The Shrine

Never again. Never again will I buy a fucking ATI video card. Total garbage drivers.

After fucking around for 5 hours on that, playing LOTRO on the LOWEST settings was extremely choppy and had unplayable FMV. Compare to my old GeForce 5700 FX, which is fine on Medium settings and FMV is smooth. PC is a 3.0GHz with 1.5GB RAM.

I'm RMAing the thing, but I'm still getting gimped with NewEgg's 15% restocking fee (plus the shipping here and back). That's $50 I won't get back. I just ordered a GeForce 7600GT 512MB 128-bit DDR2 with 12 pipelines for $120 plus a VGA cooling fan. This should max out my AGP capabilities until I settle for a new PC with PCI-E. Plus, I've never had problems with NVIDIA drivers, unlike ATI.

If ATI can't write proper drivers, why does this company still exist?

SineSwiper wrote:Never again. Never again will I buy a fucking ATI video card. Total garbage drivers.

After fucking around for 5 hours on that, playing LOTRO on the LOWEST settings was extremely choppy and had unplayable FMV. Compare to my old GeForce 5700 FX, which is fine on Medium settings and FMV is smooth. PC is a 3.0GHz with 1.5GB RAM.

I'm RMAing the thing, but I'm still getting gimped with NewEgg's 15% restocking fee (plus the shipping here and back). That's $50 I won't get back. I just ordered a GeForce 7600GT 512MB 128-bit DDR2 with 12 pipelines for $120 plus a VGA cooling fan. This should max out my AGP capabilities until I settle for a new PC with PCI-E. Plus, I've never had problems with NVIDIA drivers, unlike ATI.

If ATI can't write proper drivers, why does this company still exist?

Because they were bought by AMD. Now if you put all of the letters together it equals DAAMIT.

Buy nVidia. Be happy. Just don't use it with Vista. Or a creative labs soundcard with vista. Wait about 12 months.

Barret wrote:
Buy nVidia. Be happy. Just don't use it with Vista. Or a creative labs soundcard with vista. Wait about 12 months.

I've been using Vista for over a year between 2 video cards (originally I had 2 SLIed 7600GS's, now it's 1 8600GT) with NO problems on video. The only difficulties I've ever had were because of some games not playing nice with SLI. DX10 had some stumbling in the beginning I believe but now it's solid. LOTRO in DX10 mode is BEAUTIFUL; to me it was almost the difference between playing an Xbox 360 game on an SD vs HD TV.

Now Creative is a different story, lol, I'm glad I stuck with my onboard RealTek or whatever.

Don't know why you had such trouble with ATI, but then again I've never bought an ATI video card in my life.

Tessian wrote:I've been using Vista for over a year between 2 video cards (originally I had 2 SLIed 7600GS's, now it's 1 8600GT) with NO problems on video. The only difficulties I've ever had were because of some games not playing nice with SLI. DX10 had some stumbling in the beginning I believe but now it's solid. LOTRO in DX10 mode is BEAUTIFUL; to me it was almost the difference between playing an Xbox 360 game on an SD vs HD TV.

I think that's mostly colored by the difference between an older card and new one. DX10 only adds some lighting effects. Shellie's PC has LOTRO on max settings except DX10 stuff and it looks awesome.

This morning, I checked the power supply on a whim. It was worse than I thought: rated at 300W, max 350W. So, I replaced it with a 420W and tried the card again. It's slightly better, but it still playing choppy FMV on the lowest settings. (I use the new character "Play Movie" FMV as a test. Vocals always seem to cut in and out with this card.)

I've since put my old 5700 back in there and overclocked it with NVIDIA's hidden CP. The graphics are a bit better after some graphic settings adjustments. I can see the tall grasses and the like. I hope to boost it even more with the newer card coming in. (Can't OC it though, since it already runs hot. I'll see what the new cooler will do to the temp, though.)

SineSwiper wrote:

Tessian wrote:I've been using Vista for over a year between 2 video cards (originally I had 2 SLIed 7600GS's, now it's 1 8600GT) with NO problems on video. The only difficulties I've ever had were because of some games not playing nice with SLI. DX10 had some stumbling in the beginning I believe but now it's solid. LOTRO in DX10 mode is BEAUTIFUL; to me it was almost the difference between playing an Xbox 360 game on an SD vs HD TV.

I think that's mostly colored by the difference between an older card and new one. DX10 only adds some lighting effects. Shellie's PC has LOTRO on max settings except DX10 stuff and it looks awesome.

