Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > Video Cards and Graphics

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-09-2013, 04:13 PM   #1
JediKnight
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 41
Default Upgraded my video card. Benchmark results surprisingly bad

Ran a PassMark performance test (no idea if this is a good benchmark or not - but it's a starting point) on my system. Surprised by low results with my newly upgraded video card (XFX Radeon 7850HD Core edition 1GB). This is by no means a top-end card, but I don't think I should be getting scores this low.. although I may be wrong.


DX10 and DX11 results are not good at all - slower than an Intel integrated card for DX11??!

Am I expecting too much, or is there something wrong here?
__________________
I was on the "L" the other day and this guys walked up to me, and said. "Are those implants?"
JediKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 04:20 PM   #2
notty22
Diamond Member
 
notty22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Beantown
Posts: 3,315
Default

Wow, 24 posts since 7/2000. Hi longtime lurker, you need to tell us the specs of

This computer !
Meaning your rig components.



edit: And O/S and if you have updated DX components from Microsoft.
__________________
i5 4670K@4100mhz, 32GB Kingston 1600,H50
MSI GTX 970 gaming Seasonic SS-760XP2

240gb SSD, Win 8.1
Let's make sure history never forgets... the name... 'Enterprise'. Picard out.

Last edited by notty22; 01-09-2013 at 04:30 PM.
notty22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 04:35 PM   #3
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
 
DominionSeraph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Equestria
Posts: 8,252
Default

You should be around the same speed as a 6950.
__________________
Danse De Raven

"P&N: Not Quite as Bad as Stormfront"
DominionSeraph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 04:37 PM   #4
JediKnight
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 41
Default

I think at one point they removed all old posts from the forum. Somewhat explaining my low post count

My machine's an older one.. but I was hoping to get a bit more life out of it before building a new one (was very seriously considering doing so over the holidays.. but decided against it at the last minute as I hadn't done enough research).

Core2 Quad 6700 @ 2.66GHz
4GB DDR2 RAM
XFX Radeon 7850HD Core edition 1GB
2x500GB Seagate HD @ 7200 RPM (not RAIDed)
Corsair CX500 PSU

It's a HP Pavilion elite m9250, with the video card and PSU upgraded (all other components are stock). Still running Windows Vista.
__________________
I was on the "L" the other day and this guys walked up to me, and said. "Are those implants?"
JediKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 04:41 PM   #5
notty22
Diamond Member
 
notty22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Beantown
Posts: 3,315
Default

I would run other benchmarks, like Uningene Heaven.
Also, try to run the DX update from microsoft.
Your DX9 results show a higher % tile.
Your clock speed is low, which effects some game engines aspects, what resolution are you running?
__________________
i5 4670K@4100mhz, 32GB Kingston 1600,H50
MSI GTX 970 gaming Seasonic SS-760XP2

240gb SSD, Win 8.1
Let's make sure history never forgets... the name... 'Enterprise'. Picard out.
notty22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 04:54 PM   #6
Termie
Diamond Member
 
Termie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 7,099
Default

Run 3dMark11: http://www.3dmark.com/3dmark11/download/

While the total score will be greatly affected by your slow CPU, the graphics score should be about 5000, and if it's around that, you know the system's ok.

Comparisons: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/2048/9/
__________________
Work: 3770K | Hyper 212+ | Asus Max V Gene | 290 Tri-X | 16GB | 830 256GB | TJ08B-E | x650 | U2713HM
Gaming: 4770K@4.5 | H100i | ASRock Z97 Ex4 | 780 Ti SLI | 8GB | MX100 512GB | 500R | EVGA G2 850W | Asus VG248QE
HTPC: 4690K@4.0 | CM S524 | ASRock Z97E | HD7870 | 8GB | 1TB SSHD | SG08 | CX500M | Samsung 55" 4K
Looking for deals? Check out The Hot Deals Blog at The Tech Buyer's Guru!
How's your video card compare? See TBG's Video Card Rankings!
Termie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 05:22 PM   #7
ockky
Senior Member
 
ockky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: near enough to the ghetto that it makes sleeping difficult
Posts: 735
Default

My initial guess is that your motherboard has an older 1.0 pci-e slot instead of the newer 3.0. Just a guess due to limited info.

