GPU upgrade for (ancient) motherboard

[Bateluer]

Yes it is, you can ABSOLUTELY PLAY shooter games at 15 frames per second.

Unplayable would be 10fps and less, or less than 20fps in strategy games and stuff.

For shooters 15fps is playable, its not great, but its PLAYABLE!

And I bet you $1000 dollars that he is going to have a decent enough experience playing Crysis 3 on that cd2.

Wtf? I'd be skimming this thread, internally debating whether the OP should just spend 100 bucks on a HD7770 or GTX750 or bite the bullet and do a more substantial rebuild, then I came across this bit. Wtf!? I think my brain just misfired! Seriously, wtf? No shooter is playable at 15fps. Most RTS games aren't playable at 15fps. What peasantry is this!? Have you been worshiping Microsoft's PR to justify why the Xbox One had lower resolutions and frame rates than its competitor?


To the OP, I don't know what you've decided . . . I kinda lost track of any throught processes. Your E6400 isn't completely of date, but any GPU upgrade is merely going to post pone the inevitable. And if you seriously want to play today's games, you're going to need a little more than a video card upgrade. You could drop in a GTX750 or Radeon HD 7770/R7 250X, but its mileage is going to be minimal. Here's an R7 250X for 90 USD, with a free Never Settle Bronze game though. --> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814131559

 

[ibex333]

Update:

Toyota was very, very wrong. I ran Crysis3 and it works perfectly at 1080p with 1x AA and high textures with everything else on low. 30-60fps. About 40fps on average.

e6300 Contoe @ 3.20GHz and AMD 6950 1GB (Non-OC'd)
Gigabyte DS3
4GB DDR2 Ram.
Windows 7

I actually ran the game at 1.86GHz default and it still runs well. Wit a drop in frame-rate off course.

I would love to record a video but trial FRAPS refuses to show framerate in the video and records only like 2 min or it. Can someone tell me where I can get free recording software which can record Windows and games?

Thanks very much.


PS: I compared my Passmark results with other CPUs and my performance is about equal to Sandy Bridge i3. Given that, why in the hell wouldn't I be able to run latest Crysis and Assasin's creed? If I was running at 720p, my frame-rates would be through the roof. So the OP can definitely play these games.

 

[toyota]

Update:

Toyota was very, very wrong. I ran Crysis3 and it works perfectly at 1080p with 1x AA and high textures with everything else on low. 30-60fps. About 40fps on average.

e6300 Contoe @ 3.20GHz and AMD 6950 1GB (Non-OC'd)
Gigabyte DS3
4GB DDR2 Ram.
Windows 7

I actually ran the game at 1.86GHz default and it still runs well. Wit a drop in frame-rate off course.

I would love to record a video but trial FRAPS refuses to show framerate in the video and records only like 2 min or it. Can someone tell me where I can get free recording software which can record Windows and games?

Thanks very much.

PS: I compared my Passmark results with other CPUs and my performance is about equal to Sandy Bridge i3. Given that, why in the hell wouldn't I be able to run latest Crysis and Assasin's creed? If I was running at 720p, my frame-rates would be through the roof. So the OP can definitely play these games.

you had everything on low and the bench I showed was medium which is huge difference. textures have no impact on the cpu of course. I call BS on it being playable at all at 1.86 regardless of what you claim.

and lol at you thinking your old first gen Core 2 duo is close to a Sandy Bridge i3. this forum is going downhill with ignorant comments like that.

 

[Bateluer]

I would love to record a video but trial FRAPS refuses to show framerate in the video and records only like 2 min or it. Can someone tell me where I can get free recording software which can record Windows and games?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8224/hands-on-with-amds-gaming-evolved-client-game-dvr

 

[VirtualLarry]

and lol at you thinking your old first gen Core 2 duo is close to a Sandy Bridge i3. this forum is going downhill with ignorant comments like that.

I agree. No way the passmark of an older FSB-based C2D @ 3.2 is going to compare with a modern, HyperThreaded, i3 @ 3.4. There's just no way.

 

[toyota]

I agree. No way the passmark of an older FSB-based C2D @ 3.2 is going to compare with a modern, HyperThreaded, i3 @ 3.4. There's just no way.

here is the slowest Sandy i3 and it gets 3620. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i3-2100+@+3.10GHz

an E6300 at stock speeds gets 1120 and even with perfect magical 100% scaling he would not get but just over 1900. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core2+Duo+E6300+@+1.86GHz

to back that up, an E8400 at stock 3.0 would be faster than his E6300 oced to 3.2 and even the E8400 only gets 2164. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core2+Duo+E8400+@+3.00GHz

bottom line is even the slowest Sandy i3 is basically twice as fast as his E6300 oced to 3.2. as per usual around here though, reality is not part of the equation when people start making claims.