This morning, I checked the power supply on a whim. It was worse than I thought: rated at 300W, max 350W. So, I replaced it with a 420W and tried the card again. It's slightly better, but it still playing choppy FMV on the lowest settings. (I use the new character "Play Movie" FMV as a test. Vocals always seem to cut in and out with this card.)

I've since put my old 5700 back in there and overclocked it with NVIDIA's hidden CP. The graphics are a bit better after some graphic settings adjustments. I can see the tall grasses and the like. I hope to boost it even more with the newer card coming in. (Can't OC it though, since it already runs hot. I'll see what the new cooler will do to the temp, though.)

Did you try to add some more RAM your rig? 1.5GB is kinda on the low side.

Kinda on the low side? For what? I wasn't even using that much on LOTRO anyway (only about 500-700MB). And yeah, I put in an extra 512MB on it this morning. 4GB rigs are only for wasting memory or server work.

Unless I'm missing a Photoshopping feature in LOTRO...

SineSwiper wrote:Kinda on the low side? For what? I wasn't even using that much on LOTRO anyway (only about 500-700MB). And yeah, I put in an extra 512MB on it this morning. 4GB rigs are only for wasting memory or server work.

Unless I'm missing a Photoshopping feature in LOTRO...

I run 2GB cause of BF2142 and BF2 being such resource hogs.

Yeah, I even turn on the texture caching options on LOTRO, since I have enough to spare.

1.5gig is fine unless you're trying to game on Vista, then I'd recommend 2+.

I have an Audigy 2, an Nvidia card and they both work perfectly with my pc running Vista.

Ram is so cheap now, you might as well run 4GB. Its what - 60 bucks now? Ridiculous.

Sephy wrote:Ram is so cheap now, you might as well run 4GB. Its what - 60 bucks now? Ridiculous.

Ahh poor Sephy... a 2 minute search on Newegg makes you a liar on that one, or just a strong exaggerator

I bought new ram last month (Corsair PC2 8500) and it was $84 for 2x1gb. So even 4x1gb would be $168 which is not cheap in my eyes (and really you'd probably wanna do 2x2gb instead and that's more expensive). Besides that, only 64bit versions of Windows will even be able to USE that 4gig; if you're running 32bit Windows you might as well cap out at 3gig. Add the 512mb graphics card and you're already only 512mb from your 4gig limit and that doesn't even include all the rest of the physical memory squirreled away onboard.

It's for this reason I laugh at anyone who thinks it's smart to buy 4gig of physical memory; very few of us are even still daring enough to try 64bit versions anyway so you're just wasting money.

Tessian wrote:

Sephy wrote:Ram is so cheap now, you might as well run 4GB. Its what - 60 bucks now? Ridiculous.

Ahh poor Sephy... a 2 minute search on Newegg makes you a liar on that one, or just a strong exaggerator

He does not lie.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820211188

Sephy + Oracle 1 - Tess 0

The pc I just built I got 4G RAM for 50 bucks in combo with my motherboard. And I'm running 64bit Vista.

That's a highly unusual deal. Do you have to buy a AMD processor to get the price?

Tessian wrote:Besides that, only 64bit versions of Windows will even be able to USE that 4gig; if you're running 32bit Windows you might as well cap out at 3gig.

I had to look this up for myself, but, yes, processes in 32-bit Windows have an address-space limit of 3GB. That's bizarre. But, it's probably still worth using 4GB because Windows itself is probably smart enough to make sure all of physical memory is used. That is, even though a single process might not be able to use all of physical memory, you have many processes running at once, and combined they can use all 4GB.

Kupek wrote:Windows itself is probably smart enough

Impossible......

Kupek wrote:

Tessian wrote:Besides that, only 64bit versions of Windows will even be able to USE that 4gig; if you're running 32bit Windows you might as well cap out at 3gig.

I had to look this up for myself, but, yes, processes in 32-bit Windows have an address-space limit of 3GB. That's bizarre. But, it's probably still worth using 4GB because Windows itself is probably smart enough to make sure all of physical memory is used. That is, even though a single process might not be able to use all of physical memory, you have many processes running at once, and combined they can use all 4GB.

Actually, if you install 4GB of Physical memory into a PC and install either XP or Server 2003 Standard, windows only sees 3.37 GB of that memory. There is a registry hack needed to make it see the entire 4GB. That hack is unsupported by Microsoft.

