Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

ATI 9800 XT 256mb better than HIS 4670HD agp 1G DDR3?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 3, 2010 5:38:49 AM

Hi guys,


I have a question for you. I read on many forums that the HIS 4670 HD is pretty much useless with a single core cpu but, is it possible to have worst performances with that card than my old 9800XT??

I mean, I use to play on L4D2 and CSS. I had no lag with my old card and ran about 45-60fps on those games. The fact is, I wanted to try some other new games and give a second breathe to my computer. I also purchase this card because I am a 3D animator and though that it was better for 3D rendering.

Now with my new card, I get about 25-45 fps max, and sometime it drops to 10. I can't play with recent game and other old game like flatout lags with my new card. I didn't try yet on 3D software but it sounds very creepy.

My system:

mb: Asus P4C-800 E deluxe fsb 800mgz
cpu: single core 3.2ghz HT
Ram: 4X512mb OCZ dual PC3200
psu: 420W Thermaltake
GC: HIS 4670 HD 1GB DDR3 AGP 8X
OS: win7
CCC: 10.9 set to Optimal Performance

I forgot to mention that I formated my pc before installing the new card and the new drivers, so it's not a driver issue imo.

So... Someone have an idea why I get worst performances with my new card even if with my old card I was set to max Optimal Quality?? Is it normal that a older card runs better with old cpu than a new one with old cpu?

Thanks

Jonathan

November 3, 2010 5:56:42 AM

What usually happens is the new card is detected as a better card, so things increase. Perhaps the games increase the resolution, or the details go up. If you put the detail settings at the same level the 4670 should be much faster.
Score
0
November 3, 2010 6:12:40 AM

Hi,

That's my point, I forgot to mention it, sorry but, I run the game on lower settings than usual! only the resolution has increased by default to 1680x1050! with my new flat screen LCD LG but I decreased it to 1280x800, and sometime, above depending of the game!

it really pissed me off because I have the feeling to have loose my time and my money on a new card. I don't want to buy a new cpu that fit on my mb, and a new system either.

any other ideas?

thanks
Score
0
Related resources
November 3, 2010 6:20:10 AM

Increasing the res is the same as increasing the details. More pixels = more work for the GPU. I would expect to see lower scores.
Score
0
November 3, 2010 6:23:04 AM

i have found that in some older games that my 9800xt outperforms my 8800gts. America McGees Alice is one of thiose games. It just doesnt like the newer hardware.
Score
0
November 3, 2010 7:30:36 AM

Did you install the motherboards AGP drivers?
Score
0
November 3, 2010 2:46:42 PM

Shader model 2 to 4.? for the 4670 also makes a difference.
Score
0
November 3, 2010 3:02:50 PM

coozie7 said:
Did you install the motherboards AGP drivers?



Yes for sure! I'm a kind of freak so yes! I always have the new or the best driver I can find on the net! Since yesterday, I got the new 10.10 Catalyst drivers instead of 10.9 version. I didn't try yet but I'm not sure it will make a big difference. They just fixed small issues.

@4745454b: That's what I said, by default, the resolution increased, but I put it lower! I used to play 1024x768 in CSS or L4D2, and now I am something like that but in 16:9 instead of 4:3 because of my widescreen LCD but! The drivers came with the default direct X installer and my card takes Direct X 11 instead of Direct X 9.0c. Is it possible that it could make a big difference? I mean, in my CSS video advanced settings example, there is a roll down menu with "Direct X version : 9" but I can't change it. I guess it's because the valve engine can only run with Direct X 9. I'm not an expert but I though that running with Direct X 11 was fine, like if the direct x 9 was the minimum requirement so the 11 version was better but I may be wrong.

Some new games run on 10.1 or 11 version but could it make a difference for older games that run on 9.0c? Because I'm not sure if my new 4670 could support the old version...
Score
0
November 3, 2010 3:24:07 PM

actually you need both dx9.0c AND dx11 installed, since they dropped the dx9 part from the dx10 and 11 versions.

And amd has lowered the support level for agp cards, make sure the graphics drivers you are using are meant for agp, as well
Score
0
November 3, 2010 3:31:22 PM

Kari said:
try this for drivers, 10.10 hotfix for agp
http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/CatalystAGPH...



