Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

9800GX2 FPS perfomance

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 7, 2008 8:09:22 PM

Hello out there you guys!
I upgraded my graphic card a few days ago, from a X1900XTX card to a 9800GX2.

System specs:
AMD 4800+ 64 X2 processor, socket 939
ASUS A8R-MVP, with 4x1GB Samsung DDR-400 memmory modules.
CLUB3D 9800GX2
160GB Seagate SATA drive
Antec True Power 1000W
Dell 30" 3007WFP LCD panel

I usually play Call of Duty 2 & 4, and Oblivion in 1280x800 resolution, but with very limited added effects, if none at all to reach max. FPS.

After I installed this card, I continued with the current settings on the games to see in reality what more I got out of the new card. I must admit I'm pretty dissapointed at the moment. It seems like my old X1900XTX card ran better then the new 9800GX2 card with the exact same effect and resolution settings.

The new 9800GX2 card seems to struggle a lot, when I'm in close combat with others, when there's many players on the same server, and in open spaces. I've thought of upgrading to a newer processor, board, and memmory, because I suspect that bottlenecks are accuring in my current system now, could this be a fact?

It strikes me ass odd, that with the old card, even though I had "crappy" settings set on the effect side, it seemed to perform very well.

More about : 9800gx2 fps perfomance

May 7, 2008 8:49:35 PM

did u make sure that u uninstalled ALL ati product drivers prior to install. that can make a differince. im running a 9800GX2 on a E1200 ( duel core celeron*) in 64bit vista at 1920X1080 and i rarely run into huge bumps. nut ram might do it to.

*still waiting on a Q9450
a b U Graphics card
May 7, 2008 9:27:37 PM

You are totally CPU limited playing 1280x800 no fsaa with that CPU and video card. AT least crank 4xaa/16xaf if you can't up the resolution.

Not really sure on the COD's, but parts of Oblivion are very CPU intensive. AT your resolution, an X2 4800 would have a hard time keeping up with a single 8800GS never mind the beastly GX2. If you enable 4xaa/16xaf (force them in the nv drivers so you can run HDR) you will probably see the GX2 pull ahead of the X1900XTX outside in the foliage. Around towns it's not going to happen though.

Tou are in effect running G92 SLI, and with that and especially your CPU, it comes down to increasing resolution and/or maximizing the eye candy (AA/AF) to take advantage of SLI. Otherwise keeping your old settings, even your X1900XTX was CPU bound in many parts of Oblivion.
Related resources
May 7, 2008 9:30:44 PM

I did make an uninstall ALL ati producct driver before installing 9800GX2, but not without problems. Running XP btw. It said it couldn't initialize the driver uninstallment, but uninstalled anyway.

Wondering, if I should re-install from the bottom up to see if it makes the difference. Actually something I'll do right now, because it's kindoff slow anyway!

It's funny, I'm waiting for the Q9450 processor aswell, allready have my new motherboard ready. Guess they fly like hotcakes at the moment!
a b U Graphics card
May 7, 2008 9:32:43 PM

Check out my Oblivion charts in this thread.
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/246603-33-overclocked...

I used an Asrock 939 dual sata II system with 3 cpus (only two listed there) and found the Town to be totally CPU limited on the average and minimum fps and a simple stock clocked 8800GS. The Foliage was both CPU and GPU limited at lower res and GPU limited at high res. Your card is 3 times the card that 8800GS is or more.
May 7, 2008 9:59:52 PM

Hi Paul!
If understand correctly, you're saying I would benefit from a faster CPU.

We're not talking miracle FPS results, but a faster CPU would do a lot better in intensive areas (towns, action packed places), where my current CPU seems to struggle, and therefore give of lower FPS score, almost at an laggy/choppy experience?
a b U Graphics card
May 7, 2008 10:07:26 PM

u need a new cpu and ram! ur setup complete bottleneck for a 9800gx2. My q6600 @ 3.0gz seems like a bottleneck to my 9800gx2.
if ur interested in a cpu go with a e8400 or a q6600 there really cheap i believe they can be found under 200 i got my q6600 for 196$
a b U Graphics card
May 7, 2008 10:12:19 PM

Yes, for sure an e8400/Q6600 card would give you massive performance increases. Your card is not breaking a sweat right now. The cpu intensive areas you will currently struggle with both cards. Oblivion Towns, Lots of NPC's, Crysis large AI battles, lots of physics effects, flight sims, large scale RTS games, etc. It could possibly offer maybe 4 times the fps you are seeing at 12x8 res if it was paired with a killer CPU.

