Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New video card for a Pentium4 3.0Ghz (Ati 4670?)

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
December 30, 2009 8:41:36 PM

Hi guys, i recetly had some problems with the pc, it seems that the old graphic card (Club3D Nvidia 6600GT) has passed away. This is my configuration:

Motherboard: Intel D915GEV

CPU: Intel Pentium 4 3.00Ghz

Ram: 1500mb (espandibile)

Monitor: Samsung SyncMaster 795MB (CRT) 17"

Power Supply: S-Tech 500W 12C, Output Current: +12V1= Min 1A, Max 18A ; +12V2= Min 0,5A, Max 18A

......following other suggestions, i was looking for the ATI cards 4650HD or 4670HD.

- First, do you think that a card like the 4670 will be well supported by the system or it will be under-used (bottleneck)?

- Second, do you think that my power supply will support well the new card, or a new power supply is recommended?

Thanks.... ;) 
a b U Graphics card
December 30, 2009 9:04:14 PM

The 4670 or 4650 are about the highest that make sense for your system. Even they might be bottlenecked a little bit, but if they do, so what -- they'll still max out your system and it's not like you spent a ton of money. I'd personally rather risk wasting the extra $20 than end up with a card I wasn't happy with by trying to pinpoint the exact point where I'd encounter a bottleneck. In any case, you'll be close and those cards are a good choice.

And yes, that power supply is more than enough to run either card. It'll run 4800 or 5700 series cards, for that matter.
December 30, 2009 9:18:55 PM

capt_taco said:
The 4670 or 4650 are about the highest that make sense for your system. Even they might be bottlenecked a little bit, but if they do, so what -- they'll still max out your system and it's not like you spent a ton of money. I'd personally rather risk wasting the extra $20 than end up with a card I wasn't happy with by trying to pinpoint the exact point where I'd encounter a bottleneck. In any case, you'll be close and those cards are a good choice.

And yes, that power supply is more than enough to run either card. It'll run 4800 or 5700 series cards, for that matter.


Thank you capt_taco, i'm almost decided for the 4670HD 512gb that i can find at around 57€ here in Italy......i think it will be a decent improvement for the system over the old 6600gt.

Concerning the doubt about the power supply, it's because some people told me that is better to replace it with a good power supply, like Corsair 450W, mainly due to the difference in ampere (at 12V)...mine has 18A maximum, the Corsair 30A....but i'm not very expert about that tecnhical issues.....and the power supply is another 50€..... :sarcastic: 
Related resources
December 30, 2009 9:40:28 PM

the hd 4670 will be bottlenecked by most dual cores, i can play gta 4 with 4670 with x3 710 at very high settings, arma 2 at nearly nearly very high, resident evil 5 maximum, you will not be able to feel its true power without a good processor, and i run it on HEC 300w 12v/22a ( total ) with no problems.

before x3 710 i had core 2 duo e6300 but it was much slower ( in cpu bound engines ) than now.
a b U Graphics card
December 30, 2009 9:46:40 PM

The 4670 512MB is cheap enough that the slight bottleneck won't matter.
December 30, 2009 9:50:30 PM

not slight the difference in benchmark was from 22.5 avarage in resident evil 5 to 44.5, in GTA 4 from 25 ( at 20 % quality ) to 42 ( at 70 % quality ), dragon age origins from 27 to 40, mass effect from 33 to 43, maybe some older games but not new ones.
a b U Graphics card
December 30, 2009 9:51:31 PM

What's the test bench?
Where's the benchmark.
December 30, 2009 10:06:28 PM

my tests thats why i changed the processor, and here some benchmarks of the processor effects ( my e6300 is on edge with lower end pentium dual cores and amd athlon x2 4000 and x3 710 is 5-7 % slower than x3 720) :

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,690488/Processor-ben...

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,669595/GTA-4-PC-CPU-...

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,688240/Prototype-CPU...

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,687620/ArmA-2-tested...