 

[2is]

Weird... This thread started with upgrade advise and it has turned into people with crappy hardware defending crappy performance and tell each other fairytales of how it's adequate and only marginally worse than current hardware.

 

[Leyawiin]

Way too many people on both sides insist on being right as if its a life or death matter instead of just letting it go and moving on to the next thread.

 

[sniper7137]

Way too many people on both sides insist on being right as if its a life or death matter instead of just letting it go and moving on to the next thread.

Some of these people missed the point of my post completely. All I wanted was some upgrade advice and I got it. Now these guys are duking it out David and Goliath style...

 

[SlickR12345]

Wtf? I'd be skimming this thread, internally debating whether the OP should just spend 100 bucks on a HD7770 or GTX750 or bite the bullet and do a more substantial rebuild, then I came across this bit. Wtf!? I think my brain just misfired! Seriously, wtf? No shooter is playable at 15fps. Most RTS games aren't playable at 15fps. What peasantry is this!? Have you been worshiping Microsoft's PR to justify why the Xbox One had lower resolutions and frame rates than its competitor?


To the OP, I don't know what you've decided . . . I kinda lost track of any throught processes. Your E6400 isn't completely of date, but any GPU upgrade is merely going to post pone the inevitable. And if you seriously want to play today's games, you're going to need a little more than a video card upgrade. You could drop in a GTX750 or Radeon HD 7770/R7 250X, but its mileage is going to be minimal. Here's an R7 250X for 90 USD, with a free Never Settle Bronze game though. --> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814131559

Its absolutely playable at 15fps. I predict with a 750ti and that c2d he will have at least 25fps in Crysis 3 at low settings and resolution of 1280x960.

You are clueless because you've never played on low end machine, looking at online benchs is also misleading because ALL benches are on maxed out settings and very high resolutions, 1080p and over, when in fact most people in the world have monitors that are 21 inches and smaller, that can't even get more than 1650x resolution.

So stop being ignorant and learn something.

 

[2is]

So stop being ignorant and learn something.

The irony is strong here

 

[hoorah]

here is the slowest Sandy i3 and it gets 3620. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i3-2100+@+3.10GHz

an E6300 at stock speeds gets 1120 and even with perfect magical 100% scaling he would not get but just over 1900. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core2+Duo+E6300+@+1.86GHz

to back that up, an E8400 at stock 3.0 would be faster than his E6300 oced to 3.2 and even the E8400 only gets 2164. http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core2+Duo+E8400+@+3.00GHz

bottom line is even the slowest Sandy i3 is basically twice as fast as his E6300 oced to 3.2. as per usual around here though, reality is not part of the equation when people start making claims.

I have a system running a sandy bridge I3 (2120), an old system I gave away running an E8500, and 2 HTPCs running an E6300 and an E6600 and can confirm all of the passmark numbers.

The i3 is noticeably faster than the E8500, the E8500 is noticeably faster than the E6600.

 

[ibex333]

Ok Toyota, yes, I made a mistake. The i3 is indeed much faster. But the game does run great on 1080p. If it runs on low on 1080p it will sure as hell run on medium at 720p. I will take a video later this week and you will be ashamed for arguing with me.

The new hardware may be miles faster, but the old hardware is very adequate and very capable of running Crysis 3 at the settings the OP wanted.

 

[toyota]

Ok Toyota, yes, I made a mistake. The i3 is indeed much faster. But the game does run great on 1080p. If it runs on low on 1080p it will sure as hell run on medium at 720p. I will take a video later this week and you will be ashamed for arguing with me.

The new hardware may be miles faster, but the old hardware is very adequate and very capable of running Crysis 3 at the settings the OP wanted.

again what you don't understand when we're talking about a slow CPU that the resolution being lower is not going to help you. Crysis 3 on medium will have some settings that affect the CPU and will not allow it to maintain a smooth frame rate as you can see from the benchmark that I linked to showing faster CPUs than yours not even getting but 25 frames per second average.

 

[iiiankiii]

Its absolutely playable at 15fps. I predict with a 750ti and that c2d he will have at least 25fps in Crysis 3 at low settings and resolution of 1280x960.

