• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

7950GT just burned out--Suggestions for a new GPU?

D

DaedalCipher

Member
I would like to once again call upon the wisdom of AToTers if I may.

My EVGA GeForce 7950GT seized up on me yesterday morning, and is now completely dead. I need some suggestions for a new one. My primary concern is longevity--in terms of maximizing my current gaming rig without upgrading anything else-- followed by price. If we can keep it under 200$, that would be great. Here's my current system:

Case= Thermaltake SOPRANO VB1000BWS Black 0.8mm SECC Chassis, ATX Mid Tower
MoBo= GIGABYTE GA-965P-DS3 LGA 775 Intel P965 Express ATX
CPU= Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 Conroe 1.86GHz 2M shared L2 Cache LGA 775 65W
Heatsink= Tuniq Tower 120 Universal CPU Cooler 120mm Cooling Fan
RAM= G.SKILL 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel
GPU= EVGA 512-P2-N635-AR GeForce 7950GT 512MB 256-bit GDDR3
Power Supply= Antec Neo HE550W High Efficiency
HDD= Western Digital 160GB 7200 RPM 8MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" and Seagate 250GB 7200 RPM

No matter what, I'm grabbing some more RAM as well. Another two sticks of what I've currently got goes for like 30$ on newegg right now, so unless someone has a better suggestion that's what I'm going with.

What do you guys suggest for the new graphics card? My case runs kind of hot, so the cooler the better even if I have to spend a bit more. The 7950GT was running around 80-85C under load.

Thanks in advance,

Daedalcipher
 
$200 AR 4890 probably the best deal going round right now- you may even find it cheaper if you really look hard. Below $200 you drop down into 4870/ Core 216 territory and that's a more hard fought price bracket, generally just get whatever is the cheapest/best bundle there. 4890 is especially important if you intend to overclock.
 
It maybe a stupid question but when did you purchase your card? And did you register it? If you did you should be under their lifetime warranty since it's a -AR product. If it is still under warranty I would contact eVGA about a RMA. Don't let that stop your plans to upgrade but I would never turn down a free (except for the cost of shipping it to them) GPU that I could use as a backup or something.

I just received a replacement 8800GTS 512 back from RMA and the whole process was easy and quick, I started it less than two weeks ago. If you didn't register your card and it was purchased after Nov 1st, 2006 then you are probably out of warranty now. If it was purchased between June 22nd, 2005 and Nov 1st, 2006 you did not need to register and should still be covered under the lifetime agreement.

EVGA Warranty Details.
 
Originally posted by: Schmide
You have a good PSU so get the

Sapphire 4870 512

for $113 after CC UNSTOPABLE rebate and bing shopping 5%.
Click to expand...

Wow, that is a GREAT deal and will be a very, very noticable upgrade from what you are used to with the 7950 OP. That price almost makes me want to look into Crossfire. 🙂

*edit - OP, that EVGA 7950 card has a life time warranty doesn't it? I'd send it in, you might get a bit of an upgrade for free. Even if you don't want to keep the card they send you, it could help off set the cost of a new card if you sold the replacement.
 
I was looking at their support website, but couldn't find the warranty info pertinent to my card. Thanks for the tip spike and slowspyder--I'll double check right now
 
I purchased my card on in Feb of 2007 off of newegg, pretty sure I did not register. Question-- where do you find that it is an -AR card? I saw that in their warranty info, but couldn't find what type of card mine was...
 
Originally posted by: DaedalCipher
I purchased my card on in Feb of 2007 off of newegg, pretty sure I did not register. Question-- where do you find that it is an -AR card? I saw that in their warranty info, but couldn't find what type of card mine was...
Click to expand...

It's on the sticker on the back of the card or on the box. It has the serial and product numbers. Sorry that you didn't register it. I bought my 7950GT one month before you, registered it, and it died last month in a slew of artifacts. I had registered it within the one month period, and had it replaced with an 8800GT. If you pick up an nVIDIA card, you should pick up an eVGA and register it. You can't beat their warranty or CS.
 
I would certainly oc that cpu a bit. 1.8 isnt going to cut if you want to get the most out of any decent card. was the res you are gaming at even mentioned??
 
Originally posted by: DaedalCipher
I purchased my card on in Feb of 2007 off of newegg, pretty sure I did not register. Question-- where do you find that it is an -AR card? I saw that in their warranty info, but couldn't find what type of card mine was...
Click to expand...

From your OP

"GPU= EVGA 512-P2-N635-AR GeForce 7950GT 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 "

That -AR at the end is what you are looking for. Since you bought it too late and did not register you are most likely out of luck. Just in case I would email eVGA anyway as the worst they can do is tell you "no". I have heard of them being nice in the past so who knows...

For future reference always register your cards from eVGA. Even the -TR cards I bought went from a standard 1 year to a 2 year (or was it 3?) warranty just by registering.
 
