Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Upgrade to AGP 8x x1950 PRO

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
February 14, 2007 10:20:29 PM

Hello,

Looking to do some decent upgrading to my system. The point of this thread is just to make sure the x1950 will work safely and be compatible with my current system.

Specs:
Mobo- ECS L4VXA2 (V 1.0C)
CPU- Intel P4 2.4 GHz socket 478 Northwood
PSU- Ultra 550 watt X-Connect 2 (X2)
Memory- 2GB Patriot DDR400 @ DDR333 (mobo does not support DDR400)
Hard Drive- 250 GB WD
Video Card- ATI Radeon 9550
Sound Card- SB Audigy 2

As you can see, an x1950 will be a big upgrade over my baby 9550. I just upgraded that RAM as well. My Ultra has a total of 35 on the dual 12v (17 and 18. Is this enough? The card looks like it requires a lot of power.) It also came with a 6 pin PCI-E adapter cable that I have sitting in the original box because there was no use for it when first obtaining the PSU.

I was originally looking to purchase the Sapphire version, until spotting the HIS with that insane cooler.

Bacically, will I be alright in going for this card? I know I'll most likely bottleneck a bit with that Pentium 2.4, but I SHOULD still notice an improvement over a 9550. I can upgrade the cpu too to a 3.6 with HT as thats the max my ECS mobo will handle, but I doubt that would completely get rid of bottlenecking all together.

More about : upgrade agp x1950 pro

February 15, 2007 1:25:49 PM

your bottleneck will be pretty darn big.

I had a p4 2.5 ghz (socket 478) and with 2gigs of ram at the same speed as your I got about 5000 points in 3dmark05

with a c2d E6600 and same ram my score now is 10121.

the only other thing thats changed is that its now agp 8x rather than 4x and iv got fast write enabled.



soooo the question is...is it worth getting a x1950 pro on your system when a 7600 gt could give you the same range of performance (on the system you have).

the x1950 pro has 2 power connectors so your psu should be able to run it, I run it with a 380 watt supply with a single +12v rail at 22 amps.


so its your call.
a b U Graphics card
February 15, 2007 7:55:08 PM

Some games it would be worth it, but for the most part that card is overkill for your system. You'll be CPU/system bottlenecked big time in many games.

I'd recommend a card I just recently bought as it's cheaper, still performs great, and is a better match for your system. Also, this thing is basically second best or tied for second best of AGP cards available with only the X1950 pro beating it. (Others in it's league are the 7600GT, 7800GS, X850XT)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1681...

$135 after rebate and you get the huge quiet high performance ice Q cooler.
Related resources
February 15, 2007 8:28:22 PM

So basically instead of the card doing the best it can, it will actually just perform worse? Not to the best of it's ability in regards to my system?

Thanks for the post on the x1650, but would that really be THAT much better for me over the x1950? I'd hate to spend that with an overall much better card out there that's just a bit more expensive.

Also, is there a difference with some cards having two four pin molex connectors and others having a 6 pin PCI-E connector? (At least I'll be set for this either way.) PCI-E on an AGP card?
a b U Graphics card
February 15, 2007 9:11:11 PM

Yeah, exactly. Your system will hold the card back. Believe it or not, Unless you play at a very high resolution, I bet the X1650XT and X1950 pro would often perform very close to one another on your system. The X1950 pro is better, just being crippled by system bottlenecks. But it depends on the game and the resolution you play at.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/10/agp-platform-ana...
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/02/01/agp-platform-ana...

Check out those two links. Basically your system is about like the XP2500+, or even a little below if it's a 533 bus P4 as apposed to the 800 bus P4 2.4C. Notice it really takes the higher end system to make the X1950 pro shine. It does manage to show it's stuff in some games though. The thing with the X1650XT, it will also shine in some of the games that the X1950 pro shine in. So while the X1650XT is simialr to the 7600GT in performance, it will beat the 7600GT in games like Oblivion and NFS:Carbon.

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/digest3d/index0612....
This review will show you how the X1950 pro and X1650XT stack up to one another on a very high end rig. But remember, the performance will be lower and closer together on your rig so study the XP2500+ results above also. Personally I just think the X1650XT is such a bargain right now at $135 AR and you'll be spending almost $100 more to get the HIS X1950 pro without fully being able to benefit from what the card can do. Again depends on your games and resolution, and just what the $100 means to you.
February 15, 2007 9:44:46 PM

Ok I see, you posted the x1650 since my system wont live up to the full potential of a x1950. I should still expect some performance increase though right, even if it's not ALL the card can do?

