What PCI Video Card would play WoW easily enough?

[Cook1]

Ok, I want my lil brother OFF of my PC, so decided to dump $100 into the "family" computer. This computer played the orig EQ just fine for years. Here are the specs, lemme know which one(s) would gain the most for playing WoW since that's the game he loves.

Intel Celecron 900MHz S370
2x128MB PC133
Nvidia Geforce 4 MX 64MB PCI

The Motherboard can handle 2x256MB MAX for Ram, so upgrading to 1GB isn't an option.

 

[Matthias99]

Blech.

You could look for a RADEON 8500 or GeForceFX5700 in PCI, but that CPU is gonna hurt you, as well as the lack of RAM. And I don't know if it makes much sense to essentially dump money into 2x256MB of PC133 RAM (although that would probably help more than anything).

My recommendation would be to get the family/brother to chip in a little more cash, and get a S754 board with an AGP slot that takes DDR RAM, which you can actually upgrade into something capable of playing WoW acceptably. You might also be able to get a steal on some used SocketA boards/CPUs at this point. Even a Duron 1.6 or so would be worlds better than that Celeron.

 

[Cook1]

That's the thing, he doesn't want to drop any money, I just want him off my PC so willing to spend a lil to get that to happen. Upgrading the Celeron is also a possibility, something to the effect of a 1.2GHz or there abouts would be a nice lil improvement.

 

[Sforsyth]

Originally posted by: Cook1
Ok, I want my lil brother OFF of my PC, so decided to dump $100 into the "family" computer. This computer played the orig EQ just fine for years. Here are the specs, lemme know which one(s) would gain the most for playing WoW since that's the game he loves.

Intel Celecron 900MHz S370
2x128MB PC133
Nvidia Geforce 4 MX 64MB PCI

The Motherboard can handle 2x256MB MAX for Ram, so upgrading to 1GB isn't an option.

It should have an AGP port, get AGP if you can.

 

[imported_Rampage]

Check my sig.


The Geforce 6200 will do the job better than anything else. Will do WoW great.
Get that.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: Cook1
That's the thing, he doesn't want to drop any money, I just want him off my PC so willing to spend a lil to get that to happen. Upgrading the Celeron is also a possibility, something to the effect of a 1.2GHz or there abouts would be a nice lil improvement.

I understand the dilemma. However, if you're willing to spend $100ish to upgrade this essentially dead-end system, you might be able to explain to your parents that for, say, $300, you could get a new MB/CPU/RAM/video card that would not only be FAR better, but would be upgradable again later on.

If you could get a used SocketA/AGP motherboard and CPU for under $100, you could get something like a GF6600/R9800Pro and a gig of DDR400 for ~$200 total (maybe less). That would give you not only a much better system now, but something that could be substantially upgraded again later. Plus, these parts might actually be sellable in a couple years, whereas PC133RAM, a PCI video card, and a Celeron CPU really won't be.

 

[Maximilian]

Tell your little bro to respecty your authoritay! and give him a clip round the ear 😛

As for upgrading, i would ask your parents for a little more cash and go with the socket A option, cheap AXP/Duron, geforce4TI, refurbed 9600 maybe?

 

[Lyfer]

Originally posted by: southpawuni
Check my sig.


The Geforce 6200 will do the job better than anything else. Will do WoW great.
Get that.

I have to agree.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: Lyfer

Originally posted by: southpawuni
Check my sig.


The Geforce 6200 will do the job better than anything else. Will do WoW great.
Get that.

I have to agree.

Does anybody have any benches on this thing? I didn't even know they made a PCI version (I thought they just stuck with the FX5200 for PCI), and I can't find *any* reviews/benches of it.

 

[imported_Rampage]

It should bench about like an AGP 6200. There isnt any benches because the PCI 6200 is brand new and this is the only one I've seen so far.

IMO, it probably maxes out the 133MB/s bandwidth of the PCI interface. So this is about the pinnacle of performance you'll see on PCI as I think the bus is now the limiting factor.

Anymore video card and I think you'd start to see too much waste due to the PCI bus.

Its a GREAT, and nearly perfect swan-song for PCI and those who have a relatively decent system that could use this. :thumbsup: We all know that nothing speeds up games like a GPU upgrade does.

For PCI, the other choice before this for performance was the 5700LE PCI, and I believe they at one-time offered a straight 5700.

