Lag.. help.

[Dasquian Belargic]

I have checked the specs for my desktop to see if I should be able to run games like Assassin's Creed without any problems, but whenever I load it, or Tomb Roader: Underworld or Prince of Persia, I get incredibly laggy play. Might there be any system / display settings that I need to adjust? I have:

Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q8300 @ 2.50GHz
Microsoft Windows 7 (Build 7600)
GeForce 7100 " nForce 630i
3.7 GB RAM

:huh

[Darth Turbogeek]

Turn off all running programs, anti virus etc.

[Yog]

You're attempting to run modern games with a 4 year old internal graphics chip. That is obviously going to get laggy.

You will need a dedicated graphics card.

Edit: what resolution are you running your monitor at btw? If it's 1680x1050 or 1600x1200 or lower, you could get by with a Radeon 4850 / 5750.

[Morgan Evanar]

Oh it's your video card, or lack thereof, just as Yog said.

[Dasquian Belargic]

Ohhh.. :( That sucks, since when I run those "Can I play this" sites for those games, they say it should be working fine.

My monitor is 1600x900 I think.

[Yog]

Ohhh.. :( That sucks, since when I run those "Can I play this" sites for those games, they say it should be working fine.
Those sites are probably reading your shader model / DX version or something and giving recommendations as if it was a video card, not integrated graphics chip on the motherboard. It is a huge difference. There is no integrated chip in the world that can handle games well. Also, I would not trust minimum requirements too much, recommended specs is more the one to look at for a nice experience. Steam page for Assassin's Creed for example, specifically mentions "**PCI Express only supported.". No one uses GeForce 6-7s nowadays, especially because some of the latest generation cards can be had for so dirt cheap and still perform decently in the latest games.


My monitor is 1600x900 I think.
That is not too hardware demanding, especially with your nice CPU, so here are a few bang for the buck cards with price ranges, because I'm guessing you don't want to spend too much.

Shoestring budget - ATI Radeon HD 4850 (http://www.overclock.co.uk/product/PowerColor-1024MB-GDDR3-ATI-Radeon-HD4850-VGADVIHDMI-PCI-E---Retail_20050.html) £76.99

Better - ATI Radeon HD 4870 (http://www.pricerunner.co.uk/pl/37-1195680/Graphics-Cards/XFX-Radeon-HD-4870-CrossFire-512MB-GDDR5-PCI-E-2xDVI-TV-OUT-Compare-Prices) £109.07 w/shipping

Good - ATI Radeon HD 4890 (http://www.pricerunner.co.uk/pl/37-1251561/Graphics-Cards/Sapphire-Radeon-HD-4890-Vapor-X-CrossFireX-1GB-GDDR5-PCI-E-2.0-DVI-Compare-Prices) £124.67 w/shipping

Comparison of cards (http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-cards-charts-2009-high-quality/Left4Dead,1519.html) to get an idea how they perform vs each other (ignore the results with SLI or crossfire)

You will also need to make sure your motherboard has a PCI-E expansion slot, and that the power supply give enough Ampere, probably +500W. The PSU should also have 6 pin PCI-E power connectors (http://www.playtool.com/pages/psuconnectors/connectors.html), and if not you'll need a molex to PCI-E 6+2 Pin Y-splitter cable. I expect none of this should be a problem, but you never know with generic PC vendors such as PCWorld, assuming it is the desktop computer in the general forum thread.

Edit- The 4670 (http://www.pricerunner.co.uk/cl/37/Graphics-Cards?ref=redirect&q=HD%204670%201024MB&search=HD%204670%201024MB&other_hits=2%3AHD%204670%201024MB%7C707%3AHD%20467 0%201024MB%3B%3B%3B&sp=1&sort=4) recommended by Droo below VV

[Droo]

In all honesty, you really don't need to go overboard when it comes to graphics cards at the moment. In my opinion, unless you want a completely top-of-the-range super computer that is future proof for about, oh, two years then yes, go expensive and splash out £200+ on a video card. If not, go moderate at best, because the leaps in technology are nowhere near as vast as the leaps in the prices with which they well and truly rip you off.

A month ago I bought a Sapphire Radeon HD 4670 from Overclockers (http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-209-SP&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1274) for a pleasant £58 and it runs Modern Warfare 2 like a dream with all of the graphics turned up. I was very surprised but it reassured my belief that minor improvements aren't worth the whopping price we pay for them and it's better to just wait a little longer for the better stuff to plummet in price as it always does.