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,699110/Left-4-Dead-2...

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,698761/Dragon-Age-Or...

and here's the comparison from tomshardware :

x3 710 vs athlon 2.7 ( = core 2 duo 2.4 not even low 1.86 )

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2009-desktop-cpu-cha...

e6300 vs q6600 ( x3 710 on par with it most the time

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q...)

a b U Graphics card
December 30, 2009 10:16:32 PM

sabot00 said:
The 4670 512MB is cheap enough that the slight bottleneck won't matter.


That was my point too. If you downgrade to a lower-performance card ... congratulations, you might have saved $25. Not worth it to me. As long as you're not trying to run a $200 graphics card in a system this old, you've got the right idea as far as I'm concerned. You're trying to get in the right ballpark, not pin down the bottleneck point precisely.

To the OP: I wouldn't worry about the difference in amps on the PSU. The 4670 consumes so little power that it's not likely to come into play.

One more thing -- even if the CPU does bottleneck the video card, it's probably possible to squeeze another 5-10% performance out of the CPU by overclocking, if you're comfortable attempting that. Might as well, since it doesn't cost anything.
December 30, 2009 10:21:30 PM

i think he needs a really low card ( 3600-2600 or 4550 series ) for now and a whole upgrade later ( i had x1950pro before 4670 and i didnt feel the processor bottleneck of e6300 like with hd 4670 ), and i think he will only game at lower resolution ( 800x600 - 1024x768 max. --- 6600gt ) so no need for 4600.
a b U Graphics card
December 30, 2009 10:44:12 PM

Yeah, but a 4600 card doesn't hurt anything. And since you can get a 4650 for like $40 when they're on sale, my thought is you might as well at least get that.
December 30, 2009 10:47:20 PM

if they are 40 ok, but he will miss some of its strength when comparing cpu bound to gpu bound games this is my opinion ( what i felt with 4670-e6300 days not x1950-e6300 ), any way its his choise let him read this forums then decide.
a b U Graphics card
December 30, 2009 11:04:52 PM

capt_taco said:
The 4670 or 4650 are about the highest that make sense for your system. Even they might be bottlenecked a little bit, but if they do, so what -- they'll still max out your system and it's not like you spent a ton of money. I'd personally rather risk wasting the extra $20 than end up with a card I wasn't happy with by trying to pinpoint the exact point where I'd encounter a bottleneck. In any case, you'll be close and those cards are a good choice.

And yes, that power supply is more than enough to run either card. It'll run 4800 or 5700 series cards, for that matter.


sabot00 said:
The 4670 512MB is cheap enough that the slight bottleneck won't matter.


sabot00 said:
What's the test bench?
Where's the benchmark.


capt_taco said:
That was my point too. If you downgrade to a lower-performance card ... congratulations, you might have saved $25. Not worth it to me. As long as you're not trying to run a $200 graphics card in a system this old, you've got the right idea as far as I'm concerned. You're trying to get in the right ballpark, not pin down the bottleneck point precisely.

To the OP: I wouldn't worry about the difference in amps on the PSU. The 4670 consumes so little power that it's not likely to come into play.

One more thing -- even if the CPU does bottleneck the video card, it's probably possible to squeeze another 5-10% performance out of the CPU by overclocking, if you're comfortable attempting that. Might as well, since it doesn't cost anything.



NOBODY with a Pentium 4 based system needs to upgrade anything except perhaps their ram at this point.
The netburst architecture is extremely inefficient in every way.

The core architecture (Conroe design, the E6300 being a good example) gives more than double the performance per clock of a Pentium 4 while consuming far less power and generating a fraction of the heat. This is only per core. A 1 Ghz Core 2 Duo is the equivalent of a 5 Ghz Pentium 4 not including code enhancements from SSSE3 and SSE4. And that is only for the original Core 2s, the 45nm Penryn design increased performance per clock even more and consumed even less power.

