Users/Owners or Radeon X1900XT/XTX with lower CPUs

[akshayt]

It is my request that users of lower cpus like Amd 64 3000-3500/ Intel single core 3-3.6ghz and Intel Dual Core D 8xx and D 920/930 should please tell me there experience with a high end graphic card preferably 1900XT/XTX.

Please mention,
CPU
RAM
GPU
Gameplay

Owners of 7900GTX and 7950GX2 as well as 7900GT 512, 7800GTX 512 and 1800XT 512mb can also share their experiences.

I request that you should mention one/more of the following games or any other game that you played on your CPU.

FEAR
Oblivion
GRAW
Most Wanted
Quake 4
Serious Sam 2
AOE3
UT04
Prey
Lost Coast
Hitman Blood Money
Chronicles of Riddick
Far Cry with HDR
Half Life 2 Episode 1
3d mark 2005
3d mark 2006

Please mention the fps as well if you can.

Please don't ask me the reason for this thread, if you are interested in helping, please do else forget it.

 

[Ulfhednar]

The reason for this thread is that you famously made a thread saying the X1900XT-X was crap, and was educated about how your CPU is an insane bottleneck. :roll: I don't think you'll get many replies because not many people are stupid enough to pair an X1900 series card with a 3200+ POS.

 

[akshayt]

there are 2 persons in this forum itself. they had 3500 class or lower.

one of them played FEAR at 1600*1200 MAX no soft shaodws 2x AA and I think Quake 4 ran perfect at 16X12 AA AF.

What do you have to say about that?

There are 2 other persons or more elsewhere who have a similar config + oced cpu, one of them says that I should not have a prob with most wanted and all at 12X10 type settings and one more person with opteron 144 + 1900XT says more or less the same.

Another person has 512mb 1800XT with Amd 64 3000 oced 2.2+ and he maybe is doing fear at 1280X960, must be obvioudly max without soft shadows maybe.

you are highly mistaken. please read all these links thoroughly and comment. This is basically what I want to confirm practically.

1900XT + Amd 64 3000 = 1280X1024 MAX AA AF or higher for games like Most Wanted, 45+fps

7600GT + X2 4800 will be something like 10X7 MAX 16x AF no AA and maybe around 50-55fps, by no means can you compare the two.

The thing is that a faster cpu helps mainly while playing at lower settings, but with very high settings and res the game is entirely GPU depedent and most CPUs, not all, are capable of taking it.

Just try running the game and you will feel the difference yourself. Please don't make any comment unless you have concrete proof for it. Please get the proof first. I can get the proof if you want.

RAM doesn't affect the gaming performance even noticeably in current practical cases as quantity is what matters, rest all have DDR 400 or up.

for 8k i don't recommend 7600GS. actually it is for sub 7k or so from leadtek.
rather extend the 8k to 10k+ to get 7600GT which will be much better.

PROOF
Please keep in mind that in most/all cases only average fps are mentioned and not the minimum fps which is also a very important aspect for gaming which is present only in hardocp of the ones I metnioned.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphi...282&char t=97

http://www.tomshardware.com/site/vgacharts/index.html

This proves that even a low end cpu powered with a high end graphic card or other graphic cards will give what kind of performance. So high end graphic card is enough even with a lower cpu, it however doesn't point whether a faster cpu would help or not.

Also, most/all of these games may not exactly be able to use the dual cpus and even if they do to a certain extent the intel D8xx series is crap, so you might get better performance with Amd 64 3000-3500 than with such a CPU in gaming that is.
It also shows the performance difference between different cards.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/...de_2006_part3/

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.ht...=71&model2=212

This compares the different cpus in performance, although the graphic card is the bottleneck, since sometimes low settings have been used and Far Cry and UT04 has tested so it does show some difference and also shows actually that there is not much difference. Also, you might get a very rough idea as to how your system will perform with a 7600GT/6800Ultralevel cards which maybe around 20-30% better than 6800gt with a high end cpu. 7600GT on average may be 20% or so better than 6800gs and 6800gs equals a 6800GT.
So, CPU is not everything.


http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/dis...pu-games2.html
This shows that if you have a mainstream card 7800GT there won't be much/any difference in your average fps. Again, no point going for a CPU without a good GPU.

low end cpu oc link
http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/dis...pu-games2.html

xbitlabs oced their 3500 winchester to almost 2.6ghz, 2.5x.

