 and PCI-E but I think that’s the way I’m gonna have to go.

Thanks for everyones help, at least it’ll get some use now till I’ve decided how to upgrade.

 

[Emlyn_Dewar]

For some reason I read the post as saying it was 3DM05 tests...
Like pastymuncher says, those scores are probably about right for what it is.

Edit: Also, I wouldn't worry about what a benchmarking program says either, load up the games and see the difference for yourself! Should notice a great improvement over the 9800!

 

[melchy]

Lol lots of dodgy info in this thread. A 2.4ghz AXP IS a slow CPU by todays standards there's no two ways about it. It sucks for gaming compared to A64, just look at this mass of CPU tests and judge relative performance http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/11/21/the_mother_of_all_cpu_charts_2005/page28.html

The 7800GS should be faster than the 9800Pro though anyhow, and I note you have changed from an ATi card to an NVidia one. One word: reformat. Twice I have changed from ATI to Nvidia and twice I had shoddy performance until I did a clean install. It should always be done when changing vid card brands imo and I bet if you did you would notice a boost in performance.

Also make sure you are running higher res with more detail so that the GPU is used, or you will be CPU-limiting it even more than it already is.

If I were you i'd upgrade to an Asrock 939 SATA2 board that has both the AGP/PCI slots and get a cheapish Skt 939 Venice, you'll notice a world of difference.

Sorry an XP at 2.4Ghz isnt all that slow by todays standards. Where does the list you posted show overclocked XP's, the fastest i noticed was the XP3200+. I very nearly gave up on my first A64 setup (an A64 3500+) because at stock it was destroyed by the XP2500+ Mobile @ 2500Mhz that it was meant to replace. The XP @ 2500Mhz was faster than the A64 3500+ in everything i chucked at it, benchmarks, games. It was only when i clocked the A64 upto 2500Mhz as well that it really showed the XP a clean set of heels. In my case the extra 300Mhz that the XP had over the stock A64 3500+ more than made up for the A64's better architecture.

Looking at the 3DMark06 score though it looks not bad. I dont score as high on a A64 3500+ with a 6800GT. Im running an 06 now just to give you a rough comparison. Have you tried running a 3DMark05 as well just to see if your scores are alright for that. Did you reinstall all your games fresh or are they installs from when you were running the 9800Pro. Definately try with fast writes on and off and see if it makes any difference.

*edit* Scored 2288 on an A64 3500+ with a 6800GT AGP on an Asrock Dual SATA. Score seems a little low to me, but it puts your 06 score into perspective.

 

[Five_Star]

Honestly the biggest speed jump I got out of this card was when I pushed the cpu from 2.3Ghz up to 2.4Ghz to see if that made any difference to fps in games.

Its only on air cooling but max temp is only 48c at 1.75v. I’m a little worried to go to 1.9v to try for 2.5Ghz or 2.6Ghz but if it helps this 7800GS I might try this weekend.

 

[Richdog]

Sorry an XP at 2.4Ghz isnt all that slow by todays standards. Where does the list you posted show overclocked XP's, the fastest i noticed was the XP3200+. I very nearly gave up on my first A64 setup (an A64 3500+) because at stock it was destroyed by the XP2500+ Mobile @ 2500Mhz that it was meant to replace. The XP @ 2500Mhz was faster than the A64 3500+ in everything i chucked at it, benchmarks, games. It was only when i clocked the A64 upto 2500Mhz as well that it really showed the XP a clean set of heels. In my case the extra 300Mhz that the XP had over the stock A64 3500+ more than made up for the A64's better architecture.
.

A 3200+ Barton is 2.2ghz... his CPU only 200mhz higher. I have overclocked and benched both AXP and A64 CPU's until I was blue in the face on all forms of cooling. 2.4 ghz is slow by todays standards compared to even a cheap A64, there's no debate.

If your 3500+ @ 2.2ghz was getting destroyed by an AXP @ 2.5ghz then you were doing something very, very wrong.

 

[Richdog]

Here's a nice link of a 2500+ AXP @ 2.4ghz getting destroyed by... wait for it... a 3500+ http://techreport.com/reviews/2004q3/athlon64-3500/index.x?pg=5

 

[melchy]

A 3200+ Barton is 2.2ghz... his CPU only 200mhz higher. I have overclocked and benched both AXP and A64 CPU's until I was blue in the face on all forms of cooling. 2.4 ghz is slow by todays standards compared to even a cheap A64, there's no debate.

If your 3500+ @ 2.2ghz was getting destroyed by an AXP @ 2.5ghz then you were doing something very, very wrong.

Sorry the XP @ 2500Mhz was faster than a A64 3500+ at stock in everything i tested it in. There was a big thread discussing the relative speed of overclocked XP's and A64s. whether it still exists or not i dont know. My system was at 2.5Ghz so faster than the 2.4Ghz in your link. I did have a few benchmarks both Sisoft Sandra synthetics and 3DMark05 benches for both machines but im unable to find them. They may still be linked in that thread. Anyway lets not derail this thread too much. My 05 and Sandra benchmarks for the A64 were spot on, so i wouldnt say i'd done anything wrong with the system.