I haven't been playing anything recently released, so uber performance isn't necessary--just decent performance to play some older games. I'm mostly playing WoW right now, along with some C and C3 and HL2. When I get out of grad school I'll upgrade again, but that's not for 5 more years. I just want something that will play the goodies until then, offer me a bit of future-proofing, and get the most out of my current cpu. Res is mostly just at 1280x960, with other settings at about medium high for those games, except CC3 which is a whore.

And I do need to OC my e6300, but just haven't had the time to do it justice. I just want to replace the graphics card so I can get going again ASAP.

I can't believe I didn't register it; thanks for the heads-up PCTC2, this is definitely the last time I'll make that mistake. In the meantime, it seems everyone is saying the Radeon cards give better bang for the buck over GeForce right now. Just a matter of choosing the right card. Here's a question: for my current system (if you want to factor in an OC, go ahead but tell me in your analysis) and for the games I'm playing right now, is a 1 gig card going to be worth the extra 75$ (Sapphire 4870 vs AR 4890 mentioned above)? I realize my cpu may be the biggest factor in bottlenecking performance (especially when I go from 2 to 4 gigs of RAM).
 
Originally posted by: Sylvanas
$200 AR 4890 probably the best deal going round right now- you may even find it cheaper if you really look hard. Below $200 you drop down into 4870/ Core 216 territory and that's a more hard fought price bracket, generally just get whatever is the cheapest/best bundle there. 4890 is especially important if you intend to overclock.
Click to expand...

4890 with a E6300?


😕
 
Originally posted by: OCguy
Originally posted by: Sylvanas
$200 AR 4890 probably the best deal going round right now- you may even find it cheaper if you really look hard. Below $200 you drop down into 4870/ Core 216 territory and that's a more hard fought price bracket, generally just get whatever is the cheapest/best bundle there. 4890 is especially important if you intend to overclock.
Click to expand...

4890 with a E6300?


😕
Click to expand...

Yes.... It's not like hes going to be so CPU limited he will see no benefit from a 4890 over a 4850.

OP asked :
My primary concern is longevity--in terms of maximizing my current gaming rig without upgrading anything else-- followed by price. If we can keep it under 200$, that would be great.
Click to expand...

For $200 the best card he can get to maximize his performance for the future will obviously be the fastest card that can be had for $200, that is the 4890 no question about it.
 
Originally posted by: Sylvanas
Originally posted by: OCguy
Originally posted by: Sylvanas
$200 AR 4890 probably the best deal going round right now- you may even find it cheaper if you really look hard. Below $200 you drop down into 4870/ Core 216 territory and that's a more hard fought price bracket, generally just get whatever is the cheapest/best bundle there. 4890 is especially important if you intend to overclock.
Click to expand...

4890 with a E6300?


😕
Click to expand...

Yes.... It's not like hes going to be so CPU limited he will see no benefit from a 4890 over a 4850.

OP asked :
My primary concern is longevity--in terms of maximizing my current gaming rig without upgrading anything else-- followed by price. If we can keep it under 200$, that would be great.
Click to expand...

For $200 the best card he can get to maximize his performance for the future will obviously be the fastest card that can be had for $200, that is the 4890 no question about it.
Click to expand...

at stock 1.86 speeds getting a 4890 would be ridiculous though especially below 1920. if he isnt going to oc that cpu then there is no point in getting a card that fast. why pay for a more expensive card if you cant even fully utilize the 4850 with that cpu at 1.86?
 
Significant performance improvements are gained until you hit 2.4GHz on a Core 2 Duo, higher clocks after that the performance gains goes downhill and then you will start to be more GPU bound. CPU bottlenecking is overrated unless if you are running a SLI or Crossfire system.
 
Sylvanas, I see your point, and in reality if the price points call for a much better card for a relatively insignificant price increase, I'll probably do it.

But what I really wanted to know was which card to get that would maximize performance without wasting a bunch of that card's potential. I don't want to get a massively overpowering graphics card only to use only 50% or whatever of its capability. When I originally did this build, I was under the impression (and still am) that what evolucion8 is saying is true--that cpus tend to be more future-proof than video cards. Please correct me if I'm wrong here. That said, I'm looking for which card, be it the 4870 or whatever, I can get the MOST from. So if it's slightly better than my system can handle, and I do say a 15% or 20% overclock on my e6300 until they are in-sync performance-wise, then that's what I'm looking for.
 
Originally posted by: evolucion8
Significant performance improvements are gained until you hit 2.4GHz on a Core 2 Duo, higher clocks after that the performance gains goes downhill and then you will start to be more GPU bound. CPU bottlenecking is overrated unless if you are running a SLI or Crossfire system.
Click to expand...

