PNY GT620 64-bit 1GB DDR3 $34.99 FS @ Newegg

[ch33zw1z]

Ah, I had it backwards, thinking that little tab on the front of the x16 card would fit in the 1x slot, instead of the correct way of using smaller connectors in larger slots.

Thanks.

No problem, as Schmide and myself have been discussing, it's about the slot design.

 

[Roland00Address]

So to put this in comparison since no body benches such a low end gpu, I am using the benchmarks of the notebook version of this card from notebookcheck.net. Nvidia has the same notebook gpu (710m) as the desktop card gt620 exept the notebook gpu has a faster clock speed than the desktop card

710m
Core Speed 775 - 800 MHz depending on oem
Shader Speed 1550 - 1600 MHz depending on oem
Memory Speed 1800 MHz, 64bit ddr3

gt620
710m
Core Speed 700 MHz
Shader Speed 1400
Memory Speed 1800 MHz, 64bit ddr3


For simplicity sake I am using the 3dMark 11 1280x720 preset gpu score (just the gpu score and not the composite score).

710m
3d Mark 11-1121

Intel (going from fastest to slowest but sticking with mainstream models)

Iris 5100 (this is the model without the edram, you won't find this part in ultrabooks only in mainstream notebooks, 40 CUs at 1200 mhz)
3DMark 11 -min: 1164 avg: 1221.5 (9%) median: 1221.5 (9%) max: 1279 points

HD 4600 (20 CUs at 1350mhz max turbo)
3d Mark 11-min: 738 avg: 1063.2 (7%) median: 1084 (8%) max: 1258 points

HD 4400 (20 CUs at 1100mhz max turbo)
3d Mark 11-min: 457 avg: 754.3 (5%) median: 735 (5%) max: 962 points

HD 4200 (20 CUs at 850mhz max turbo)
3d Mark 11-(only 1 test of 640)

HD 4000 (16 @ 350 - 1350MHz max turbo, though some units do not turbo all the way to 1350 on the 4000 series)
3DMark 11 -min: 216 avg: 522.4 (4%) median: 524 (4%) max: 684 points

In a desktop the gpu clock of the normal haswell chips is 20 cus at 1200 mhz, they call this part intel hd 4600 (yes the same name as the mobile part even though they are desktop vs mobile)

The fastest laptop radeon a10 graphics Radeon HD 8650G
3dMark 11-min: 1122 avg: 1306.7 (9%) median: 1355 (9%) max: 1443 points

For comparison the fastest radeon A10-6800k desktop graphics (richland), HD 8670D
3DMark 11 - 1547

Also for comparison a desktop radeon 7750 is about 2363

So unless you are with a computer with integrated graphics greater than 2 years old, I don't see the point of this card

 

[VirtualLarry]

So unless you are with a computer with integrated graphics greater than 2 years old, I don't see the point of this card

Intel G31 and AMD 780G old enough candidates?

 

[Fayd]

it won't work, you can put a smaller x card in a bigger slot...but not vice versa.

example, x1 card in x4 slot works, x16 in x8 won't work.

not true at all. PCI-E is upwards and downwards compatible. hell, some boards only use pci-e x8 in their x16 slots. flip the board over and see that the electrical connectors only go half the way.

 

[ch33zw1z]

not true at all. PCI-E is upwards and downwards compatible. hell, some boards only use pci-e x8 in their x16 slots. flip the board over and see that the electrical connectors only go half the way.

yes, if you have an x16 card that will run in x8, and an x16 slot that's wired for x8, that will work. But you can't physically fit an x16 card into an x8 slot, x4, or x1.

See the difference?

 

[Fayd]

yes, if you have an x16 card that will run in x8, and an x16 slot that's wired for x8, that will work. But you can't physically fit an x16 card into an x8 slot, x4, or x1.

See the difference?

if you were to cut the back end off the x8 slot(or x1 for that matter), and had space to extend the card (without hitting anything else on the mobo), then yes, it would work just fine.

riser cards and cables allow you to avoid the interference problem.

i'm really not sure why you're being so dense about this.

 

[ch33zw1z]

if you were to cut the back end off the x8 slot(or x1 for that matter), and had space to extend the card (without hitting anything else on the mobo), then yes, it would work just fine.

And here we go with the mods, which are always ymmv. it's not a guaranteed fix for all situations.

riser cards and cables allow you to avoid the interference problem.

cables(such as Schmide linked to): Yes, they help provide a workaround for the physical slot limitations, again..mods are always ymmv...

riser cards: sure, but where exactly are you headed with this? The PCIE slots are still standard, meaning you still won't be able to force an x16 card into a smaller slot without modding.

Or by "interference", do you actually mean the standard slot design?

i'm really not sure why you're being so dense about this.

mod all you want, I'm not wrong or dense about it. an x16 card will not fit into a smaller slot, without modding in some way, and it's still not a guarantee that it will work. The same goes for any similar situation. x8 in an x1 or x4...x4 in an x1...x16 in an x1...

So my original post stands, because that's the way that PCIE is designed. I'm not sure what the problem is here, if you want to show me a link of an x16 card fitting into a smaller slot without mods, and still being functional (ie. slot and/or card isn't destroyed), go for it.