Now Core 2 is being phased out (slowly but surely starting in January) and Core i7,5,3 is taking the performance and efficiency crown. Netburst is DEAD. Stop flogging a dead horse and telling people to buy things they don't need.

capt_taco said:
Yeah, but a 4600 card doesn't hurt anything. And since you can get a 4650 for like $40 when they're on sale, my thought is you might as well at least get that.


Although in this case with the 4650 being so cheap (if it is on sale) and his original card being dead an exception can be made :whistle: 
a b U Graphics card
December 30, 2009 11:37:32 PM

That is theoretical performance, overclock a Pentium 4 to 4GHz, downclock a C2D to 800MHz and compare.
Look at the benchmarks, you never get the theoretical power.

December 30, 2009 11:47:10 PM

no the core 2 duo ( at 1066 bus ) = 2x the performance of pentium ( for core 2 core not a dual core core 2 duo vs single core pentium ) which means pentium d at 3ghz/4mb cache = core 2 duo at 1.5 ghz/4mb cache ( take in your mind the difference of the cache memory 10-15 % according to application ) so pentium d 3ghz = core 2 duo at 1.65-1.7 ghz/2mb cache and my older e6300 (1550 3dmark 2006 cpu score )= pentium d 3.4ghz/4mb cache ( 1650 3dmark 2006 cpu score ) in most real life applications at 1.5 the price of pentium d ( i have seen it with my eyes in manual test ), dont be fooled by new names.
a b U Graphics card
December 30, 2009 11:48:11 PM

Pentium D is dual core, 2 P4's on one die, just like the C2Q's.
December 30, 2009 11:52:06 PM

pentium d = 2x pentium 4 ( not the hyperthreading versions ), core 2 duo = 2 core 2 solo on one chip, the same core 2 quad = 4 core 2 solo on one chip ( pentium 1-4 and core 1 and core 2 are the series names representing a new architecture and not because it is core 2 it is 2 cores or the pentium 4 must be 4 cores ), core duo i heard its name ( before core 2 duo ) in few servers and handbooks.
a b U Graphics card
December 30, 2009 11:56:47 PM

dualblade said:
pentium d = 2x pentium 4 ( not the hyperthreading versions ), core 2 duo = 2 core 2 solo on one chip, the same core 2 quad = 4 core 2 solo on one chip ( pentium 1-4 and core 1 and core 2 are the series names representing a new architecture and not because it is core 2 it is 2 cores or the pentium 4 must be 4 cores ), core duo i heard its name ( before core 2 duo ) in few servers and handbooks.


Sorry, but I've gotta correct you on this one.

Pentium D = Two Pentium 4 chips sitting on the same block.
Core Duo = Two Core Solo chips sitting on the same block.
Core 2 Duo = True dual core cpu with both of the cores in one chip.
Core 2 Quad = Two Core 2 Duos sitting on the same block.
Core i5, i7 = True quad core cpu with all 4 cores in one chip.
December 31, 2009 12:06:20 AM

edeawillrule said:
Sorry, but I've gotta correct you on this one.

Pentium D = Two Pentium 4 chips sitting on the same block.
Core Duo = Two Core Solo chips sitting on the same block.
Core 2 Duo = True dual core cpu with both of the cores in one chip.
Core 2 Quad = Two Core 2 Duos sitting on the same block.
Core i5, i7 = True quad core cpu with all 4 cores in one chip.


you are correct, maybe i didnt write it correct but this is what i meant, and the difference between core 2 architecture and core ix architecture ( in performance ), is nearly the difference between the amd athlon and phenom.
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 12:17:12 AM

svarionman said:
Hi guys, i recetly had some problems with the pc, it seems that the old graphic card (Club3D Nvidia 6600GT) has passed away. This is my configuration:

Motherboard: Intel D915GEV

CPU: Intel Pentium 4 3.00Ghz

Ram: 1500mb (espandibile)

Monitor: Samsung SyncMaster 795MB (CRT) 17"

Power Supply: S-Tech 500W 12C, Output Current: +12V1= Min 1A, Max 18A ; +12V2= Min 0,5A, Max 18A

......following other suggestions, i was looking for the ATI cards 4650HD or 4670HD.