I have it! thx! Even if HIS told me that the drivers was fine for both AGP and PCi-E, I installed the hotfix. and How could I have both Direct X installed? When I tried to reinstall the 9.0c version, the installer told me that my actual version of direct X was more recent and it just stop there.

tnx
Score
0
November 3, 2010 3:33:18 PM

You can't force a game into DX 10 or 11 if the game wasn't programed for it, and your card doesn't support DX 11.

Update the bios on your motherboard.
Score
0
November 3, 2010 3:41:01 PM

the card supports 10.1 so yeah no dx11 for you.
The dx9.0c has multiple versions, though they are all named the same. You could try and find the most up-to-date version from microsofts website.

I have dx11 installed and when I installed Fallout new vegas last friday it updated a lot of dx9.0c stuff as well
Score
0
November 3, 2010 3:48:18 PM

benski said:
You can't force a game into DX 10 or 11 if the game wasn't programed for it, and your card doesn't support DX 11.

Update the bios on your motherboard.



You are right, it doesn't support 11 version, only 10.1. So it means that my Direct X version was upgraded probably with windows update or something else.

I have the latest bios update from Asus. 1024.001, which is very old, but is the latest :S
Score
0
November 3, 2010 3:49:54 PM

Kari said:
the card supports 10.1 so yeah no dx11 for you.
The dx9.0c has multiple versions, though they are all named the same. You could try and find the most up-to-date version from microsofts website.

I have dx11 installed and when I installed Fallout new vegas last friday it updated a lot of dx9.0c stuff as well


Do you know if there is a way to see each directX versions installed?
Score
0
November 3, 2010 4:00:32 PM

Actually, I installed the DirectX End-User Runtime

"The Microsoft DirectX® End-User Runtime provides updates to 9.0c and previous versions of DirectX — the core Windows® technology that drives high-speed multimedia and games on the PC."

But I still see Direct X 11 in my dxdiag.
Score
0
November 3, 2010 4:01:29 PM

Johnnybee1 said:
Do you know if there is a way to see each directX versions installed?
well.. not really. For me Dxdiag says that I have dx11 installed, it doesn't mention anything about dx9...


edit: well if the Microsoft DirectX® End-User Runtime was up-to-date you should be good as far as I can tell...
edit2 and the dx11 comes with windows 7 I believe, even if your card doesn't support it
Score
0
November 3, 2010 4:14:08 PM

I think i found something...
in the C:\windows\system32 folder there are a lot of files named like d3dx9_xx.dll and d3dx10_xx.dll and d3dx11_xx.dll where the xx part is some number. For dx9 the numbers go up to 42 for me, and I think the Fallout added files from 37 to 42 when it updated my dx9
Score
0
November 3, 2010 4:14:31 PM

does it make a difference if I download the localized runtime End-User License Agreements for directx 9.0c? As I said the web installer do not let me install a previous version of directx
Score
0
November 3, 2010 4:21:27 PM

Kari said:
I think i found something...
in the C:\windows\system32 folder there are a lot of files named like d3dx9_xx.dll and d3dx10_xx.dll and d3dx11_xx.dll where the xx part is some number. For dx9 the numbers go up to 42 for me, and I think the Fallout added files from 37 to 42 when it updated my dx9



Yep! I can see d3dx9_24 to 43, d3dx10_33 to 43 and d3dx11_42 to 43.

I guess it means that I have all the directx versions?
Score
0
November 3, 2010 4:22:10 PM

yeah, yours are newer than mine :p 
Score
0
November 3, 2010 4:23:44 PM

It brings me back to my original question, is it normal to have worst performances with my new card? O.o
Score
0
November 3, 2010 4:35:55 PM

well no if the settings are all the same. Take a look in CCC and make sure everything in the 3d settings are either 'use application settings' or 'performance' rather than high quality.

Download GPU-Z to see if the card is running at the correct clocks, when idling at desktop they should be quite low, but should jump up under load. There is a sensor tab in GPU-Z that can record clocks over time. (CCC doesn't)

also make sure the agp slot is running at 8x, GPU-Z will show the current bus interface as well.

Check the temperatures too, for both gpu and cpu. You might have bumped the cpu heatsink loose while installing the card, and now it's overheating and throttling down. Speedfan or RealTemp or some similar software works great.