Edit for clarification: The 7850 you have is made for the a 3.0 slot, but can still be used by a slower 1.0 slot.
__________________
HeatWare
ockky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 05:36 PM   #8
shabby
Diamond Member
 
shabby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 4,685
Default

The cpu and pcie 1.1 mobo is holding you back, i'd sell the 7850 and upgrade the whole system.
__________________
I'm on a boat!

R.I.P. PrideFC
shabby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 05:40 PM   #9
SPBHM
Platinum Member
 
SPBHM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shabby View Post
The cpu and pcie 1.1 mobo is holding you back, i'd sell the 7850 and upgrade the whole system.
I highly doubt that this is the main reason...

also, test in more things, passmark is hardy the best way to compare gaming performance,



16x 1.x should be at least as good but probably better than 4x 3.0?
SPBHM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2013, 06:00 PM   #10
shabby
Diamond Member
 
shabby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 4,685
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPBHM View Post
I highly doubt that this is the main reason...

also, test in more things, passmark is hardy the best way to compare gaming performance,



16x 1.x should be at least as good but probably better than 4x 3.0?
Im not sure what passmark does in the dx10/11 tests but it probably saturates the pcie bus and is the reason why his scores are low in those two tests. But yes, pointless benchmark try some games.
__________________
I'm on a boat!

R.I.P. PrideFC
shabby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 12:42 AM   #11
JediKnight
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 41
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Termie View Post
Run 3dMark11: http://www.3dmark.com/3dmark11/download/

While the total score will be greatly affected by your slow CPU, the graphics score should be about 5000, and if it's around that, you know the system's ok.

Comparisons: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/2048/9/
Here's the result:
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/5516801
__________________
I was on the "L" the other day and this guys walked up to me, and said. "Are those implants?"
JediKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 12:48 AM   #12
JediKnight
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 41
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by notty22 View Post
I would run other benchmarks, like Uningene Heaven.
Also, try to run the DX update from microsoft.
Your DX9 results show a higher % tile.
Your clock speed is low, which effects some game engines aspects, what resolution are you running?
I'm normally at 1920x1080..
Where do you get directx updates? Stupid question.. but I don't see anything in Windows update, and a google search says Vista's restricted to 10.1. Which is curious because dxdiag says I'm running dx11?
__________________
I was on the "L" the other day and this guys walked up to me, and said. "Are those implants?"
JediKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 01:41 AM   #13
notty22
Diamond Member
 
notty22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Beantown
Posts: 3,315
Default

DirectX11 Released For Windows Vista



__________________
i5 4670K@4100mhz, 32GB Kingston 1600,H50
MSI GTX 970 gaming Seasonic SS-760XP2

240gb SSD, Win 8.1
Let's make sure history never forgets... the name... 'Enterprise'. Picard out.

Last edited by notty22; 01-10-2013 at 01:47 AM.
notty22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 02:15 AM   #14
DominionSeraph
Diamond Member
 
DominionSeraph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Equestria
Posts: 8,252
Default

>Vista
Oh God, what are you doing? Upgrade to XP at least.
__________________
Danse De Raven

"P&N: Not Quite as Bad as Stormfront"
DominionSeraph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 05:34 AM   #15
JediKnight
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 41
Default

Ahh. Odd that MS has outdated info on their website about this. And the outdated info is one of the top google search results!

Here's the other benchmark result:
Heaven Benchmark v3.0 Basic

FPS:
56.9
Scores:
1434
Min FPS:
22.4
Max FPS:
113.8
Hardware

Binary:
Windows 32bit Visual C++ 1600 Release Mar 7 2012
Operating system:
Windows Vista (build 6002, Service Pack 2) 64bit
CPU model:
Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6700 @ 2.66GHz
CPU flags:
2666MHz MMX SSE SSE2 SSE3 SSSE3 HTT
GPU model:
AMD Radeon HD 7800 Series 8.14.01.6278 1024Mb
Settings

Render:
direct3d11
Mode:
1920x1080 fullscreen
Shaders:
high
Textures:
high
Filter:
trilinear
Anisotropy:
4x
Occlusion:
enabled
Refraction:
enabled
Volumetric:
enabled
Tessellation: disabled
__________________
I was on the "L" the other day and this guys walked up to me, and said. "Are those implants?"
JediKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 07:00 AM   #16
Termie
Diamond Member
 
Termie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 7,099
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JediKnight View Post
Ok, great. I think your card is doing fine, although you may be slightly held back by your motherboard's PCIe interface, and of course greatly held back in they physics tests by your CPU. Overall, though, I don't see a cause for alarm. Also, 3dMark11 provides a handy bar graph that shows that you're right in the middle range for your hardware setup.