In all honesty, I wonder what an HD 4890 model could twice as well as my HD 4670 model to warrant doubling its price.

[Yog]

A month ago I bought a Sapphire Radeon HD 4670 from Overclockers (http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-209-SP&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1274) for a pleasant £58 and it runs Modern Warfare 2 like a dream with all of the graphics turned up.
Have you tried running Crysis on high detail level lately? :)


I was very surprised but it reassured my belief that minor improvements aren't worth the whopping price we pay for them and it's better to just wait a little longer for the better stuff to plummet in price as it always does.
I agree with this.


In all honesty, I wonder what an HD 4890 model could twice as well as my HD 4670 model to warrant doubling its price.
A 4890 knocks the socks out of a 4670, then drops it from great height, before it stomps on it repeatedly. Read some benchmarks. The 4670 is pretty good for it's super low price though. In fact it's AnandTech's recommendation (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3588) at the lowest price range. I am a little hesitant to recommend it though, because there is a dramatic leap in performance up to the 4850, which is only about £20'ish more.

E: Actually, when I think about it some more, the main reason I'd go for a 4670 is not so much the price, but the low power consumption, noise and heat levels of the card. It is a single slot card that draws power straight from the PCI-E x16 slot, with no additional power needed. But like I said, the 4850 is a much better performer.

[Droo]

I've no doubt it's a better card but I'm fairly sure it's not twice the card mine is and consequently, not really worth twice as much, but then that's the industry for you.

And also, on the Crysis issue, yes the game is gorgeous on its full settings but as far as I'm concerned, so is Modern Warfare 2. Yes, there's a fair bit of a difference but in all honesty, if you play a game with the visuals of MW2, find it running perfectly smooth, then what's the problem? Do you really want to spend an extra £200 to turn the graphics up on Crysis just a few more notches? It's all pretty absurd when you think about it.

[Yog]

I've no doubt it's a better card but I'm fairly sure it's not twice the card mine is and consequently, not really worth twice as much, but then that's the industry for you.
The 4890 uses GDRR5 instead of GDDR3, 256 bit memory interface vs 128, 800 stream processing units instead of 320 and a faster clock as well.

Here (http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-cards-charts-2009-high-quality/Sum-of-FPS-Benchmarks-1680x1050,1535.html) is the weighting in aggregated FPS score (accumulating all the game benchmarks together for a real world comparison in gaming performance)
HD 4670: 184.90
HD 4890: 459.50

That is on average more than twice the performance in games.

Let's look at Modern Warfare 2 (http://www.techspot.com/article/219-cod-modern-warfare-2-gpu-performance/page5.html)
HD 4670: 39
HD 4890: 77


At 1680x1050 the GeForce GT 220, Radeon HD 3850, Radeon HD 4670 and GeForce 9600 GT were no good for these demanding settings.
And that was with a top of the line i7 CPU! I am not sure what display you're running or other hardware to run Modern Warfare 2 smoothly with all bells and whistles at max. 39 frames per second is about the bare minimum for an enjoyable smooth experience in first person shooters, IMO. Especially online ones, were even the smallest lag due to frame drops can be quite annoying.



Do you really want to spend an extra £200 to turn the graphics up on Crysis just a few more notches? It's all pretty absurd when you think about it.I have the GeForce 9600GT which perform about the same as the 4670 in crysis, and at 1680x1050, it was not playable at max, I had to put it on medium. Recently, I got a 24 inch 1920x1080, I imagine it is much worse now. Also, prior to getting the 24 inch, I played a bit of Age of Conan in DX10 mode, which is an insane visual difference compared to DX9. It's not even the same game. But in DX10 mode, I really had to cut down on some bells and whistles, for a playable framerate, shadows, viewing distance and so on, and believe me, it is very noticeable. At least from my perspective, it's not really a question of a few notches, or £200 more (it's a £124 card!).

I am changing the "low and medium budget recommendations" of the 4850 and the 4870 to the 5750 (http://www.overclock.co.uk/product/XFX-512MB-GDDR5-ATI-Radeon-HD5750-DVI--HDMI--VGA-PCI-E_24975.html). It is about the same performance and price range as the 4850, but for 10 quid more the 5750 is DX11, runs cooler and quieter and uses less power. It's hard to go wrong with that card.