I still like the 5200 PCI for people who need to add DVI to their PCI-only PCs for an LCD, Nvidia tends to have exceptional Luna acceleration as well (and will surely have leading Avalon/Aeroglass acceleration).

 

[imported_Rampage]

My suggestion if you get a 6200 is to try to not use any extra PCI cards since PCI is a shared bandwidth bus.
Take out your bandwidth HOG Creative cards and whatever else you might not have to be using.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: southpawuni
It should bench about like an AGP 6200. There isnt any benches because the PCI 6200 is brand new and this is the only one I've seen so far.

I'm so glad you've arbitrarily decided this without seeing any benchmarks. Not that I don't think it will perform reasonably well, but I'd really like to see some numbers on this thing if you're going to go around recommending it to people (and advertising it in your sig as the "fastest PCI card ever").

For PCI, the other choice before this for performance was the 5700LE PCI, and I believe they at one-time offered a straight 5700.

There's also the RADEON 8500/9100, although PCI versions of these have become *extremely* hard to find.

I still like the 5200 PCI for people who need to add DVI to their PCI-only PCs for an LCD, Nvidia tends to have exceptional Luna acceleration as well (and will surely have leading Avalon/Aeroglass acceleration).

The only problem with it is that the GF5 cards have kind of crappy DVI implementations that sometimes have issues at 1600x1200 resolution or higher. But for a 17" or 19" LCD, they should work quite well (especially for Linux use).

 

[imported_Rampage]

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: southpawuni
It should bench about like an AGP 6200. There isnt any benches because the PCI 6200 is brand new and this is the only one I've seen so far.

I'm so glad you've arbitrarily decided this without seeing any benchmarks. Not that I don't think it will perform reasonably well, but I'd really like to see some numbers on this thing if you're going to go around recommending it to people (and advertising it in your sig as the "fastest PCI card ever").

Why do you always have to have a problem Matthias?
Would you like to bet its faster than the Radeon 9100/9200, and Geforce 5700LE?

I've got $50 sitting in paypal I'll be pleased to wager with you. Theres always got to be some objection.
I'm going to be ordering one of these for myself sometime and I'll be happy to bench it for you.

Heck, I'll bet you the price of the card its the fastest PCI card. I dont see any reason why it wouldnt?
If anything I'm the one who presented the PCI bus issues that might slow it down from the AGP version.. but I dont think it will be trounced by any of the other PCI cards ever made.

For PCI, the other choice before this for performance was the 5700LE PCI, and I believe they at one-time offered a straight 5700.

There's also the RADEON 8500/9100, although PCI versions of these have become *extremely* hard to find.[/quote]
Right, and right.

I still like the 5200 PCI for people who need to add DVI to their PCI-only PCs for an LCD, Nvidia tends to have exceptional Luna acceleration as well (and will surely have leading Avalon/Aeroglass acceleration).

The only problem with it is that the GF5 cards have kind of crappy DVI implementations that sometimes have issues at 1600x1200 resolution or higher. But for a 17" or 19" LCD, they should work quite well (especially for Linux use).[/quote]

I dont think they are crappy. THG did a test (and I think another site did as well) and synthetically they performed worse but I've never actually seen or heard evidence that they did have issues at 1600x1200 or higher.
I'm not doubting your claim, just saying I've never seen or heard that.

As far as the "DVI signal quality issues", its mostly been a thing on paper, I never heard there being any real-world issues with the FX series.

Regardless, for a measly $70 I'm pulling my support out from under the FX PCI cards anyway for those who need one. I do keep a FX5200 on hand to work on PCs with though and I havent seen an issue.. although I never went above my native res of 1680x1050 with one..

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: southpawuni

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: southpawuni
It should bench about like an AGP 6200. There isnt any benches because the PCI 6200 is brand new and this is the only one I've seen so far.

I'm so glad you've arbitrarily decided this without seeing any benchmarks. Not that I don't think it will perform reasonably well, but I'd really like to see some numbers on this thing if you're going to go around recommending it to people (and advertising it in your sig as the "fastest PCI card ever").

Why do you always have to have a problem Matthias?
Would you like to bet its faster than the Radeon 9100/9200, and Geforce 5700LE?

I don't "always have a problem"; however, you shouldn't claim things you don't have evidence for.

Would you like to bet its faster than the Radeon 9100/9200, and Geforce 5700LE?

I've got $50 sitting in paypal I'll be pleased to wager with you. Theres always got to be some objection.
I'm going to be ordering one of these for myself sometime and I'll be happy to bench it for you.