Your GPU is operating at about 70% the speed of my 7870 clocked at 1000/1200, which should theoretically be about 20% faster. So you're losing another 10% of performance, probably due to your motherboard's slower bus.

Here are your scores versus mine:

7850/q6700 | 7870/i7-860
3dM: P4454 | P7081
GS: 5208 | 7174
PS: 3353 | 7260
CS: 2796 | 6249
GT1: 21.0 | 31.27
GT2: 24.15 | 35.15
GT3: 33.68 | 45.69
GT4: 17.26 | 21.78

It's possible that adding the DX11 Windows software will help some of those scores - depends how 3dMark11 uses DX11.

Edit: I'm using the beta 11 drivers, which improve performance about 10%. That may explain the extra delta entirely. My conclusion: your card is working perfectly.
__________________
Work: 3770K | Hyper 212+ | Asus Max V Gene | 290 Tri-X | 16GB | 830 256GB | TJ08B-E | x650 | U2713HM
Gaming: 4770K@4.5 | H100i | ASRock Z97 Ex4 | 780 Ti SLI | 8GB | MX100 512GB | 500R | EVGA G2 850W | Asus VG248QE
HTPC: 4690K@4.0 | CM S524 | ASRock Z97E | HD7870 | 8GB | 1TB SSHD | SG08 | CX500M | Samsung 55" 4K
Looking for deals? Check out The Hot Deals Blog at The Tech Buyer's Guru!
How's your video card compare? See TBG's Video Card Rankings!

Last edited by Termie; 01-10-2013 at 07:36 AM.
Termie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:03 PM   #17
JediKnight
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 41
Default

I'm kind of surprised my CPU is such a bottleneck.
Tried the Metro 2033 frontline benchmark:
Settings:
Options: Resolution: 1280 x 720; DirectX: DirectX 11; Quality: High; Antialiasing: MSAA 4X; Texture filtering: AF 4X; Advanced PhysX: Disabled; Tesselation: Enabled; DOF: Disabled

Results:
* Average Framerate: 49.40
* Max. Framerate: 140.04
* Min. Framerate: 4.42


If I enable "advanced PhysX" (everything else the same), results change dramatically:
* Average Framerate: 20.00
* Max. Framerate: 148.52
* Min. Framerate: 5.52
__________________
I was on the "L" the other day and this guys walked up to me, and said. "Are those implants?"
JediKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:59 PM   #18
Termie
Diamond Member
 
Termie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 7,099
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JediKnight View Post
I'm kind of surprised my CPU is such a bottleneck.
Tried the Metro 2033 frontline benchmark:
Settings:
Options: Resolution: 1280 x 720; DirectX: DirectX 11; Quality: High; Antialiasing: MSAA 4X; Texture filtering: AF 4X; Advanced PhysX: Disabled; Tesselation: Enabled; DOF: Disabled

Results:
* Average Framerate: 49.40
* Max. Framerate: 140.04
* Min. Framerate: 4.42


If I enable "advanced PhysX" (everything else the same), results change dramatically:
* Average Framerate: 20.00
* Max. Framerate: 148.52
* Min. Framerate: 5.52
Two things:

(1) your CPU is nearly 6 years old - why wouldn't it be a bottleneck? It's actually amazing that it's still as functional as it is.

(2) you have an AMD video card - you can't run PhysX on it. So you're running PhysX off your CPU in Metro 2033, which is going to cause it to tank.