Score
0
November 3, 2010 11:38:57 PM

Again, the only way to check is to have ALL settings identical.

Can you run GPUz? Maybe post the screen shots? Perhaps you have an odd thing going on that we can then pin point.
Score
0
November 4, 2010 4:33:05 AM

Here is the image of GPUz with my card






So everything is ok on this side I guess. I have never overclocked my system, cpu or graphic card.


Score
0
November 10, 2010 11:20:16 PM

I guys, I still have FPS drops on some games that I never had with my old card. Any idea why it happens?
Score
0
November 10, 2010 11:53:40 PM

Nothing that I haven"t already suggested.

FPS drops? I thought they ran slower overall?
Score
0
November 11, 2010 12:06:42 AM

Try uninstalling the HD audio driver that installs with the card. I had some issues with a 4650 a while back and read something about the audio driver for the HDMI port hogging CPU resources for some people and slowing things down.
Score
0
November 11, 2010 12:08:35 AM

benski said:
Try uninstalling the HD audio driver that installs with the card. I had some issues with a 4650 a while back and read something about the audio driver for the HDMI port hogging CPU resources for some people and slowing things down.



already done... I'm thinking to return this crap...
Score
0
November 11, 2010 2:01:58 AM

Johnnybee1 said:
It brings me back to my original question, is it normal to have worst performances with my new card? O.o


The resolution 1280x800 is a good bit higher than 1024x768. Also, the HD4000 series cards were not originally designed to be used on the AGP bus and for that reason, suffer performance loss. Also, the HD4000 series cards were designed to be run at higher resolutions than your 9800XT and result in lower framerates when run at lower resolutions due to CPU bottlenecking. The average resolution used when the 9800XT was released, was 800x600 15" and smaller or 1024x768 on 15" or larger....which are now CPU bound resolutions.
Score
0

Best solution

November 11, 2010 2:11:04 AM

Probably a good idea to return it if you can. Save your money and build a whole new rig, AGP cards are way overpriced and you will always be limited by your processor.
Share
November 11, 2010 2:19:13 AM

sykozis said:
The resolution 1280x800 is a good bit higher than 1024x768. Also, the HD4000 series cards were not originally designed to be used on the AGP bus and for that reason, suffer performance loss. Also, the HD4000 series cards were designed to be run at higher resolutions than your 9800XT and result in lower framerates when run at lower resolutions due to CPU bottlenecking. The average resolution used when the 9800XT was released, was 800x600 15" and smaller or 1024x768 on 15" or larger....which are now CPU bound resolutions.

I do not believe this to be true at all. I have never experienced a game that runs slower at a lower resolution and I've been playing computer games on computers I built for close to 20 years. Obviously at higher resolutions the GPU is doing a larger portion at the work, BUT THAT IS BECAUSE THERE IS MORE WORK TO BE DONE, mostly for the GPU but also for the CPU. I don't believe you can ever increase performance by raising the resolution.
Score
0
November 11, 2010 3:14:00 AM

benski said:
I do not believe this to be true at all. I have never experienced a game that runs slower at a lower resolution and I've been playing computer games on computers I built for close to 20 years. Obviously at higher resolutions the GPU is doing a larger portion at the work, BUT THAT IS BECAUSE THERE IS MORE WORK TO BE DONE, mostly for the GPU but also for the CPU. I don't believe you can ever increase performance by raising the resolution.



I agree. I heard nothing about it. Also for me, it doesn't make sense that we get more performance by increasing the resolution. Higher resolution = more pixels = more cpu or gpu work = better quality = less performance.


FYI, bad news, I can't return my card because of the mail in rebate offer.

Newegg:

"Mail-In Rebate Policy
Any product offering a mail-in rebate is not returnable to Newegg once the rebate has been filed. Be sure that the product is functional and that you intend to keep the product before sending in for your rebate. Products missing UPC codes or serial numbers from the box are NOT returnable. Only the product manufacturer can replace a defective item missing the UPC code."

too bad. Anyone wants to buy me this card? auction opened! starting price 75$ CAD!! It's better to laugh than to cry :??: 
Score
0
November 14, 2010 12:32:03 AM

Best answer selected by Johnnybee1.
Score
0
November 14, 2010 11:15:58 AM

This topic has been closed by Maziar
Score
0
!