2.4 is not some magic number and on his cpu tbh around 3.0-3.2 on an older core 2 seems to be about right for a card like a gtx260 or 4870. remember his cpu would already be slower than newer cpus like an E8500 clock for clock.

of course many games can still be quite playable on a slower clocked cpu. the point is there is no need in buying more gpu than your cpu can come close to handling. even at 1920 his 1.86 cpu would only deliver about 65-75% of what a 4890 can do in many newer games.

here are some quick numbers for you. remember that my cpu at 1.8 is actually slightly stronger than his at 1.86. my 192sp gtx260 is slower than a 4890 so the gap would be even larger with it.



lets start with Far Cry 2 on high at just 1280 which is a fairly low res. you can see his cpu at stock speeds that even a gtx260 not to mention a 4890 would be heavily bottlenecked. as you can see with my cpu at 3.16 my minimum framerate would be higher than his average.

Settings: Demo(Ranch Small), 1280x1024 (60Hz), D3D9, Fixed Time Step(No), Disable Artificial Intelligence(No), Full Screen, Anti-Aliasing(None), VSync(No), Overall Quality(High), Vegetation(High), Shading(High), Terrain(High), Geometry(Medium), Post FX(High), Texture(High), Shadow(Medium), Ambient(High), Hdr(Yes), Bloom(Yes), Fire(Very High), Physics(Very High), RealTrees(Very High)

stock 3.16 E8500
Total Frames: 3387, Total Time: 51.01s
Average Framerate: 66.39
Max. Framerate: 91.00 (Frame:510, 6.72s)
Min. Framerate: 50.90 (Frame:2299, 34.11s)

E8500 at 1.8
Total Frames: 2312, Total Time: 51.01s
Average Framerate: 45.32
Max. Framerate: 68.03 (Frame:340, 6.42s)
Min. Framerate: 33.85 (Frame:1601, 34.59s)




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

now lets move to a very gpu limited run at 1920x1080 on very high settings with 4x AA. the cpu shouldnt make much difference here right? well you would be WRONG because the faster cpu provides a whopping 45% increase in framerate even at these settings. a 4890 would be even more bottlenecked.

Settings: Demo(Ranch Small), 1920x1080 (60Hz), D3D10, Fixed Time Step(No), Disable Artificial Intelligence(No), Full Screen, Anti-Aliasing(4x), VSync(No), Overall Quality(Very High), Vegetation(Very High), Shading(Very High), Terrain(Very High), Geometry(Very High), Post FX(High), Texture(Very High), Shadow(Very High), Ambient(High), Hdr(Yes), Bloom(Yes), Fire(Very High), Physics(Very High), RealTrees(Very High)

stock 3.16 E8500
Total Frames: 2752, Total Time: 51.01s
Average Framerate: 53.95
Max. Framerate: 81.93 (Frame:401, 6.16s)
Min. Framerate: 38.94 (Frame:1837, 34.13s)

E8500 at 1.8
Total Frames: 1878, Total Time: 51.02s
Average Framerate: 36.81
Max. Framerate: 59.43 (Frame:294, 6.43s)
Min. Framerate: 22.22 (Frame:815, 20.81s)




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

okay lets go with Warhead which is less cpu intensive than Far Cry 2. even at 1920 on gamer(enthusiast) settings the stock 3.16 E8500 provides a perfectly playable experience where as at 1.8 the cpu would make the game sluggish at times. thats right even at 1920 on the most visually demanding game out there the cpu will make a difference even on a single 192sp gtx260. and of course the 4890 would be even more bottlenecked.

System Information
Operating system: Windows (TM) Vista Home Premium
System memory: 4093 MB
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8500 @ 3.16GHz
CPU speed: 3166 MHz
Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 - 0 MB
Benchmark information
Demo: Train
Quality: High
Renderer mode: DirectX 9
Antialising mode: Off
Filtering mode: None
MultiGPU support: Disabled
Boost renderer: Disabled
Use Custom Config File: No
Random .exe: Disabled

stock 3.16 E8500
Resolution: 1920×1080 (HD WideScreen)
Result(1): Minimum= 25 FPS Average= 35 FPS Max= 45 FPS

E8500 at 1.8
Resolution: 1920×1080 (HD WideScreen)
Result(1): Minimum= 17 FPS Average= 26 FPS Max= 36 FPS


cpu bottlenecking is not always overrated and you simply have to look at each situation individually. the op with his 1.86 older core 2 cpu would be severely bottlenecked with a high end card. he would really need to oc to around 3.0 or better to get most of what a 4890 could deliver.