I feel this would be a bad bet, because this card is likely faster than a R9100 or GF5700 PCI (it's certainly faster than a 9200, which is significantly slower than an 8500/9100). Otherwise I would be happy to take you up on it. I would love to see some benchmarks when you get the card.

I dont think they are crappy. THG did a test (and I think another site did as well) and synthetically they performed worse but I've never actually seen or heard evidence that they did have issues at 1600x1200 or higher.
I'm not doubting your claim, just saying I've never seen or heard that.

As far as the "DVI signal quality issues", its mostly been a thing on paper, I never heard there being any real-world issues with the FX series.

Some (but not all) people with these cards have had issues with 1600x1200 and 1900x1200 LCD displays. I will see if I can dig up some of the threads. Usually it works if you use a reduced blanking interval and/or lower the refresh rate, but it's worth mentioning.

 

[Fox5]

I'd recommend spending around $70 to get a socket 754 motherboard with integrated ati or nvidia graphics, I believe jetway and biostar sell some. Then spend another $70 to get a sempron socket 754 cpu, and another $20 for 512MB of ram. I'd really recommend this because cpus are very critical to running MMORPGs well(even if you put the fastest cpu available for his mobo, it may not even meet the minimum requirements of WoW), and 256MB isn't really sufficient either.
As an alternative, go for an nforce2 motherboard with integrated geforce 4mx graphics for around $40, add in a sempron for $40, and then spend the $20 to get 512MB of ram. It won't be great, but it'll be sufficient.

BTW, the 6200 could be slower than other PCI cards if it saturates the PCI bus more than they do. In PCI cards, it's not always the fastest chip that determines the fastest card.(oh, and typically pci cards have been between 50%-70% the performance of the agp versions, but they never went beyond the geforce 3 level so it's hard to tell what a card more powerful than that would perform like)

 

[DaveSimmons]

the Biostar Tforce socket 754 with onboard nv6100 looks like a good choice based on price and performance of the 6100, plus it has AGP for a future video upgrade.

Reviews on newegg, at Sudhian.com and (via PM) JSLIM here in the forums are all positive, though JSLIM says his doesn't overclock much.

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: Matthias99
Some (but not all) people with these cards have had issues with 1600x1200 and 1900x1200 LCD displays. I will see if I can dig up some of the threads. Usually it works if you use a reduced blanking interval and/or lower the refresh rate, but it's worth mentioning.

He's gonna be running a 900mhz celeron with 256mb of PC133 ram..1600x1200 resolution problems shouldn't even be mentioned, there is no way he's gonna be able to run at that resolution anyway!! If there is a PCI version of the 6200, thats probably the best he'll be able to do, but nothing is gonna make WOW run 1600x1200 on a system that old.

 

[imported_Rampage]

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: southpawuni

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: southpawuni
It should bench about like an AGP 6200. There isnt any benches because the PCI 6200 is brand new and this is the only one I've seen so far.

I'm so glad you've arbitrarily decided this without seeing any benchmarks. Not that I don't think it will perform reasonably well, but I'd really like to see some numbers on this thing if you're going to go around recommending it to people (and advertising it in your sig as the "fastest PCI card ever").

Why do you always have to have a problem Matthias?
Would you like to bet its faster than the Radeon 9100/9200, and Geforce 5700LE?

I don't "always have a problem"; however, you shouldn't claim things you don't have evidence for.

Would you like to bet its faster than the Radeon 9100/9200, and Geforce 5700LE?

I've got $50 sitting in paypal I'll be pleased to wager with you. Theres always got to be some objection.
I'm going to be ordering one of these for myself sometime and I'll be happy to bench it for you.

I feel this would be a bad bet, because this card is likely faster than a R9100 or GF5700 PCI (it's certainly faster than a 9200, which is significantly slower than an 8500/9100). Otherwise I would be happy to take you up on it. I would love to see some benchmarks when you get the card.

I dont think they are crappy. THG did a test (and I think another site did as well) and synthetically they performed worse but I've never actually seen or heard evidence that they did have issues at 1600x1200 or higher.
I'm not doubting your claim, just saying I've never seen or heard that.

As far as the "DVI signal quality issues", its mostly been a thing on paper, I never heard there being any real-world issues with the FX series.

