Download the Tom's Hardware App from the App Store
The reference for current tech news
Yes No
Ads
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Graphics & Displays > Graphics Cards > Hardware Mystery: GTX470 not performing much better than GTS250?

Hardware Mystery: GTX470 not performing much better than GTS250?

Forum Graphics & Displays : Graphics Cards Hardware Mystery: GTX470 not performing much better than GTS250?

Word :    Username :           
 

Hello TomsHardware community, I am posting for the first time here in hopes that maybe you guys can identify my problem.

Here is my story...

Last week, these were my system specs:

CPU: Intel Core2Duo e6850 Dual Core Processor 3.0 GHz
Power Supply: NZXT PP800 800 watt power supply
Motherboard: Asus P5NE-SLI
Video Card: BFG NVidia GTS 250 1GB
Memory: 3GB PC2-6400 DDR2-800 RAM (2x 1GB Corsair, 1x 1gb GSKILL)
HDD: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 7200RPM
Windows 7 Professional 64bit


With these specs, I wasn't satisfied with the performance in games like Battlefield: Bad Company 2, GTA 4, and All Points Bulletin. I would regularly get framerates in the low 20s during heavy load situations, and thought that now would be a good time to upgrade.
I went ahead and bought an NVidia Gigabyte GTX 470 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125320&cm_re=gigabyte_gtx_470-_-14-125-320-_-Product) because it was on sale and I had a coupon code to reduce the price further.

When it arrived last Wednesday, I eagerly replaced my GTS 250 and installed in its place the huge GTX 470. I installed the drivers from the packaged CD and booted up a few games to test out its performance. I ran Bad Company 2, cranked the settings to high at DX11 1680x1050 (but with anti-aliasing and HBAO disabled) and expected to be greeted with silky smooth 50+ FPS even during intense battles. This was far from the case. Intense battles would regularly dip to around 25fps, sometimes even 21, 22.

Disappointed, but knowing that BC2 is a pretty CPU intensive game, I quit out and ran Dawn of War 2. I set the graphics to high, no anti aliasing, and ran the benchmark in the options menu. Max FPS was in the 90s, average FPS was around 40, and lowest FPS was 15! Surely there is something holding the card back.

I went ahead and tested out GTA4, and got the same unsatisfactory results. The lowest framerates were in the low 20s. I reduced the settings to low, just to see how much smoother it would be. It was not much smoother at all, minimum FPS was still in the 30s.

At this point I was thinking that it had to be my CPU bottlenecking the card. After talking with some friends who are pretty knowledgeable in PC hardware, they agreed, and I could get a good deal on an Intel Core2Quad Q9550 2.83 GHz CPU at Microcenter. I went ahead and purchased one, and installed it when I got home. Booted up those same games expecting to see a boost in performance, but only saw slight boosts in fps. In DOW2, minimum FPS was still something like 16-18. BC2 saw an FPS boost of around 3-5 fps. and GTA4 saw a boost of the same. By now I was quite disappointed, thinking maybe it wasn't the CPU bottlenecking to begin with.

I started talking with a few of my friends to compare performance and hardware. One of them has:

Intel Dual Core E8400 3.0 GHz
Windows XP 32bit
4GB DDR3 RAM
ATI HD5850

His DOW2 benchmark with the same graphics settings as me reads something like
Maximum FPS:120
Average FPS: 60
Minimum FPS: 30+
By comparison, I now have a Q9550 and a GTX470 running a minimum FPS of 16...


Another friend has:

AMD Phenom x4 running at around 3.2 GHz (not sure what the exact model is)
4GB DDR3 RAM
Windows 7 Professional 64bit
ATI HD5770

He says he runs BC2 with silky smooth FPS on DX11, high settings except shadows on medium. By silky he means 50+ FPS all the time. Another frield has a GTS250 and even he runs BC2 smoother than my system (on medium though. Even if I set mine to medium I would still not meet up to his performance).

It is also worth mentioning that my Asus P5N-E SLI motherboard does not "officially" support the Q9550. Something about not taking advantage of the the 45nm architecture. When I first installed the CPU, the bios only read 2.00 GHz. Others have reported that the board can detect the full 2.83 GHz but only after updating the bios to the latest version and setting the multiplier from 6 to 8.5. I did this and the bios now reads the full 2.83 GHz. Curiously though, when I ran PassMark it only reported around 2500-2600 MHz

I guess to boil this post down, I am asking "Why is my FPS so low compared to other computers with lesser specs?" The only thing I am lacking in is RAM and maybe motherboard. After a week of testing, tweaking, and research and finding no solutions, I am stumped. I uninstalled drivers, reinstalled drivers, reinstalled windows, all to no avail. Some people tell me that my motherboard, which is pretty old, may be holding it all back. Other people tell me that the motherboard should not have a significant impact on performance at all. Maybe my slow RAM is holding things back? I don't know. Please help! Any answers could potentially help my situation. If nothing works, I think I'm just going to return the video card...