My 9550 just gets killed in pretty much everything now a days. I don't expect to play all the newest games out there, but make what I do play a whole lot better experience over all. I also have to think down the line here. I could get a better mobo/cpu to better the card if i ABSOLUTELY wanted too. This was another reason for using the backwards compatibility on the RAM, it can be run ddr400 in a mobo that supports it.

Again though, my performance should go up as compared to the 9550? (I hope.) Even if the card can't show everything it can do?
a b U Graphics card
February 15, 2007 9:54:39 PM

Either card will destroy the R9550. For example look at farcry:
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/digest3d/0705/itogi...

For the radeon 9550 look at the 9600 performnace. And I know from testing that the His X1650XT turbo would peform at X850XT or X850XTpe levels. So at those stressful settings, it's showing 10 times the performance. :wink: The X1950 pro would be even better.
February 15, 2007 10:01:15 PM

Thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for. Everyone just tells me, "you'll bottleneck, you'll bottleneck." I don't need the full effects of the card, as long as my gaming is more satisfying. Playing on low settings has gotten very boring lately.
a b U Graphics card
February 16, 2007 12:04:15 AM

What games do you play?
February 16, 2007 12:14:45 AM

Halo, CS, Nascar Racing 2003 Season, C&C Generals, to name a few.

Have Battlefield 1942 runs like total crapola for me though. :oops: 
Also Doom 3, but got tired of the fps being so inconsistent, and the test said ULTRA... WHHHHATTTT!!!!
CSS stress test was a joke for me too. Have Farcry too, but again fps jumpin up n down stopped me from loading the disc in my drive.

My ram upgrade has helped out though tbh. Noticeable performance increase from my previous 512 of PNY.) :roll: Especially after doing the 2GB switch in windows.
February 16, 2007 1:13:16 AM

There is no doubt your gameplay will radically improve if you add the 1950 pro. You put the games head to head against a faster machine, and it will look and play the same. The benchmarks, though true, are crap. Your CPU is more than fast enough for any game out there.
February 16, 2007 2:39:39 AM

Wow, an Intel pentium 4 2.4GHz 478 is that good? I can't seem to believe that with all this dual core stuff and what not out there. You're the first one to tell me that it's fast enough for just about any game out there. What would happen if I threw a 3.6 with HT in this mobo? (Thats the max cpu it will take.)

Some other info I can include from previous posts: cpu is clocked at 400MHz, I run 1024x768 res.
a b U Graphics card
February 16, 2007 3:49:04 AM

Quote:
Wow, an Intel pentium 4 2.4GHz 478 is that good? I can't seem to believe that with all this dual core stuff and what not out there. You're the first one to tell me that it's fast enough for just about any game out there.

No, it's not that good. There are already games like FEAR, Oblivion, and GTR2 that recommend a 3.0GHz P4 or equivelent. You'll meet minimum spec for almost all current games, but minimum specs means near minimum physics/detail levels in some games. Other CPU intensive areas like large numbers of cars or NPC's, things will come to a crawl with a slower cpu. (try final battles of the main quest in Oblivion with a slow CPU) 8O
a b U Graphics card
February 16, 2007 3:51:59 AM

Quote:
There is no doubt your gameplay will radically improve if you add the 1950 pro. You put the games head to head against a faster machine, and it will look and play the same. The benchmarks, though true, are crap. Your CPU is more than fast enough for any game out there.

Where do you come up with that. A P4 2.4GHz paired with a X1950 pro will look and play the same as a C2D or even faster(edit: as in high end) A64 with the same card. Not a chance. :roll:
February 16, 2007 4:09:54 AM

Yes, I kinda figured as much. He did say "almost" and maybe was referring to the games I posted? IDK? Bridonka, can you elaborate?
February 16, 2007 5:04:39 PM

You'll definitely be CPU limited. I am with my P4 3.0E and my X1950Pro. Still though, I went from an X850Pro to an X1950Pro and saw a lot of improvement.
!