[Dasquian Belargic]

Thanks for all the suggestions. My budget can't really stretch above £70-80, and even then that won't be until after Christmas... I guess my games will just have to gather dust until then >_<

[Yog]

Thanks for all the suggestions. My budget can't really stretch above £70-80, and even then that won't be until after Christmas... I guess my games will just have to gather dust until then >_<
Ok, that puts the 4890 out of the question. On further consideration, it might as well be for the best because we don't know what kind of PSU you have. 4890 uses about 190 watts under load, and the 5750 about 78 watts. Most video cards require 26 AMP's on the 12 volts rails for stable power distribution.

[Dasquian Belargic]

How do I find out what kind of PSU I have?

[Darth Viscera]

The 4670 is too slow for your purposes. Sure, it's fine for console ports like Modern Warfare 2, but you may want to play a little Crysis at some point, or any other game that wasn't designed from the ground up to run on an Xbox 360 or PS3's 5-odd year old GPU. And playing Crysis on low or medium image quality settings is something of a shame, really.
3.41 stone (http://www.overclock.co.uk/product/Asus-512MB-GDDR3-ATI-Radeon-HD4670-DSub--DVI--HDMI-PCI-E,-Retail_6487.html)

The 5750 is nearly twice as fast, and nearly twice as expensive. Nice, linear price/performance curve, should keep you playing console ports as well as natively designed PC games at 1600x900 with good image quality for a while. It also is cool, quiet, has DX11 support, and uses only 78 watts under load.
6.35 stone (http://www.overclock.co.uk/product/XFX-512MB-GDDR5-ATI-Radeon-HD5750-DVI--HDMI--VGA-PCI-E_24975.html)

The 4850 has the same level of performance as the 5750, but it's hot, noisy, has only DX10.1 support, and uses 40 more watts. It also costs 10 quid less.
5.5 stone (http://www.overclock.co.uk/product/PowerColor-1024MB-GDDR3-ATI-Radeon-HD4850-VGADVIHDMI-PCI-E---Retail_20050.html)

I recommend you save up the extra 10 quid and go for the 5750 instead of the 4850.

In order to find out what sort of PSU you have, you need to open up your case's side panel. Then just peer at the rectangular box from whence the electrical cables seep forth, it's either on top or on the bottom. It'll say how much wattage and how many amps it delivers on the 12V rail on the label.

[Morgan Evanar]

Most anything will be able to push a 5750. IMO going below that is cutting corners too sharp.

[Yog]

Pretty much what Morgan and Visc said :)

[Droo]

Thankfully I don't play Crysis because clearly I'm missing something here, and also there's a lot that just isn't adding up: Yog, you posted all those stats and I can say this - my computer is really quite average and with this graphics card and MW2 graphics on full I'm getting 69fps so I really don't know what to make of these benchmark tests and the like because according to their reports my computer should barely manage playing the game. Although interestingly enough, I find it has more issues running COD4 as opposed to its sequel.

[Darth Viscera]

Putting Modern Warfare 2's graphics on full is not saying much. It's still a console port, and not very graphically demanding. If you were playing at 1680x1050, with all graphical options set to max, you could even get a playable 31fps (http://www.techspot.com/article/219-cod-modern-warfare-2-gpu-performance/page5.html) with an old Radeon HD 3850.

[Yog]

Yog, you posted all those stats and I can say this - my computer is really quite average and with this graphics card and MW2 graphics on full I'm getting 69fps so I really don't know what to make of these benchmark tests and the like because according to their reports my computer should barely manage playing the game. Although interestingly enough, I find it has more issues running COD4 as opposed to its sequel.I'm guessing you still have some different settings than in the benchmark not sure which, maybe the type and amount of AA. Or maybe you're running it on a 1,280 x 1,024 monitor, that would explain it. I have no idea really.

[Dasquian Belargic]

Fingers crossed that my grandparents will be buying me a 5750 for Christmas ^_^;

[Peter McCoy]

I think Crysis is overrated. I'm not for one second saying it doesn't look absolutely fantastic. But 5 minutes of gorgeousness doesn't really warrant forking out for a powerful card - thats how long I felt the desire to play. It just got boring after a while. There's plenty other games to choose from that are just as fun to play, if not better, without the demands of that game. Hell - go for the standalone expansion Wargear - the spec demands are a lot more merciful and it still looks good. Once again though, I didn't find the gameplay anything to write home about.