 

[phatboy]

IGNORE ME....I SMELL OF CHEESECAKE!

 

[Cyber-Mav]

no no no, an athlon xp @ 2500 mhz would be slower than a 2ghz a64.

also take into account that the xp1700 the OP is using is not a barton core which is a lot faster thanks to its larger cache. but a [email protected] is is still not too bad on processing power.

 

[Richdog]

Sorry the XP @ 2500Mhz was faster than a A64 3500+ at stock in everything i tested it in. There was a big thread discussing the relative speed of overclocked XP's and A64s. whether it still exists or not i dont know. My system was at 2.5Ghz so faster than the 2.4Ghz in your link. I did have a few benchmarks both Sisoft Sandra synthetics and 3DMark05 benches for both machines but im unable to find them. They may still be linked in that thread. Anyway lets not derail this thread too much. My 05 and Sandra benchmarks for the A64 were spot on, so i wouldnt say i'd done anything wrong with the system.

lol so it was 100mhz faster than the one in the benchies... it still would get demolished. I trust the review and benching system of a professional reviewer such as the guy from tech report to that of your own if you believe an AXP running 300mhz faster than a Skt 939 2.2ghz A64 CPU was genuinely faster, no offence. I have benched enough AXP's and A64's to know the difference, my AXP @ 2.8ghz was considerably slower in games and benchies than my Skt 754 @ 2.4ghz, and that was after fresh installs.

 

[melchy]

also take into account that the xp1700 the OP is using is not a barton core which is a lot faster thanks to its larger cache. but a [email protected] is is still not too bad on processing power.

You make a fairly good point there, although the difference wont be all that massive.

I really dont want to derail the thread, Richdog and me obviously have different experience with regards to this. Lets just leave it at that. I still think the 06 score looks fine, but that doesnt account for the poor game performance.

 

[melchy]

lol so it was 100mhz faster than the one in the benchies... it still would get demolished. I trust the review and benching system of a professional reviewer such as the guy from tech report to that of your own if you believe an AXP running 300mhz faster than a Skt 939 2.2ghz A64 CPU was genuinely faster, no offence. I have benched enough AXP's and A64's to know the difference, my AXP @ 2.8ghz was considerably slower in games and benchies than my Skt 754 @ 2.4ghz, and that was after fresh installs.

My experience of benchmarks was different to yours. SiSoft benches were much faster on the XP with the A64 at 2.2 and the XP at 2.5. With A64 matching what Sandra expected or there abouts. 3DMark05 was faster on the XP as well. Im kind of annoyed that i cant find the comparitive benches i did. Its all kind of irrelevent anyway as im currently using an X2 3800 @ 2500Mhz in my main machine and the A3500+ in another. The XP has been retired. The only point i was trying to make was that it wasnt quite as poor a processor that people were pointing out. The OP doesnt have to run out and get a A64 straight away to expect performance from the 7800GS.

Anyway none of this helps the OP.

 

[man_from_uncle]

Five Star: I know this'll be a daft response, but sometimes the most obvious thing is missed out. Did you plug the card in properly? I mean, did you plug the power line into it? Some 6800 cards will run, if poorly, even without the powerline. Just.....you know.....checking. Having said that you wouldn't have got 2844 if your card wasn't plugged in. I think my 7800gt only got 3400 at stock speeds and that's with a fairly mighty overclock on my opty.

As for the sidetrack debate of how the XPs stack up to 64s........ I had my old mobile xp3000+ up to 2.55ghz on air (not all the time) and it was certainly quicker in any test you'd like to run than my opty at stock speeds. 38 seconds on superpi1m; that's about what you'd get from a 3200+ venice. It was only when I got this chip up to A64 3500+ speeds that it started to pull ahead in a meaningful way. If he's got a well overclocked xp1700 then it won't bottleneck him too badly except on CPU heavy games like Rome Total war and Civ 4.

 

[Overlag]

Sorry the XP @ 2500Mhz was faster than a A64 3500+ at stock in everything i tested it in. There was a big thread discussing the relative speed of overclocked XP's and A64s. whether it still exists or not i dont know. My system was at 2.5Ghz so faster than the 2.4Ghz in your link. I did have a few benchmarks both Sisoft Sandra synthetics and 3DMark05 benches for both machines but im unable to find them. They may still be linked in that thread. Anyway lets not derail this thread too much. My 05 and Sandra benchmarks for the A64 were spot on, so i wouldnt say i'd done anything wrong with the system.

my XP2500 (barton) at 2400mhz on a Nforce2 board was quiet a bit slower than my Socket 754 A64 3200 (2000mhz)

then, my 939 A64 3200 (2000mhz) was ALSO faster than the 754 A64, and there for MILES faster than a 2400mhz Barton XP....

 

[Phil99]

Ok, maybe my claim was a bit OTT

It's not slow to the extent FarCry should show no improvement though.

By the way, Five_Star, what was the CPU score on the 3D Mark 06 benchmark and have you tried 3D Mark 01/03/05?