- First, do you think that a card like the 4670 will be well supported by the system or it will be under-used (bottleneck)?

- Second, do you think that my power supply will support well the new card, or a new power supply is recommended?

Thanks.... ;) 


It should work fine, and if your PSU has 2 12vlt 18a rails it should also work ok.
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 1:50:22 AM

dualblade said:
pentium d = 2x pentium 4 ( not the hyperthreading versions ), core 2 duo = 2 core 2 solo on one chip, the same core 2 quad = 4 core 2 solo on one chip ( pentium 1-4 and core 1 and core 2 are the series names representing a new architecture and not because it is core 2 it is 2 cores or the pentium 4 must be 4 cores ), core duo i heard its name ( before core 2 duo ) in few servers and handbooks.


Theoretically a Pentium D = 2x Pentium 4 (Hyperthreading versions is the Pentium 4 HT) but the normal Pentium 4 is extremely bandwidth hungry, forcing 2 Pentium 4's into sharing the same bus is horrible.
December 31, 2009 1:56:07 AM

Quote:
go for the 9800GT or the GTS 250, or HD 4850. Those 3 GPUs are perfect for your PSU


if he wants high graphics card the hd 4670 is much better for him ( price for performance ), it gives almost the 9800gt performance in a lot of modern games.
December 31, 2009 1:57:18 AM

sabot00 said:
Theoretically a Pentium D = 2x Pentium 4 (Hyperthreading versions is the Pentium 4 HT) but the normal Pentium 4 is extremely bandwidth hungry, forcing 2 Pentium 4's into sharing the same bus is horrible.


yes i know but i didnt write it HT because there is another HT in amd processors ( hyper transport ).
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 1:58:33 AM

But there's no Pentium 4 in AMD.
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 1:59:21 AM

Guys you're getting kind of off topic. With the cards being as cheap as they are it won't really hurt the OP at all to get either one.
December 31, 2009 2:13:29 AM

sabot00 said:
But there's no Pentium 4 in AMD.


i am not saying Pentium 4 i am saying hypertransport has the same HT letters like intels pentium 4.
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 2:23:19 AM

@okini, depends on what game/setting/resolution, the 4670 & 9600GT seem to trade blows, but overall the 9600GT wins.

@dualblade, if you said Pentium 4 HT, no one would think of HyperTransport as that is AMD CPU's & the Pentium is Intel

@anonymousdude, that is what I have said, it's so cheap that it won't matter

@OP get a 4550/4650/4670, which ever one you find a good deal on or happens to catch your eye.
December 31, 2009 2:26:04 AM

Quote:
Nah, the 9600GT beats the HD 4670 BUT they are almost equal. I think 9800GT would take down HD 4670 easily. (I THINK)


i compared my hd 4670 with 8800gt ( from youtube users not some fake internet reviews and compared it to 9600gt of my friend ), and i found out thet it equals 8800gt or beat 9600gt in:

dragon age origins
gta 4
resident evil 5
hawx
left 4 dead 2 demo
arma 2 demo
bioshock
mirrors edge ( with AA )
call of juarez dx10 benchmark
mass effect stalker cs dx10
company oif heroes dx10
risen demo
burnout paradise ( with ssao )

and equals 9600gt in :

call of duty 4-6
batman
dirt 2 demo
race driver grid
world in conflict demo
stalker dx9
assassins creed
fear 2
fallout 3
crysis ( gameplay not benchmark - snow level )

and beaten ny 9600gt in :
borderlands
call of juarez dx9
fear 1
last remnant ( benchmark and not gameplay )

i had 8800gts 320mb ( equals 9600gso = 85-90 % 9600gt ) before 4670 and i was surprised with the difference in performance ( 20 - 50 % ) over 8800gts.
December 31, 2009 2:28:01 AM

sabot00 said:
@okini, depends on what game/setting/resolution, the 4670 & 9600GT seem to trade blows, but overall the 9600GT wins.