 
Theres a difference between seeing large gains from a large CPU speed increase, and being CPU bottlenecked
 
Originally posted by: yh125d
Theres a difference between seeing large gains from a large CPU speed increase, and being CPU bottlenecked
Click to expand...

um okay. I already said that most games would be playable. the POINT was that if he isnt going to oc that cpu then there is no need to go with a very high end card. his cpu at 1.86 will not let him take full advantage of what a 4890 could do and that is fact. if I overclock my gtx260 in those settings with my cpu at 1.8 it does little to nothing. thats because at 1.8 and with a fast card my cpu become the limitation. get that cpu to around 3.0-3.2 and he will be able to push the 4890 to its potential.
 
Originally posted by: toyota
Originally posted by: yh125d
Theres a difference between seeing large gains from a large CPU speed increase, and being CPU bottlenecked
Click to expand...

um okay. I already said that most games would be playable. the POINT was that if he isnt going to oc that cpu then there is no need to go with a very high end card. his cpu at 1.86 will not let him take full advantage of what a 4890 could do and that is fact. if I overclock my gtx260 in those settings with my cpu at 1.8 it does little to nothing. thats because at 1.8 and with a fast card my cpu become the limitation. get that cpu to around 3.0-3.2 and he will be able to push the 4890 to its potential.
Click to expand...

Toyota is correct.


That being said, if you really want the 4890, do yourself a favor and up that FSB!
 
Given that the OP hadn't planned on upgrading, and assuming from his games that he doesn't need a huge upgrade, I would tend to suggest what a few others have mentioned - the 4850. For under $100 at Newegg, the OP is going to get at least twice the performance of his old card, and it will be balanced with the rest of his components. If he wants to overclock the CPU, he'll see additional advantage, but again, he seems to have been content with things the way they were and just needs to replace a burned out card. No need to spend $200 to do that.

Although I do agree that with EVGA's reputation for service, he might as well check whether they'll do him a favor.
 
Excellent discussion guys--thanks a bunch. I think I've gotten a good picture of the situation, and Toyota I really appreciate the in-depth explanation. It looks like a 4850 is the way to go, given that Termie points out it gives twice the performance of my 7950GT (not that I'm doubting you Termie, but will others corroborate this if they can?) for around half the price of the 4890.

It looks like Newegg has a myriad of manufacturers to choose from for the 4850. Other than just going with the best-rated card there, a 512mb Visiontek, can anyone from experience recommend a reliable card?

VisionTek 900241 Radeon HD 4850 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFire Supported Video Card - Retail

* Chipset Manufacturer: ATI
* Core Clock: 625MHz
* Stream Processors: 800 Stream Processing Units
* DirectX: DirectX 10.1
* OpenGL: OpenGL 2.1
* DVI: 2
* TV-Out: HDTV / S-Video Out
* RAMDAC: 400 MHz
* Model #: 900241
* Item #: N82E16814129112
* Return Policy: VGA Standard Return Policy


Additionally, what's the real difference between a 512mb 4850 and a 1gb 4850? Anything? The one I'm looking at here is a Gigabyte:

GIGABYTE GV-R485OC-1GH Radeon HD 4850 1GB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready CrossFire Supported Video Card - Retail

* Chipset Manufacturer: ATI
* Core Clock: 700MHz
* Stream Processors: 800 Stream Processing Units
* Memory Clock: 1920MHz
* DirectX: DirectX 10.1
* OpenGL: OpenGL 2.1
* HDMI: 1 (via Adapter)
* DVI: 2
* Model #: GV-R485OC-1GH
* Item #: N82E16814125236
* Return Policy: VGA Standard Return Policy

The VisionTek has a lifetime warranty, while the Gigabyte's is only 2-3 years, so unless there's a pretty big difference (which will probably be counteracted by my cpu), I'll go with the VisionTek.

Thanks again for all the help guys. You are awesome.

-Daedalcipher
 
Daedal,

Good to ask - I was going on recollections of my jump from an x1900xt to an 8800gt, which is somewhat similar. Here's an example from Tom's Hardware:

Call of Duty, 1680x1050, noAA/AF:
7950GT: 29.4
4850: 121.7
http://www.tomshardware.com/ch...f-Duty-4-v1.6,742.html


Crysis, 1680x1050, noAA/AF:
7950gt: 5.5
4850: 28.4
http://www.tomshardware.com/ch.../Crysis-v1.21,748.html

Need I say more, other than I was quite conservative in my estimate? You won't see the same benefit in older games, which is what I was thinking of, but this shows that under modern conditions, a 4850 is up to 4x faster than your 7950gt.

As to which to buy, I only have experience with my HIS x1900xt, which was good. Here's a good deal on a HIS:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814161259
About $80 with coupon and rebate.

And here's a good deal on a Sapphire:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814102824
Currently $80 with coupon and rebate.

As for 512MB vs. 1GB, I think it depends on resolution and games. From what I've seen, it begins to matter at 1920x1200, and particularly in very new games like GTAIV and Far Cry 2. Others will weigh in, I'm sure. For your purposes, it's probably not necessary to go to 1GB.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top