My current specs:
CPU: Intel Core2Quad Q9550 Quad Core Processor 2.83 GHz
Power Supply: NZXT PP800 800 watt power supply
Motherboard: Asus P5NE-SLI
Video Card: Gigabyte NVidia GTX 470
Memory: 3GB PC2-6400 DDR2-800 RAM (2x 1GB Corsair, 1x 1gb GSKILL)
HDD: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 7200RPM
Windows 7 Professional 64bit


Message edited by wu05 on 06-28-2010 at 03:18:18 AM
Register or log in to remove.

I suggest upgrading the ram to minimum 4Gb (looks like you are running out of ram 4 Gb is considered min for 64bit) and see if that changes things.

Reply to rolli59

Does Task Manager show all four cores and are you using the 258.19 driver (which is the latest)?

------------------------------ http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/3995/bl11.gif
Reply to Mousemonkey

Task Manager does indeed show all four cores. During gaming sessions, HW Monitor shows temperatures increase in all four cores, so I assume the CPU is working fine. I am using the latest drivers as of last night for the GTX 470. I believe the driver is named 257.21

Reply to wu05

As rolli59 pointed out, 4GB of RAM is kind of required for W7 64 (my install is currently using 1.7GB just doing 2D stuff!) and the drivers for the 4 series are evolving quickly so it might be worth giving the 258.19's a go but get some more RAM as well even though DDR2 is a tad expensive now.

------------------------------ http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/3995/bl11.gif
Reply to Mousemonkey

Thank you for your responses Rilli59 and MouseMonkey. But do you really think that getting more ram will make such a huge difference in game performance? If RAM is a legitimate and significant factor in framerate, then I may consider upgrading it later this week.


Message edited by wu05 on 06-28-2010 at 03:44:21 AM
Reply to wu05

Having had a go at running W7 64 on 128MB of RAM (I was bored at the time) I can honestly say that a 64bit OS uses RAM in a different manner to a 32bit OS, so yes it will make a difference.

------------------------------ http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/3995/bl11.gif
Reply to Mousemonkey

Have you checked out what gpu-z is reporting ?
use the internal screenshot function (the little camera)and u/l to their free server and post here.
I'm pretty sure your m/b is pci-e 1.0, lets see if the card is running at full speed.
[**IMG]http://gpuz.techpowerup.com/10/06/27/7g6.png[/IMG]
http://gpuz.techpowerup.com/10/06/27/7g6.png


Message edited by notty22 on 06-28-2010 at 03:51:44 AM
Reply to notty22

Here is a screenshot of my GPU-Z

http://gpuz.techpowerup.com/10/06/27/403.png

PsychoSaysDie: Are you sure? Specs say 45nm. This is what I have

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] -_-Product

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by wu05 on 06-28-2010 at 04:13:20 AM
Reply to wu05

wu05 wrote :

Here is a screenshot of my GPU-Z

http://gpuz.techpowerup.com/10/06/27/403.png

PsychoSaysDie: Are you sure? Specs say 45nm. This is what I have

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] -_-Product


Take no notice of him he's just jealous( :kaola: @ PsychoSaysDie), I have one of those together with an E8400 and both of them can still kick botty.

------------------------------ http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/3995/bl11.gif
Reply to Mousemonkey

PsychoSaysdie wrote :

Model
Brand Intel
Processors Type Desktop
Series Core 2 Duo
Model BX80557E6850
CPU Socket Type
CPU Socket Type LGA 775
Tech Spec
Core Conroe
Multi-Core Dual-Core
Name Core 2 Duo E6850
Operating Frequency 3.0GHz
FSB 1333MHz
L2 Cache 4M shared
Manufacturing Tech 65 nm
64 bit Support Yes
Hyper-Threading Support No
Virtualization Technology Support Yes
Multimedia Instruction MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, EM64T
Voltage 0.85V – 1.5V
Thermal Design Power 65W
Cooling Device Heatsink and Fan included
Manufacturer Warranty
Parts 3 years limited
Labor 3 years limited


OK, I'll bite. The meaning of this post is... :??:

------------------------------ http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/3995/bl11.gif
Reply to Mousemonkey

Mousemonkey wrote :

Having had a go at running W7 64 on 128MB of RAM (I was bored at the time) I can honestly say that a 64bit OS uses RAM in a different manner to a 32bit OS, so yes it will make a difference.


:o I think my brain just 'sploded.

Message quoted 1 times
Message edited by jedimasterben on 06-28-2010 at 06:01:15 AM
------------------------------ i7 2600K 5GHz w/HT 1.4v ~ Asrock P67 Fatal1ty ~ ASUS 6970 2GB 1000/1475 1.25v
16GB G.Skill Ripjaws X DDR3-1600 ~ Intel 160GB G2 SSD ~ OEM 8800GT PhysX ~ Samsung 12x Blu-ray
Seasonic X650 Gold ~ Razer Mamba & Lycosa ~ Tecnofront HWD ~ Big Custom Water
Reply to jedimasterben

jedimasterben wrote :

:o I think my brain just 'sploded.