[Darth Viscera]

What about all the other non-crysis games that a Radeon 5750 would deliver 90% faster performance in compared to a Radeon 4670? The Radeon 4670 isn't like 640KB of memory, it's not good enough for everybody. There are plenty of GPUs above it that deliver a good ratio of price to performance before you wind up in $600 gold-plated SLI/Crossfire crazytown.

[Dasquian Belargic]

Okay I have just been poking around in the back of my computer, am I right in thinking that the orange slot in the first picture is a PCI Express x16 and the little white thing above it is a PCI Express x1

[Yog]

Okay I have just been poking around in the back of my computer, am I right in thinking that the orange slot in the first picture is a PCI Express x16 and the little white thing above it is a PCI Express x1
Yes, you're correct.

[Figrin D'an]

The orange slot in the first pic is your PCI-E x16 slot, yes. If you have a single slot video card, that orange slot it the only one you'll need.

Remember to connect power to the video card as well from your power supply. There should be one or two power cables specific for PCI-E devices.

[Dasquian Belargic]

So if I buy this: http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-155-XF

It should be compatible with my computer? (Would I need to buy anything else with it or is it just a case of slotting it into the appropriate... slot? :huh)

[Dasquian Belargic]

The orange slot in the first pic is your PCI-E x16 slot, yes. If you have a single slot video card, that orange slot it the only one you'll need.

Remember to connect power to the video card as well from your power supply. There should be one or two power cables specific for PCI-E devices.

Is this those cables? I was wondering why they weren't attached to anything...

[Yog]

It should be compatible with my computer? (Would I need to buy anything else with it or is it just a case of slotting it into the appropriate... slot? :huh)
Yep, you should be set pretty much already. The only thing I would do is verify that you have a PCI-E plug / cable coming out of your Power Supply and that it gives adequat amount of watts and volts on the 12 amp line, which is almost certainly the case.

[Yog]

Is this those cables? I was wondering why they weren't attached to anything...

Those white plugs are molex connectors. They are used for powering harddisks, DVD drives and most things in your computer.

It is too dark in that photo for me to identify the rest.

What you need is a 6 pin PCI-E connector, it looks like this:
http://www.playtool.com/pages/psuconnectors/pcie6.jpg

It's black and got 6 pins.

Edit: notice in that photo, on the other end of the 6 pin PCI-E, there are 2 male molex connector, so even if you don't have a dedicated PCI-E cable, you can get one of those to connect with instead to your molex cables.

[Dasquian Belargic]

okay, thanks for the tour of my computer :D :lol

[Dasquian Belargic]

Well, many moons later... I have finally had the cash to upgrade. I went with a ATI Radeon HD 4890, as the price difference between this and others mentioned was negligible :) Also the tax-man is giving me a little rebate ;)

[Morgan Evanar]

Argh! The problem with video cards is that a suggestion is only valid for 3 months. =/

[Darth Viscera]

You should have gone with the Radeon 5750. Now you'll probably need to buy a new power supply to feed that beastly thing. That is, if a power supply upgrade will fit in your case, I know that some companies, like Dell, design their systems to be rather difficult to upgrade.

[Dasquian Belargic]

Morg - The games I want to play are all at least a year, if not two or three years, old... I looked into performance reviews for a number of them and they all said that this card would run them very well :)

Visc - my computer isn't a Dell

[Darth Viscera]

You should probably select a 500+ watt power supply from a reputable manufacturer such as Corsair, Seasonic or Antec. I have no idea what your current power supply is, but it likely isn't up to the task. It'll cost you around 60 quid.

[Dasquian Belargic]

I have no idea what your current power supply is, but it likely isn't up to the task.

Is there any reason you think this, or is it just a guess?

[Darth Viscera]

Of course it's just a guess, silly! You never told us what power supply you have :p Make with the details so you can get more informed advice!

Most computers that one buys have crappy power supplies.

[Droo]

Jenny, if you don't mind me asking, how much did that card cost?

I'm on Overclockers at the moment and the 4850s cost between £80-90 while a 5670 is only £75. I have to concur with what Morg and Visc have said, when it comes to graphics cards so much changes in such a short period of time.