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/call...y_2_dual-core/

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/fear_cpu_performance/

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/half..._cpu_shootout/

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life_2_athlon_xp/

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/half..._cpu_shootout/

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/obli...u_performance/

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/quak...u_performance/

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/quak...e_performance/

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/articl...VudGh1c2lhc3Q=

A very important link this is: http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/articl...hlbnRodXNpYXN0

Anybody who wishes to say against me has to give a proper proof else must keep quiet.

 

[Jules]

i used a x1900xt on a 3.0c. Never didnt any benchmarks but it seemed to run fine.

 

[mwmorph]

Cpus will not limit you unelss you like to paly UT2004 a lto or maybe fear at 640x480 lowest. If you are stressing the gpu decently(16x12 fear, 20x15 hl2), the cpu, espically a decent 3200+ or 3500+(remember a 3200+ is abotu equal to a p4 3.6ghz in games) should not bottleneck you.

Cpus should bottleneck if you are in the hundreds of fps range, but seeing msot people stress their video card to maybe 40-70fps average, a cpu should not be the component restricting further performance, it is almost always the gpu.

 

[hardwareking]

i use an x1900 xt with my old rig(for now,will be switching to pentium d rig soon).That has a P4 531 and a 915GAV mobo.And that rig can't even be overclocked.I play at 1280x1024 with Adaptive AA and HQ AF without any "stuttering".games
I'e played oblivion with 4quality adaptive AA and 16HQ AF with reasonable in-game settings.
Avg frames hover around 25-30.
AOE 3 played with 6x QAA and 16xHQ AF with max in game settings.avg frames around 50-60(not in heavy battle)
Doom 3 with 6x QAA and 16x HQ AF9(pretty pointless) with max-ingame settings.
Avg frames around 70-80.
The cpu is the bottle neck for me only in oblivion where there are occasional drops in the great forest and the oblivion gates.
That should hopefully be solved when i switch to my pentium d rig.(which is already OCed)
Hope that helps.
P.S
Current rig specs
Intel P4 531 3.0ghz(HT enabled)
Intel 915 GAV mobo
2x512MB of ddr-400 value ram(3-3-3-8 timings)
PSU-Silverstone ZEUS 650W PSU

As for gameplay-It's pretty good.It'll get better when i put it in my pentium d rig.

 

[potato28]

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar
The reason for this thread is that you famously made a thread saying the X1900XT-X was crap, and was educated about how your CPU is an insane bottleneck. :roll: I don't think you'll get many replies because not many people are stupid enough to pair an X1900 series card with a 3200+ POS.

Go read some reviews please. 3200+ is plenty for most games that have been produced in the last few years.

 

[Vallybally]

"i use an x1900 xt with my old rig(for now,will be switching to pentium d rig soon)."

I highly recommend you reconsider not getting a Pentium D unless for an insanely cheap price. Reasons are: The Pentium Ds are significantly slower than AMD X2s (and they produce lots of heat). An even better alternative to the AMD X2s are the new Intel Conroes (2nd generation Dual Cores) which leap ahead of the AMD X2s, consume less power and produce less heat, and seem reasonably priced.

 

[TheRyuu]

Originally posted by: Vallybally
"i use an x1900 xt with my old rig(for now,will be switching to pentium d rig soon)."

I highly recommend you reconsider not getting a Pentium D unless for an insanely cheap price. Reasons are: The Pentium Ds are significantly slower than AMD X2s (and they produce lots of heat). An even better alternative to the AMD X2s are the new Intel Conroes (2nd generation Dual Cores) which leap ahead of the AMD X2s, consume less power and produce less heat, and seem reasonably priced.

:thumbsup:
A 3200+ or 3500+ is still good for a X1900XT(X). If you OC it's even better. But at higher resolutions, the GPU will be the bottelneck, not the CPU so it matters less and less what kind of CPU you have with higher resolutions.