Some (but not all) people with these cards have had issues with 1600x1200 and 1900x1200 LCD displays. I will see if I can dig up some of the threads. Usually it works if you use a reduced blanking interval and/or lower the refresh rate, but it's worth mentioning.

I didnt mean to sound hostile. I just was kinda miffed that you questioned the 6200 was the fastest PCI card at all.. as you said, it more than likely is.
Maybe I shouldnt claim it is.. but I'm more than confident in it being so.
I want to keep one of these cards on hand because I love having a decent PCI card for backup/bad GPU bios flashes/work on friends PCs/spare in case my main GPU goes down.
This is definitely an improvement over the 5200PCI i have for that spare, and its in my moms PC anyway so I dont even have it on hand anymore.


As far as the high res DVI, AFAIK, dont all current non-dual link cards have to run reduced blanking for anythign above 1600x1200/1680x1050?

I thought they did automatically already, I'd assume the FX does this as well?
Or are you saying there are other issues with >16x12 with the fx dvi other than the reduced blanking requirement?

No hurry on the threads but I'd like to know. Hopefully the people dont just have user error issues, I've never encountered such a thing myself but I'd like to attempt to duplicate it if I can to figure out where the problem lies exactly.

I've been known to just flame the hell out of Nvidia's board trying to get them to fix driver issues and what not. Been banned a few times from there, but you know someone has to get them to fix certain issues in a timely matter.

I was the guy who got Kyle at OCP and the INQ to report the SLI widescreen issues when that was fresh.

I love Nvidia products but Im not apologist for their laziness or when they are not attentive to me and other users. Hopefully I can get this FX DVI issue patched up.

Unfortuantely unlike SLI, the press wont work with me very much considering no one cares about the FX any longer..

I'm guessing this isnt a real issue with Nvidia, but a PEBKAC issue. Interested to read the thread you are referring too.

 

[imported_Rampage]

Originally posted by: stevty2889

Originally posted by: Matthias99
Some (but not all) people with these cards have had issues with 1600x1200 and 1900x1200 LCD displays. I will see if I can dig up some of the threads. Usually it works if you use a reduced blanking interval and/or lower the refresh rate, but it's worth mentioning.

He's gonna be running a 900mhz celeron with 256mb of PC133 ram..1600x1200 resolution problems shouldn't even be mentioned, there is no way he's gonna be able to run at that resolution anyway!! If there is a PCI version of the 6200, thats probably the best he'll be able to do, but nothing is gonna make WOW run 1600x1200 on a system that old.

Heh. You're right.

Damn you and your common sense!

 

[imported_Rampage]

Originally posted by: Fox5
I'd recommend spending around $70 to get a socket 754 motherboard with integrated ati or nvidia graphics, I believe jetway and biostar sell some. Then spend another $70 to get a sempron socket 754 cpu, and another $20 for 512MB of ram. I'd really recommend this because cpus are very critical to running MMORPGs well(even if you put the fastest cpu available for his mobo, it may not even meet the minimum requirements of WoW), and 256MB isn't really sufficient either.
As an alternative, go for an nforce2 motherboard with integrated geforce 4mx graphics for around $40, add in a sempron for $40, and then spend the $20 to get 512MB of ram. It won't be great, but it'll be sufficient.

BTW, the 6200 could be slower than other PCI cards if it saturates the PCI bus more than they do. In PCI cards, it's not always the fastest chip that determines the fastest card.(oh, and typically pci cards have been between 50%-70% the performance of the agp versions, but they never went beyond the geforce 3 level so it's hard to tell what a card more powerful than that would perform like)

is that what it is 50-70%?

hmm well regardless i think its safe to say that this is about as high performing PCI solution that you'd want to produce as it surely maxes out that puny 133MB/sec

but at least you know you are maximizing your performance out of a pci-only rig for sure.

i doubt its actually slower than other pci cards though.. i dont know of any engineering factors that would explain that.. it might not perform as well as an agp version.. but surely it would defeat a lesser card and not be massively bottlenecked simply because its a very fast card on the pci bus. that doenst really make sense why it would be slower than a fx5700 just because its faster.

if anythign, it would be the same speed (worst case scenario). but not slower.



its highly recommended pulling out any other PCI cards that are unncessary though. heck i'd probably use CPU intensive USB devices instead if i had a PCI only rig and wanted to game.

creative sound cards are notorious for being pci bus hogs, so you definitely want to keep one of those out of there.
your bottleneck is going to be your PCI bus, not your sound acceleration (which wont amount to jack anyway)