Dude, after waiting an hour and a half for the desktop to appear I was beginning to wish mine had. :lol:

------------------------------ http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/3995/bl11.gif
Reply to Mousemonkey

The psu is rated on the Nzxt official site as follows
Output: +3.3@35A,+5V@48A,+12V1@18A,+12V2@18A,+12V3@20A,+ 12V4@22A,-12V@0.5A,+5VSB@2.2A

 

Therefore there is a possibility (not sure) that if you are using 12V1@18A,+12V2@18A there will only be 36A being supplied 2A short of the recommended 40A. I personally don't think that this will cause such a lag but it is definitely a possibility!


Message edited by Ray Charles on 06-28-2010 at 08:44:45 AM
Reply to Ray Charles

I switched up the 6 pin connectors (GTX 470 needs two 6-pin connectors to function)

My power supply's 6 pin strands look something like this:

Code :
  1. .        [PSU]
  2.             |
  3.         --------
  4.         |      |
  5.       [6a]    [6b]
  6.         |      |
  7.       [6c]    [6d]
  8.         |      |
  9.       [2a]    [2b]


Previously, I had 6a and 6c connected to the card. I thought this may have an issue with power flow, so I took them out and plugged in 6a and 6b. Booted up, ran some benchmarks, and saw no performance increase. I also tried 6c and 6d, no difference.

Right now i have 6c and 6d connected to the GTX 470.


Message edited by wu05 on 06-28-2010 at 11:24:22 AM
Reply to wu05

If an application has to reach into the page file because of lack of available ram to run then there will be a dip in performance.

Reply to rolli59

My system gets 15235 3DMarks with the default settings in 3DMark06 at 1280x1024 (it wont let me change the resolution or any settings because i am running the demo version)

I can't seem to find out how to compare my score with others of similar specs.

Reply to wu05

That is a low score.
Your system should be performing better. You might want to see if your friend with the 5850 would like to try a trade/test session with you.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews [...] II/26.html
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_465_Twin_Frozr_II/images/3dmark06_1280_1024.gif

Reply to notty22

First upgrade you had to do is to add another 1GB of RAM to to your system because you are currently running in single channel mode. You need a symmetrical sticks configuration to run in dual channel mode.

Reply to FunSurfer

Something is messed up with your GPU. I assure you also, your previous CPU was not a bottleneck.

I have a GTX285 w/E8400 @ 4.0Ghz and I play Bad Company 2 with everything maxed AFx16 and 16X CSAA and never dip below 40FPS. Its 55-65FPS on Avg. ( 1440x900 ).

As for 3Dmark06. I pull an 18,000 for a score.

If I popped in a GTX470 Id probably be 22k+



Reply to Triton05

Hey guys,

Thanks for all your replies. My friend and I did some testing with my hardware, I put the GTX 470 into my friend's machine and it ran smooth as butter. We narrowed the problem down to the motherboard, which was indeed holding the entire system back in a big way. I purchased a new motherboard and everything is now running much, MUCH more smoothly.

I do have some follow-up questions though. Although my performance in games is much better, my 3DMark06 score is still around 15000. When I replace the motherboard, do I have to do a fresh install of windows to get everything working optimally? I pretty much just put the motherboard in, plugged everything in, and installed some rudimentary software and drivers included in the motherboard's utility CD. While everything seems to work fine like this, I'd like to know if any further tweaking is required.

Thanks again TomsHardware crew


Message edited by wu05 on 06-29-2010 at 11:46:49 PM
Reply to wu05

Hi there,
Interested reading,

Hi Did you check the 3dMark06 score in your friends system, that would have been interesting to see what he got?

Secondly I would definately recommend the RAM upgrade, flog the Gskill one and buy another 2 X 1GB Corsair. If you get lucky you can pick em for £15 a stick(even the dominator).

I doubt the PS has anything do with it

Good luck

Reply to scampy_008

One thing I notice that might be part of the problem is your RAM -- you list 2x1GB and another 1x1 GB which would mean you are running in single channel mode - try removing the 1x1GB. mopdule and rerun the game and see if things improve -- running in single channel will limit the memory throughput and might be a partial cause of you problem.

Reply to JDFan
Register or log in to remove.
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Graphics & Displays > Graphics Cards > Hardware Mystery: GTX470 not performing much better than GTS250?
Go to:

There are 2095 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Ads
Latest best answer
Graphics Card Help for a Casual
By geofelt, 2 hours ago:

As a standard, a pci-e x16 graphics card slot can deliver up to 75w to a graphics card...

Best offers
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
Top experts