 

[akshayt]

I got the following scores in 3d mark 06 :

SM2 = 2267
HDR/SM3 = 2588
CPU = 789

total = 4627


http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1901714&enterthread=y

 

[imported_Truenofan]

dont use 3dmark...god i hate that damn app.....even anandtech doesnt rely on 3dmark since it isnt an actual test of hardware in real conditions.i got a a64 3500(stock 2.2ghz) with 2gb of ram and a x1900xt and i average good framerates. i dont know or dont care about what i peak at but most games i try to average at least 30-40fps at 1600x1200. and in the future i do plan on going to a core 2 system with crossfire. i love amd, but intel has them beat and my rig's cpu is going on 2yrs old. time to upgrade y'know. also, anyone know where i can pick up a crossfire dongle. im havin trouble tryin to find one and i dont feel like starting a new thread just to find out. also, i play bf2 at at least 1280x1024 to 1600x1200, average at least 60fps, cs:s at 1600x1200 and average 60-120fps on maps. lineage 2 which is a mmorpg and very good looking at 130x1024, around 60-80fps. and this is with all the eye candy on, at least 4x fsaa and 4x ansio. and you are the guy that posted that the x1900xt-x sucked. but it was actually your powersupply.

 

[akshayt]

please tell me about games like FEAR and Most Wanted as well and any other game you played.

Right now, i played cronicles of riddick demo: max/near max performance CCC

1280*1024 MAX SM 2.0 Auto, no option for 2.0++ or sm3.
with or without in game max anistropy, it is not exactly stuttering but it is not non-stuttering either. it is better without anstopry.

mostly 50s or 60fps, seems vsysn or something, but sometimes in 40s

 

[imported_Truenofan]

fear seems to run fine, easy framerates. most wanted, when i turn a few of the un-needed things off, i get good fps as well but i dont play most wanted that much at all, not my kinda game, gtr/gtr2 runs great though, its smooth as silk all the way and its always topped out. all i know is that this video card is in desperate need of an upgrade of the system around it....in general the only really fast thing i'v got, is my video card....

 

[akshayt]

Most Wanted Demo
Same CCC settings
MAX in game inc AA and AF @ 12X10
Lagging and plenty of stuttering

At 800*600 med, still stuttering, though the stuttering is lesser in intensity and quantity

why is cor and mw giving me trouble?

FEAR, at what settings for you, most wanted what settings?

also, my fps in these games are more or less fine but not the gameplay.

 

[imported_Truenofan]

fear is maxed out, everything, including physics, 1600x1200 i average at least 40fps. i dont really play mw. i dont have it installed right now either. 4x fsaa, 4x ansio.

 

[akshayt]

Is FEAR fully smooth.

Also, did MW run without stuttering?
Was it demo or full version?
Did you need to patch the full version?

 

[akshayt]

BF2 demo
12X9 MAX 4x AA, no CCC AF

Avg: 60+fps, low for this card

Initially there was some stuttering, soon became more or less fine, but it doesn't run as good as UT04 ran on my 6600GT.

 

[xtreme26]

BF2 uses up a lot of ram when you put it on high settings. On my 512 mb system, it studders like a b!tch on high settings with my 6800 xt and 2.4ghz p4. It's on low-medium settings for now until I add in another stick or two of 512mb ram.

 

[akshayt]

I have 2GB ram.
There is no major issue with BF2 except that it doesn't run as smooth as UT04. Also, I played the game at very low settings with respect to the card and I should get more fps.

I tried AOE3 demo:
12X10 MAX AA HQ AF : lagging
10X7 low no AA 16x HQ AF : there is still lagging, except that it is reduced by a certain/noticeable extent.

Now, you can't blame either the cpu nor gpu nor ram here if there is lagging even at 10X7 low. It is the demo and not full version though.

 

[akshayt]

fps were high at both settings, first settings: 50s and 70s

second setting: 150

 

[CKXP]

Originally posted by: akshayt
Is FEAR fully smooth.

Also, did MW run without stuttering?
Was it demo or full version?
Did you need to patch the full version?

yes even on the full version there is stuttering on NFS:MW, even with the latest patch 1.3...plenty of times my fps will be 60+ and there's still stuttering going on.

btw: i play it @12x10 full AA/AF in the in-game setting, Overbright ON, and shadows OFF...this is with a 7800gt@500/1200

 

[akshayt]

you have a 7800GT and are playing at those settings.
I advise you to try 10X7 MAX AF no AA and then tell me.

1)I myself don't get 60fps.
2)I have 1900XTX, yet the demo stutters/lags.

 

[akshayt]

Serious Sam 2 demo often gets choppy @ 10X7 MAX, med AA, 16x AF

 

[akshayt]

I tried COD 2 demo at the max possible settings ingame @ 12X10 4x AA

It ran fine with few hitches here and there, basically med crowded fighting scenes cuased it to be a bit choppy.

 

[akshayt]

I only got 9164 in 3d mark 05 while i should be getting atlest 10k+.