So basically, like I said, everything's fine with your GPU.
__________________
Work: 3770K | Hyper 212+ | Asus Max V Gene | 290 Tri-X | 16GB | 830 256GB | TJ08B-E | x650 | U2713HM
Gaming: 4770K@4.5 | H100i | ASRock Z97 Ex4 | 780 Ti SLI | 8GB | MX100 512GB | 500R | EVGA G2 850W | Asus VG248QE
HTPC: 4690K@4.0 | CM S524 | ASRock Z97E | HD7870 | 8GB | 1TB SSHD | SG08 | CX500M | Samsung 55" 4K
Looking for deals? Check out The Hot Deals Blog at The Tech Buyer's Guru!
How's your video card compare? See TBG's Video Card Rankings!
Termie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 11:29 PM   #19
Arkaign
Lifer
 
Arkaign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 19,249
Default

I know EXACTLY that PC. I advise the following :

Grab a good midrange case, grab a dirt-cheap G41 mobo like this one :

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...ab=true&Page=3

And this cooler :

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16835103065

With this ram :

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820144496

Why that combo?

Well, #1, I've used that mobo with both Q6600 and Q6700 CPUs, and it overclocks well with no heat/stability issues. There were much better S775 mobos out there, but they're no longer available new, and the good ones are still expensive used, and a used S775 mobo that might have seen many years of torture is not a good bet. Particularly affected seemed to be P35 mobos. So, this is only $45 "wasted", and you can get more than easily out of the Q6700+G41 combo later (keep your old CPU cooler to go with it). Also if you check ebay, you can get some decent $$ reselling your HP mobo + DDR2 memory, it will probably cover a lot of this.

That memory is 8GB of nice quality C9 1600 DDR3, so you can re-use it when you can afford a full system rebuild. No sense in buying DDR2 at this point in time.

And of course that CPU Heatsink+Fan combo is fantastic for the cash, and re-usable with all popular sockets out there (just keep the instructions and mounting gear in the box).

With that mobo+ram, just set the fsb at 333 instead of 266 stock, and the 10x q6700 will run at 3.33ghz. You may need a tiny voltage bump to get there, but it may well do it without touching that.

You will get :

Decent CPU performance increase
Double the ram of higher bandwidth, reusable
Faster PCI-Express variant
Nice cool/quiet operation and a great cooler to reuse
Case that will work well with future upgrades

All for cheap. Really the best no-compromises upgrades from a C2Q are the i5/i7 quads, but that's talking a good bit more $$$. The i3, well it's actually pretty good, but I hesitate really to recommend a dual at this juncture, even with pretty effective hyperthreading on the table.
__________________
Death is the answer.
Arkaign is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 11:34 PM   #20
Arkaign
Lifer
 
Arkaign's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 19,249
Default

Yep, checked .. same-era HP Elite mobos routinely sell for $80-$140. A lot of people insist on getting a PC repaired exactly to original spec, and are willing to pay silly $ to do so. So you may be able to break even or better.

If you wanted a more robust P45-series board (more features, higher voltage stability, etc), they are $75-$100 new old stock on Ebay.
__________________
Death is the answer.
Arkaign is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 11:52 PM   #21
SPBHM
Platinum Member
 
SPBHM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,492
Default

G41 is PCIE 1.1, just like what he have, also it's limited to 4GB of DDR3 according to intel
also that board look seriously weak, I had a (apparently) better but similar board, and it would work stable at 3ghz with the 65nm quad for gaming and cinebench, but as soon as you started playing around with linx... no way, and that was with only around 1.3v, the max stable was around 2.8GHz with undervolt, these cheap boards are not designed for 65nm quad overclocking,

if you want to keep the lga 775 stuff, but want some improvement, look for a good used p45/x48 board (x38 should also be good)...

but I don't know, even a cheap Core i3 will beat the 65nm C2Q even when overclocked (for gaming)
SPBHM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2013, 02:36 AM   #22
BrightCandle
Diamond Member
 
BrightCandle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,763
Default

If you are unhappy with that level of performance and you would like to utilise the card fully you may want to take a trip into general hardware and have the guys there spec you something to your budget. I have no doubt that relatively light investment in CPU, MB and RAM will allow you to get that card running at its peak. Some games will work just fine as you are and be GPU limited whereas those that are heavy on the CPU will likely run a bit less well.

There are people around here who still run these machines but today's Ivy Bridge CPUs have effectively brought twice the performance and mostly with improvements in instructions per clock cycle.
__________________
I no longer frequent these forums.
BrightCandle is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.