So, Zeus is right, Windows is not smart enough.

I'm using these numbers as a reference: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778.aspx

According to it, the only versions of 32-bit Windows that don't support at least 4GB of physical memory are Windows Server 2003, Web Edition and Windows XP Starter Edition.

edit: phpbb isn't smart enough to strip the period ending a sentence from a URL.

Something's wrong with your link Kupek, it doesn't work.

As to Sephy + Oracle-- you're picking up memory from A-Data; nuff said. Look up a reliable name bring like Corsair or Kingston and you'll get a different story: Here . I woulda included a Kingston link but it seems the only sell a few 2x2gb and they're slow speeds.

The memory issue is a known problem with nearly ALL 32-bit versions of Windows. The only one it DOESN'T apply to is a specific version of Windows 2003/2000 server I believe. It exists in all 32-bit versions of XP and Vista. You need the 64-bit version to make use of over 4gig of physical memory. Reading through some articles it seems like Microsoft at least lies about it in Vista (says it can read 4gig but it definitely won't be using all 4gig). A Google search will confirm this "4gig limit Windows 32" shows all sorts of outraged posts from kids buying 4gig for Vista and finding it didn't actually take it all.

Full explanation, and it's not just Windows: http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archi ... 99521.aspx

Any OS written for an x86 processor has to deal with this issue; Linux has to deal with PAE as well. When it's on, the system deals with memory as I guessed.

Yeah, I remember talking about this with a UNIX admin a while back. Of course, we use Xeons for most of our needs, so it's not a big deal.

There have been plenty of 32-bit Xeons. But now the issue matters less because we're finally getting to the point that even most new consumer chips are 64-bit.

Kupek wrote:Full explanation, and it's not just Windows: http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archi ... 99521.aspx

Any OS written for an x86 processor has to deal with this issue; Linux has to deal with PAE as well. When it's on, the system deals with memory as I guessed.

Really? I coulda sworn that I was told it was a Windows only thing and Linux kernels had gotten around it... oh well.

Tessian wrote:

Kupek wrote:Full explanation, and it's not just Windows: http://blogs.msdn.com/oldnewthing/archi ... 99521.aspx

Any OS written for an x86 processor has to deal with this issue; Linux has to deal with PAE as well. When it's on, the system deals with memory as I guessed.

Really? I coulda sworn that I was told it was a Windows only thing and Linux kernels had gotten around it... oh well.

Depends on the kernal. ESX for instance supports 32GB in 3.0.1. In ver 3.5 it starts getting ridiculous.

Seraphina wrote:The pc I just built I got 4G RAM for 50 bucks in combo with my motherboard. And I'm running 64bit Vista.

How many kids do you have to sacrifice to the Sun God to get THAT deal?

There's got to be a downside.

Well, it's GSkill, not Kingston or Corsair, but it has a 5 "egg" rating on Newegg. And it was with a $10 rebate.

SineSwiper wrote:That's a highly unusual deal. Do you have to buy a AMD processor to get the price?

Im pretty sure it was combo'ed with my motherboard. The ram was originally 80 bucks. Not bad at even that price for 4G. Then I got 20 bucks off for the combo deal, and it also had a $10 rebate.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820231122

Tessian wrote:Something's wrong with your link Kupek, it doesn't work.

As to Sephy + Oracle-- you're picking up memory from A-Data; nuff said. Look up a reliable name bring like Corsair or Kingston and you'll get a different story: Here .

So you're a brand whore, who doesn't research into alternate manufacturers. It's not "nuff said", back your statements up.

Does this make you feel better?

http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php? ... re=MUSHKIN

Not as cheap as the A-Data, but it shows you can't find a decent price (I never include MIRs into the price of RAM, because even with Corsair, you are lucky to get them back in most cases):p

Got this card yesterday. Great card. Getting 40-60 FPS from my old video settings on LOTRO and getting about 20-30 FPSs (with some slight pauses) on max settings.

However, this thing runs HOT! Even with a ZEROthem cooler fan, it's running at 70C idle. While playing, it hovers at 100C and can go as high as 115C. I've ordered some Arctic Silver, along with a few PCI coolers. (This one was really nice and cheap, so I ordered a few.)

SineSwiper wrote:Got this card yesterday. Great card. Getting 40-60 FPS from my old video settings on LOTRO and getting about 20-30 FPSs (with some slight pauses) on max settings.