@dualblade, if you said Pentium 4 HT, no one would think of HyperTransport as that is AMD CPU's & the Pentium is Intel

@anonymousdude, that is what I have said, it's so cheap that it won't matter

@OP get a 4550/4650/4670, which ever one you find a good deal on or happens to catch your eye.


no problem, and for 4670 it beats 9600gt more than it was just released, see my previous comment.
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 2:57:04 AM

Quote:
go for the 9800GT or the GTS 250, or HD 4850. Those 3 GPUs are perfect for your PSU


*facepalm* The most powerful gpu this OP needs is a 4650, 4670 tops. Did you not see the Pentium 4?
a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 6:17:10 AM

dualblade said:
i compared my hd 4670 with 8800gt ( from youtube users not some fake internet reviews and compared it to 9600gt of my friend ), and i found out thet it equals 8800gt or beat 9600gt in:

dragon age origins
gta 4
resident evil 5
hawx
left 4 dead 2 demo
arma 2 demo
bioshock
mirrors edge ( with AA )
call of juarez dx10 benchmark
mass effect stalker cs dx10
company oif heroes dx10
risen demo
burnout paradise ( with ssao )

and equals 9600gt in :

call of duty 4-6
batman
dirt 2 demo
race driver grid
world in conflict demo
stalker dx9
assassins creed
fear 2
fallout 3
crysis ( gameplay not benchmark - snow level )

and beaten ny 9600gt in :
borderlands
call of juarez dx9
fear 1
last remnant ( benchmark and not gameplay )

i had 8800gts 320mb ( equals 9600gso = 85-90 % 9600gt ) before 4670 and i was surprised with the difference in performance ( 20 - 50 % ) over 8800gts.



What resolution were these benchmarks done at? Also what is the full specs on the rigs used to test this because some of these games are CPU bound.
December 31, 2009 7:36:54 AM

Thank you guys.. ;)  ....
So i understand that a 4670 can be a bit underused but, as somebody said, it's quite cheap so i don't mind of spending 10€ more in this case.......to improve the system i know that the whole motherboard and CPU should be raplaced, but i think that it's another type of cost (around 250€ to get something good?) so i think that for now the graphic card will be good and later, if i will have the necessity to upgrade motherboard+PCU, i'll still have a decent card for normal use.....as you understand i'm just a casual gamer and, for now, i really don't mind too much about high resolutions or heavy games.

Anyway, do you think that it will be a big graphic improvement for my system with a 4650/4670 instead of the old 6600GT?
December 31, 2009 12:51:46 PM

anonymousdude said:
What resolution were these benchmarks done at? Also what is the full specs on the rigs used to test this because some of these games are CPU bound.


several systems ( not only mine ) i will send you the benchmark links and numbers ( with system used ) soon, i will get the number from my friends any send them ?

test resolution 1440x900 - 1280x1024 ( mosr the time )

a b U Graphics card
December 31, 2009 2:46:48 PM

svarionman said:
Thank you guys.. ;)  ....
So i understand that a 4670 can be a bit underused but, as somebody said, it's quite cheap so i don't mind of spending 10€ more in this case.......to improve the system i know that the whole motherboard and CPU should be raplaced, but i think that it's another type of cost (around 250€ to get something good?) so i think that for now the graphic card will be good and later, if i will have the necessity to upgrade motherboard+PCU, i'll still have a decent card for normal use.....as you understand i'm just a casual gamer and, for now, i really don't mind too much about high resolutions or heavy games.

Anyway, do you think that it will be a big graphic improvement for my system with a 4650/4670 instead of the old 6600GT?


Yep it'll still be a huge improvement from that 6600 GT :]
!