 

[EliteRetard]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813132053

Here's a retail example of a product with x1 slots that accept any PCI-E length.
You can put an x4 or even an x16 into the x1 slot without any modification.

 

[Sohaltang]

So can I hook this up to my ipad with the right usb>thunderbolt> pci-e-1-4 adapter and will it make my graphics pwn?

 

[EliteRetard]

So can I hook this up to my ipad with the right usb>thunderbolt> pci-e-1-4 adapter and will it make my graphics pwn?

Depending on the iPad, you may have a much faster GPU...this thing is terribad.

 

[EliteRetard]

BAHAHA! I had to look and the GPU in the A7 almost competes with this.

This card at 64bit 1070MHz DDR3 has ~8.5 GB/s bandwidth.
The iPad GPU has ~12.8 GB/s (can't find exact numbers right now)

The GT620 at 96 cores 700MHz would be ~268 GFLOPS
The A7 at 450MHz is rated for 115 GFLOPS.

That means the Apple A7 GPU is almost as fast as the GT620 clock for clock. If it ran at 700MHz it would have similar performance (less core speed, more bandwidth).

 

[ch33zw1z]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813132053

Here's a retail example of a product with x1 slots that accept any PCI-E length.
You can put an x4 or even an x16 into the x1 slot without any modification.

Thanks for the link. I was just browsing the manual, that's one crazy mobo. But I guess for $500 it better be.

 

[EliteRetard]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814131338

Here's another worthless dirt cheap GPU. $10 after $20 rebate

 

[VirtualLarry]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814131338

Here's another worthless dirt cheap GPU. $10 after $20 rebate

There's a slight difference, the GT620 will be fully obsolete when Kaveri and Broadwell hit. The 5450 is already obsolete. The GT620 can be used to play older games (ones that aren't bandwidth-heavy, no 1080P gaming here), that would play acceptably on the 9600GSO 96SP cards (although, they had 192-bit (G)DDR3).

 

[Fayd]

And here we go with the mods, which are always ymmv. it's not a guaranteed fix for all situations.

cables(such as Schmide linked to): Yes, they help provide a workaround for the physical slot limitations, again..mods are always ymmv...

riser cards: sure, but where exactly are you headed with this? The PCIE slots are still standard, meaning you still won't be able to force an x16 card into a smaller slot without modding.

Or by "interference", do you actually mean the standard slot design?



mod all you want, I'm not wrong or dense about it. an x16 card will not fit into a smaller slot, without modding in some way, and it's still not a guarantee that it will work. The same goes for any similar situation. x8 in an x1 or x4...x4 in an x1...x16 in an x1...

So my original post stands, because that's the way that PCIE is designed. I'm not sure what the problem is here, if you want to show me a link of an x16 card fitting into a smaller slot without mods, and still being functional (ie. slot and/or card isn't destroyed), go for it.

http://www.amazon.com/StarTech-com-E...ref=pd_sxp_f_i

a riser card to allow an x16 card into an x1 slot with no mods.

 

[EliteRetard]

There's a slight difference, the GT620 will be fully obsolete when Kaveri and Broadwell hit. The 5450 is already obsolete. The GT620 can be used to play older games (ones that aren't bandwidth-heavy, no 1080P gaming here), that would play acceptably on the 9600GSO 96SP cards (although, they had 192-bit (G)DDR3).

Any game that can run on a GT620 (like solitaire or bejeweled) will run on a 5450.
These cards are strictly for monitor output when you have a computer with no other monitor output. There is almost no reason to get a card like this if you have any IGP available.

Perhaps if you are like my dad running a GMA 950 IGP that can't even run red alert then yes these cards could be an "upgrade". If the goal is play anything other than DOS, 2D, or internet games then you are vastly better off with a $60 product like a GTX650 or 7750.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Any game that can run on a GT620 (like solitaire or bejeweled) will run on a 5450.

No, it won't. The GT620 is about 2.5x-3x faster in 3D.

These cards are strictly for monitor output when you have a computer with no other monitor output. There is almost no reason to get a card like this if you have any IGP available.

Perhaps you missed the Newegg review where someone was playing Borderlands 2 on "high" with one of these cards? They are capable of lower-end 3D gaming (at lower resolutions due to memory bandwidth issues).

Perhaps if you are like my dad running a GMA 950 IGP that can't even run red alert then yes these cards could be an "upgrade". If the goal is play anything other than DOS, 2D, or internet games then you are vastly better off with a $60 product like a GTX650 or 7750.

So paying more, gets you better performance. Who woulda thunk it?

 

[Roland00Address]

Intel G31 and AMD 780G old enough candidates?

Yes. G31 came out 6 years ago in 2007, 780g came out 5 years ago in 2008. It will be a substantial upgrade.

 

[cbn]

Nobody else thought that these cards could be useful, at least in the short term, for $35?

I think the following card you found was a better deal back when it was on sale for $25 AR FS:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...&SID=u00000687

$25, that was just an awesome deal considering the value for entry level discrete cards is normally just terrible.

 

[Childs]

You can get a fanless GT 640 for $59.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814500298