However, this thing runs HOT! Even with a ZEROthem cooler fan, it's running at 70C idle. While playing, it hovers at 100C and can go as high as 115C. I've ordered some Arctic Silver, along with a few PCI coolers. (This one was really nice and cheap, so I ordered a few.)

My old GeForce 6800 OC by BFG ran, constantly at 65 just running windows. I believe the threshold for it was 135 before it started sounding alarms.

SineSwiper wrote:Got this card yesterday. Great card. Getting 40-60 FPS from my old video settings on LOTRO and getting about 20-30 FPSs (with some slight pauses) on max settings.

However, this thing runs HOT! Even with a ZEROthem cooler fan, it's running at 70C idle. While playing, it hovers at 100C and can go as high as 115C. I've ordered some Arctic Silver, along with a few PCI coolers. (This one was really nice and cheap, so I ordered a few.)

$120?! Damn man... you spent just about as much on a 7600 as I did on an 8600; you must REALLY like that motherboard to pay that much just to stick with AGP

I believe GFX are just designed to run hot these days... the 8600GT I bought doesn't even have a fan (special heatsink design). I haven't checked the temp's (where are you checking that, btw?) but I've been running it about a month without difficulties. As long as your case is well ventilated I think you're fine.

Edit-- my bad, my graphics card was cheaper

I understand the economics of PCI-E cards. However, replacing the mobo/chip/RAM, etc. would cost at least $200 plus the price of the video card. Sure, I'm buying some extra stuff to cool it down, but I can reuse that.

The rest of the PC is fine. Good chip, good memory, good HD, decent power supply, good case. This can be the last AGP video card I buy before I make the jump to PCI-E.

I'm measuring temperatures using RivaTuner. TechPowerUp GPU can measure it, too, but RivaTuner has graphs that are good for accurate in-game comparisons.

Today, it peaked at 125C, kicking the NVIDIA "lowering performance" alarm. So, I UNDERclocked the thing from 580MHz to 400MHz, and it's STILL idling at 70C. To be honest, I never tried it with the stock fan as a baseline. I installed it the first time with the new VGA cooler fan. Reapplied the paste this morning with no change. I already ordered some Arctic Silver Ceramique along with those PCI fans. Might be the paste that came with the cooling fan, since one reviewer claimed that he got it to never go above 63C.

I'll experiment with it some more when I get the other parts. It's a good learning experience, since I'm getting schooled on video cards and overclocking.

Sweet! Got my new cooling stuff yesterday and set it up today. Did the following this morning:

1. Took out a small chunk of the copper heatsink "blades" to keep it from hitting a transistor (or whatever that round tube part is) in the video card.

2. Removed the old thermal paste and put in some Arctic Silver Cermantic on both the GPU and BIOS? (Not sure, it's got just a heatsink on it and it's a smaller rectangular chip.)

3. Re-arranged my PCI slots and put a neat blue light PCI dual-fan right next to the video card.

4. Put a different PCI fan with exhaust below the first one.

Now the card is running at 40C idle, and even with overclocking the card and running LOTRO on the highest settings, it's never going past 53C or so.

I guess the important thing to learn is that to make sure that your VGA cooler fan isn't getting blocked by other parts. It's a huge fan, so it tends to run into stuff. I still have one memory chip without a heatsink, though, but everything is running at 20-30 FPS, so I'm not too worried right now.

Ahhhh...I missed reading Sine's computer posts. Like total gibberish to me.

My computer brings me porn. YAY!

SineSwiper wrote:
I guess the important thing to learn is that to make sure that your VGA cooler fan isn't getting blocked by other parts. It's a huge fan, so it tends to run into stuff. I still have one memory chip without a heatsink, though, but everything is running at 20-30 FPS, so I'm not too worried right now.

No, the important thing to remember is that had you spent a little more money initially (and just upgraded your damn mobo, CPU, memory to get a PCI-E video card) you would have saved yourself over a week's aggravation, hours of wasted time, etc. and ended up with a much better system that would have lasted longer too.

Glad to hear you finally got it working, but don't fool yourself into thinking your stubbornness didn't cost yourself time and money

http://www.newegg.com/product/product.a ... 6820227247

$55 bucks for 4 GB. Oh yeah

Of course it cost me time, but I'm fine with that. It was educational. And yes, I did save some money, because these fans can be reused for other things. I'll probably put them in my next rig.