Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

I5 with 1024mb GT240

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 28, 2010 10:56:56 AM

Hi,

I built an i5 750 machine with a 1gb GT240 earlier this year. 90% of the time this machine is used under a Linux distro for various vm/dev activities. 10% of the time, I play games under xp. I've been left a little disaspointed with the framerate in games such as Batman:Arkham Asylum (1024x768 all high details and 2x aa = mid 50's fps). I'd like to run games at my native res of 1280x1024 all high with both aa and af set at reasonable levels.

Would replacing the GT240 with a 1gb 460 (still running under XP) resolve this?

Any ideas/suggestions pls?

Thanks

Ben

More about : 1024mb gt240

a c 189 U Graphics card
August 28, 2010 4:24:17 PM

Agree, if you want use GTX460 then go with higher monitor, 23" or more recommended...
And make sure you have enough power on PSU. :) 
August 28, 2010 6:15:45 PM

The monitor is 19" flatscreen and goes up to 1280x1024, and thats my native res.

PSU is Antec 650w.

So would a 460 resolve the issue, or is the clock speed of the i5 the problem?

Thx
Related resources
a c 165 U Graphics card
August 28, 2010 6:28:36 PM

You'd be better off with a GTS250-Half the price of a GTX460 and twice as fast as the current GT240.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/geforce-gtx-460-radeon-hd...

If your motherboard supports SLI or just dual PCI-E slots, you can use the GT240 as a dedicated PhysX card BTW.
August 29, 2010 2:21:09 PM

Quote:
Were trying to tell you a GTX460 is WAAAAY too much for a little 19" monitor. But your not listening.


Err no i was just pointing out your incorrect statement in 'Yep, but really your first upgrade should be your monitor. I mean why have a i5 and a GTX460 and have a crappy little monitor that runs 1024x768?' - I don't want to run 1024x768 I want to run at 1280x1024. I'm not interested in a bigger monitor as i'm only what 2ft away from the screen.

Thanks for the links coozie7 & wh3resmycar.

Given I'm normally a Linux user i'd rather not pay out for a Windows 7 license, but do I have to to make use of DX11? Whats the latest DX that XP supports please? I've found conflicting info online, some saying 9 some saying 10.

Thanks
a c 172 U Graphics card
August 29, 2010 2:36:36 PM

Quote:
Were trying to tell you a GTX460 is WAAAAY too much for a little 19" monitor. But your not listening.


I guess that in a few years people will be saying the same thing about 109" displays. Rich people.... :pfff: 
a c 172 U Graphics card
August 29, 2010 2:39:25 PM

yeleek said:
Err no i was just pointing out your incorrect statement in 'Yep, but really your first upgrade should be your monitor. I mean why have a i5 and a GTX460 and have a crappy little monitor that runs 1024x768?' - I don't want to run 1024x768 I want to run at 1280x1024. I'm not interested in a bigger monitor as i'm only what 2ft away from the screen.

Thanks for the links coozie7 & wh3resmycar.

Given I'm normally a Linux user i'd rather not pay out for a Windows 7 license, but do I have to to make use of DX11? Whats the latest DX that XP supports please? I've found conflicting info online, some saying 9 some saying 10.

Thanks



DX9 but that doesn't stop every one from playing modern games on xp. There is some out there that have done hacks so that newer games that are DX9 run on win 2k.
August 29, 2010 2:41:46 PM

nforce4max said:
DX9 but that doesn't stop every one from playing modern games on xp. There is some out there that have done hacks so that newer games that are DX9 run on win 2k.


OK great - thanks for the info :) 
a b U Graphics card
August 29, 2010 3:54:40 PM

theres always opengl 4.0/4.1 aswell. works on windows xp and has some directx11 features like tessellation. not many games use it though unfortunately.
a c 165 U Graphics card
August 29, 2010 6:06:52 PM

@ yeleek: There were efforts to hack DX10 so it would run under XP but they seem to have died, so, as nforce4max said, you're stuck with DX9 unless you switch to either Vista or Win 7.
With such a low resolution and powerful CPU there might be another option, though: Get a HD5770 and Win7 (64 bit...obviously ;)  ) OEM license, together they will come to a little more than a GTX460. Just a thought.
Otherwise, if you plan on staying with that flea-ridden, decaying cesspit of an OS known as XP ;)  I really think you'd be better served with a card like the GTS250, it's far faster than the existing GT240 and should have few problems with even modern games at med/high settings at 1280x1014 res.
If your MB has a second PCI-E slot the GT240 might be used as a dedicated PhysX card BTW.
a c 172 U Graphics card
August 29, 2010 10:08:03 PM

Quote:
I don't get it. In a few years people will be saying a GTX460 is too much for a 109" display?? LOL



How did you reach that rank if you don't get such a basic statement? Must not be a native English speaker?
August 29, 2010 10:24:45 PM

Get a 5770.
a b U Graphics card
August 29, 2010 10:37:07 PM

+1 GTS 250. Unless you plan on playing at higher than 1280, or playing very demanding games, a 460 would be major overkill.
a c 172 U Graphics card
August 29, 2010 10:39:27 PM

jryan388 said:
+1 GTS 250. Unless you plan on playing at higher than 1280, or playing very demanding games, a 460 would be major overkill.



A GTS250 is a great card but if you are interested in getting one just wait a few weeks knowing that the GTS 450 is going to hit the market. By the way I know how to bring a GTX 460 to a crawl at that res. Log 4-6 wow accounts at once and enjoy the lagfest.
a b U Graphics card
August 30, 2010 12:14:51 PM

i had a 19" lcd panel that does 1440x900 (but usually ran it @ 1600x1000 custom resolution) coupled with a gtx260-216. in "crysis terms" it's far from being an overkill. and considering you're not happy with 50'ish fps, a gtx460 is a given especially when you can afford it.
August 30, 2010 6:26:23 PM

coozie7 said:
@ yeleek: There were efforts to hack DX10 so it would run under XP but they seem to have died, so, as nforce4max said, you're stuck with DX9 unless you switch to either Vista or Win 7.
With such a low resolution and powerful CPU there might be another option, though: Get a HD5770 and Win7 (64 bit...obviously ;)  ) OEM license, together they will come to a little more than a GTX460. Just a thought.
Otherwise, if you plan on staying with that flea-ridden, decaying cesspit of an OS known as XP ;)  I really think you'd be better served with a card like the GTS250, it's far faster than the existing GT240 and should have few problems with even modern games at med/high settings at 1280x1014 res.
If your MB has a second PCI-E slot the GT240 might be used as a dedicated PhysX card BTW.


Good idea - thanks :) 
!