You are clueless because you've never played on low end machine, looking at online benchs is also misleading because ALL benches are on maxed out settings and very high resolutions, 1080p and over, when in fact most people in the world have monitors that are 21 inches and smaller, that can't even get more than 1650x resolution.

So stop being ignorant and learn something.

15fps is playable to you. Don't assume it would be playable for everybody else. 15fps is much, much slower than movies (which are shot mostly at 24fps). Visual, low fps might be okay. However, once I start playing a game, I realise how laggy it felt.

Also, if there is a CPU bottleneck at 1080p, chances are (like most of the time), it would continue to lag EVEN at LOWER RESOLUTION. You can test this out for yourself. The reason why you get better performance when you lower the resolution is because the GPU was the bottleneck; not the cpu. Lowering your resolution on a CPU bottlenecked computer almost never helps.

 

[SlickR12345]

15fps is playable to you. Don't assume it would be playable for everybody else. 15fps is much, much slower than movies (which are shot mostly at 24fps). Visual, low fps might be okay. However, once I start playing a game, I realise how laggy it felt.

Also, if there is a CPU bottleneck at 1080p, chances are (like most of the time), it would continue to lag EVEN at LOWER RESOLUTION. You can test this out for yourself. The reason why you get better performance when you lower the resolution is because the GPU was the bottleneck; not the cpu. Lowering your resolution on a CPU bottlenecked computer almost never helps.

You do realize most games utilize the GPU 80% and the cpu only 20%, except in new modern games like BF4 and other newer games.

That is why the C2D won't be problematic for him in most games.

 

[Techhog]

Wtf? I'd be skimming this thread, internally debating whether the OP should just spend 100 bucks on a HD7770 or GTX750 or bite the bullet and do a more substantial rebuild, then I came across this bit. Wtf!? I think my brain just misfired! Seriously, wtf? No shooter is playable at 15fps. Most RTS games aren't playable at 15fps. What peasantry is this!? Have you been worshiping Microsoft's PR to justify why the Xbox One had lower resolutions and frame rates than its competitor?

No XBox One games run that badly...

 

[Techhog]

You do realize most games utilize the GPU 80% and the cpu only 20%, except in new modern games like BF4 and other newer games.

That is why the C2D won't be problematic for him in most games.

The reason that most games aren't CPU intensive isn't because they've programmed to ignore the CPU, but rather because CPUs are really fast these days and games haven't been optimized to take advantage of the speed of new CPUs. A weak CPU will still be a bottleneck. If you don't believe me, you should build your next gaming rig with an Atom.

 

[2is]

You do realize most games utilize the GPU 80% and the cpu only 20%, except in new modern games like BF4 and other newer games.

That is why the C2D won't be problematic for him in most games.

Your source for these made up numbers please?

 

[VirtualLarry]

If you don't believe me, you should build your next gaming rig with an Atom.

Maybe the OP should invest in a low-cost J1900 quad-core Atom slimline rig, and add a low-profile 750ti. (Galaxy makes one and sells it from their web-store.)

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
LOL!

 

[2is]

Maybe the OP should invest in a low-cost J1900 quad-core Atom slimline rig, and add a low-profile 750ti. (Galaxy makes one and sells it from their web-store.)

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
LOL!

Hey, don't you have some machines to sell?

 

[RussianSensation]

OP any status update on the purchase of the parts, if putting the together went smoothly and your gaming experience?
Please list the games/settings and the results.

 

[sniper7137]

OP any status update on the purchase of the parts, if putting the together went smoothly and your gaming experience?
Please list the games/settings and the results.

I'll make the purchases around mid-August when I have the time and I'll let you guys know how well it goes!

 

[Bateluer]

No XBox One games run that badly...

Not yet, but Microsoft has spent a fortune trying to convince people that 720p and 30fps is indistinguishable from 1080p60. You see idiots repeating their PR all over the place since the Xbox One's performance deficiencies became public.

 

[RussianSensation]

I'll make the purchases around mid-August when I have the time and I'll let you guys know how well it goes!

Make sure to revisit videocard prices. For example, both the 265 and the 270 are faster than 750Ti. However, keep track of 270X/280 prices too. Also, make sure if you buy the 750Ti, you don't spend more than $125 in it because otherwise 265/270 are much better for gaming. Also, I suggest you get a 550W PSU minimum. Otherwise you will be upgrading the PSU every 5 years. Might as well spend the extra $20-30 now and get a solid 650W or something. A good PSU will last 7-10 years (more unless you run out of power room which requires you to upgrade).