But to best take advantage of the GX2, you would want 16x10 res or higher, and to enable fsaa. Basically get the added eye candy/ IQ you payed for. So a new CPU and/or new higher res monitor is what that GX2 is craving.
a b U Graphics card
May 7, 2008 10:16:58 PM

Quote:
Def need to upgrade that CPU. Im about to move to a E8500 C2D from a 6000+. Also waiting on the next gen 9900 GTX card due the summer replacing my 8800 GTS 640.

Do you think the e8500 is worth $80 more than the e8400? Are you planning to try and go beyond 4.0GHz?
May 7, 2008 10:18:51 PM

invisik said:
u need a new cpu and ram! ur setup complete bottleneck for a 9800gx2. My q6600 @ 3.0gz seems like a bottleneck to my 9800gx2.
if ur interested in a cpu go with a e8400 or a q6600 there really cheap i believe they can be found under 200 i got my q6600 for 196$



Definately upgrade cpu. Ram isn't so much a bottleneck. 400 is low, but there are 4gb of it, more than enough to aviod using page file from hdd. Even the slowest ram far outruns the fastest hdd, and people with less ram that ended up using page file didn't get such bad bottlenecking. It's the cpu, not ram. Although if you're getting a new system, dump the obsolete ram. :p 

Also, q6600 @ 3.0ghz is nowhere nearly slow enough to bottleneck 9800gx2. Next time you run any game, have a cpu utilization graph recorded and you'll see just how light the cpu load there is even on 100% gpu load with 9800gx2.

So yeah, you do not need a q6600 or e8400. Much less powerful cpu will do to aviod the bottleneck.

Btw, both e8400 and e8500 both easily go beyond 4.0ghz, assuming no fsb bottleneck.
May 7, 2008 10:23:46 PM

I had a sneaking suspicion this was the case, that a newer system was needed, to reap the full benefits of this card.

My plans are a Q9450 CPU, 2x2GB g.skill DDR2 PC-8500, ASUS Striker II Formula motherboard! Should be very interesting what the outcome of that we be.
May 7, 2008 10:25:45 PM

I will follow up this thread, when a newer system is installed.
a b U Graphics card
May 7, 2008 10:29:27 PM

dagger said:
Definately upgrade cpu. Ram isn't so much a bottleneck. 400 is low, but there are 4gb of it, more than enough to aviod using page file from hdd. Even the slowest ram far outruns the fastest hdd, and people with less ram that ended up using page file didn't get such bad bottlenecking. It's the cpu, not ram. Although if you're getting a new system, dump the obsolete ram. :p 

Also, q6600 @ 3.0ghz is nowhere nearly slow enough to bottleneck 9800gx2. Next time you run any game, have a cpu utilization graph recorded and you'll see just how light the cpu load there is even on 100% gpu load with 9800gx2.

So yeah, you do not need a q6600 or e8400. Much less powerful cpu will do to aviod the bottleneck.

Btw, both e8400 and e8500 both easily go beyond 4.0ghz, assuming no fsb bottleneck.



well i think 400mhz is slow. i once underclocked my ram from 800 to 400 and i lost a good amount of fps close to like 5-9 on games.
And i read somewhere that the q6600 was even a lil bottleneck in some review. i set my q6600 stock speed and compared it to a overclock to 3.0ghz and my 3mark went up a good 350-400 points and i gained as much as 4-5fps. idk maybe 5fps might not seem much to some ppl but i appreciate every extra fps i can squeeze out of m machine. lol
May 7, 2008 10:38:30 PM

I'm sorry, but I had to post. Am I the only person here that noticed he's running a 30" Dell LCD @ 12X10??? That has to look like hell.

As far as the GX2 is concerned, I have to say the same as above. The card is most definitely bottlenecked by the CPU. Your system will scream with a new Q9450 and some good ram. Keep us posted.
a b U Graphics card
May 7, 2008 10:57:24 PM

LOL, I saw the 12x8 res, but missed the 30" Dell. it shouldn't look like crap though at 1/4 pixel of native and no interpolating.

Edit, now I'd like to see his 12x8 vs native 25x16 results to see if the GX2 can still keep up with the CPU.
a b U Graphics card
May 7, 2008 11:23:28 PM

30'' dell wtf y u running at 12x10 lmao
ill give u my 22'' 1680x1050 acer for ur 30'' 12x10 dell.
xD
May 8, 2008 3:54:31 AM

LOL you guys!