[Dasquian Belargic]

I guess I will cancel the order and get a refund then.

[Darth Viscera]

Yes, that is your best bet. I know it's disappointing, you were about to have a shiny new Radeon 4890. But then you would have had to disassemble your old power supply, install the new one, and reconnect all your devices to its power connectors. "Blimey, am I doing this right? I've never done this before. Oh, if only I had listened to Visc and bought a Radeon 5750!" you would say as you emerged from underneath a tangle of wires and shook your fists.

Radeon 5750 1GB - 104.50 quid shipped
(http://computers.pricegrabber.co.uk/video-cards/Sapphire-Technology-ATI-Radeon-5750-HD-700Mhz/m743064849.html/search=radeon+5750/st=product/sv=title)

[Dasquian Belargic]

I think my watts = 250. am I going to need to buy more on top of that card?

[Morgan Evanar]

No, the 5750 doesn't draw much power at all.

[Darth Viscera]

250w. Oh no :ohno Those guys who made your PC sure did cut corners. You ought to take a picture of it and post it here to be sure.

250w is a crapshoot. If your power supply gets less than 75% efficiency, then it will pretty much be generating exactly as much power as the PC requires, which is bad, because it needs some leeway. Or it could be an off-brand that overrates its capacity. I'd need to know the exact specifications of your PC, but I'm thinking that 250w is too little. A 5750 uses 86 watts, which, depending upon the efficiency of the PSU, could be 50% of its capacity right there.

[Dasquian Belargic]

It says 250W on the label of the.. whatever it is. It was the only thing in there with watts on it.

I already posted some specs earlier on the thread. What else exactly do you want?

[Darth Viscera]

http://extreme.outervision.com/PSUEngine

This calculator will tell you how many watts you're using and how big your PSU should be. You tell it your CPU, motherboard, ram, video card, hard drive(s), optical drive(s), additional expansion cards, USB devices, fans, etc.

It would be important to know what brand the power supply is. If it's a crappy offbrand that came with the case, as it probably is, then it will probably respond to an extra 86w load by exploding one day and taking your motherboard out with it. If it's a name brand, then who knows, it might just respond with unexplained system shutdowns or something. 250w is really too little. I would think that even 300w would have been ample. Those dicks.

[Dasquian Belargic]

I don't know the answers to the majority of this stuff on the calculator soooo.

[Darth Viscera]

Do you have any friends who could help you install a new power supply? It might be a bit daunting to do it yourself if you have no experience at it, and it would help you avoid whatever ripoff charge they might charge you if you hire someone else to do it.

[Dasquian Belargic]

Guys this is why I asked you for computer advice in the first place :( I bought a PC that Morg recommended after all. My stepdad has some technical knowledge so maybe he could fit it somehow.

[Morgan Evanar]

It's probably not a big deal and the 5750 barely draws any real power. Installation is two screws and a cable to connect it to the PSU, worst case scenario an adapter for the power cable.

[Droo]

Installation is two screws and a cable to connect it to the PSU, worst case scenario an adapter for the power cable.

And even this should come with the graphics card itself. Mine did.

[Dasquian Belargic]

The people at Overclockers have been kind enough to put my order on hold and will refund the difference between what I paid and the price of the 5750 :) so minimal fuss involved after all!

edit - well what do you know, they hadn't even taken the payment yet so that was easy squeasy. hooray for Overclockers!

[Acacius Blade]

When I got my Radeon HD5870 I was gonna do it on hire purchase - buy now, pay in 6 months. So they sent me the email for the link to Hitachi Capital finance. I did what it said, then a day later got an email asking for more info. That was accepted again, and then 2 days later an email said my application for finance had been rejected and to call blahblahblah. I did and couldn't get through so emailed them.

3. Months. Later. I got a reply saying my 'recent' application for finance had been rejected. That was it. No answer to the query I made 3 months prior.

Overclockers themselves are generally good, but they're not great when choosing affiliates.

The 'brokers fee' for the finance was refunded instantly the first time it was rejected, so I never lost out. I just bought the card outright when I got paid.

[Dasquian Belargic]

The card is installed and I just tried it out on Left 4 Dead 2 / Batman: Arkham Asylum.... they look great :eee

[Lilaena De'Ville]

:dance Yay! Congrats :D