I'm more than well aware that 1280x800 resolution, isn't all that pretty.
Hence why I bought 9800GX2 to "justify" my 30" LCD panel in games, by bringing the games up to at least 1920x1200 resolution!
a b U Graphics card
May 8, 2008 11:39:06 AM

Try testing games (not 3dmarks) at your 12x8 low res vs 19x12 and 25x16 and see if there is a difference in framerates. If not, it's a cpu limitation at all resolutions.
May 9, 2008 11:50:28 PM

Hi again!
I've upgraded my system, and I improved the gaming experience by a long shot. I must admit, I'm quite astonished!

New system specs:
Intel Core 2 Duo Quad - Q6660 CPU
ASUS Striker II Formula
4x1GB Samsung DDR2 PC-6400 memmory modules.
CLUB3D 9800GX2
160GB Seagate SATA drive
Antec True Power 1000W
Dell 30" 3007WFP LCD panel

Call of Duty 2 Multi Player -> 1280x800, max. effects, no AA -> avg. 230 FPS
Call of Duty 2 Multi Player -> 1920x1200, max effects, 4xAA -> avg. 150 FPS
Call of Duty 2 Multi Player -> 2560x1200, max effects, 4xAA -> avg. 70 FPS (Mouse gets very laggy)

Call of Duty 4 - Modern Warfare Multi Player -> 1920x1200, max effects, 4xAA -> avg. 90-100 FPS!

The FPS score are rough estimates! But it's mind blowingly beautyfull now, and very fluid.
Oblivion -> 1920x1200, max effects, max. all settings, AAx8 -> 30-50 (in towns) 40-60 FPS Outside towns... i'm blown away!

I have a feeling that the 9800GX2 could push the FPS even further, coupled with a even better processor. Truely amazing gaming experience, I must admit.

Thanks for the advice... I really gotta game now, I'm hooked :D 
a b U Graphics card
May 10, 2008 3:14:23 AM

;) 

Someones got themselves a new gaming beast. Enjoy the eye candy!


BTW, if you truely think the GX2 has room to go further, the Q6600 can really growl itself once you OC it up over 3.0GHz.
May 10, 2008 1:58:38 PM

Yes pauldh, you're right!
My thoughts exactly, about overclocking the CPU.
But I need to do some research, about how overclocking is done properly. Had a horrific experience overclocking a long time ago on a 486 DX 60 MHz (I'm old in the game), so I've stayed my ground and keept stock speeds ever since, not willing to push the envolope.

I bought a Zalman 9700 LED cooler, and It's cool to the touch, so there are definately possibilities.

I guess I'll have to snoop around here on Tomshardware, to know my way around overclocking.

Best regards,

Eizo
a b U Graphics card
May 10, 2008 2:33:47 PM

:)  Ut oh. Yeah, I'm an old timer too. Used to jumper OC early pentiums like P75 to P90. or P166 to P200. It was so easy, why not. My real overclocking addiction started with the Celeron 300a which was a beast for it's day running 464MHz. (simple 103 bus). My lil' $130 chip ran with the $800-1000 cutting edge PII 450. That was all it it took to become an OC'er. ;)  Then picked up a cheap C266 that ran 400 or even 412 no problem. I soon had 4 overclocked Slot one machines on a home LAN for gaming. Ah, the good old days. Later on, in the Socket A times, The noise level of some of my systems got old and I mellowed to quiet gaming vs max OC. Now given the right cooling budget you can have both of course.

Anyway, if in doubt, Best to read up on it then. Hit the OC forum and check the FAQ. My Q6600 runs 3.0GHz at stock voltage with the retail fan. Not sure how high it will go as I don't want load temps over 60 degrees, so I need better cooling before going higher.


Nice cooler BTW. I have a Zalman 9500 LED I plan to try and use since sitting around. Haven't desired to yank the mobo to try it yet. (too many unfinished projects going)
May 11, 2008 8:02:44 PM

The really was the good old days!!!
Then again it's not that bad anyway either, with the prizes for a new system by today standards, compared by the early days. Ouch you seriously needed to reach deep in your wallet to upgrade or by a complete new system.

Thanks for the heads up! I'll definately have a look in the OC forum FAQ, and start messing around :D 
!