Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Will this graphics card go in my computer and work?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 20, 2014 8:03:48 AM

Basically ive got an old computer now around 7 years old. The problem i have at the moment with new games is my geforce 7600gt graphics card is just too old to run new games like company of heroes 2 etc etc. So i thought it was time for a new graphics card.

I came across the NVIDIA GTX650Ti 2GB DDR5 PCI-E 3.0 Graphics Card.

Will this graphics card work with my setup?

specs: motherboard ASUS P5VD2-MX/P5V-VM DH which is PCI-E 1.0
processor Intel(R) core(TM) 2 cpu 6600 @ 2.4ghz ( 2 CPUs)
January 20, 2014 8:27:22 AM

What power suply do you have?
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
January 20, 2014 10:28:03 AM

get the 1GB.
Your system is old, man.
to get max performance, consider getting a new system.
January 20, 2014 11:59:21 AM

Your power supply is not good enough for that graphics card. 400w minimum is recomended for that card. Taking into consideration that power supplys loose power with age, it's a NO.

Even if you buy a new power supply take into consideration that cts1992 has a point, even if your power supply was good enough to support that graphics card (which isn't) that PCI-e 1.0 is a big bootleneck on the system. If you get a better power supply the graphics card will work but you cannot do things that use PCI-e brandwith like playing a game and record it with fraps. I think that even the most demanding games will run on very low frame rates.
January 20, 2014 2:44:19 PM

i was going to up my power supply to around 500 watts and go for a graphics card with pci 2.0 like the Geforce GTX 560se..

would this be a better option with my motherboard and processor?

ps..the 7600gt graphics card ive been running for years is pci 2.0 anyhows or so ive read.
January 21, 2014 1:38:32 AM

Taking into consideration that you might upgrade your system any graphics card will work as long as the power supply is good enough for it.

About the bootleneck there is on your PCI-E 1.0 lest see the numbers (taken from wikipedia):

PCI-E 1.0a
Quote:
PCI Express 1.0a
In 2003, PCI-SIG introduced PCIe 1.0a, with a per-lane data rate of 250 MB/s and a transfer rate of 2.5 gigatransfers per second (GT/s). Transfer rate is expressed in transfers per second instead of bits per second because the number of transfers includes the overhead bits, which do not provide additional throughput


PCI-E 2.0
Quote:
PCI-SIG announced the availability of the PCI Express Base 2.0 specification on 15 January 2007.[21] The PCIe 2.0 standard doubles the transfer rate compared with PCIe 1.0 to 5 GT/s and the per-lane throughput rises from 250 MB/s to 500 MB/s. This means a 32-lane PCIe connector (×32) can support throughput up to 16 GB/s aggregate.
PCIe 2.0 motherboard slots are fully backward compatible with PCIe v1.x cards. PCIe 2.0 cards are also generally backward compatible with PCIe 1.x motherboards, using the available bandwidth of PCI Express 1.1. Overall, graphic cards or motherboards designed for v2.0 will work with the other being v1.1 or v1.0a.


PCI-E 3.0
Quote:
PCI Express 3.0 Base specification revision 3.0 was made available in November 2010, after multiple delays. In August 2007, PCI-SIG announced that PCI Express 3.0 would carry a bit rate of 8 gigatransfers per second (GT/s), and that it would be backward compatible with existing PCIe implementations. At that time, it was also announced that the final specification for PCI Express 3.0 would be delayed until 2011.[26] New features for the PCIe 3.0 specification include a number of optimizations for enhanced signaling and data integrity, including transmitter and receiver equalization, PLL improvements, clock data recovery, and channel enhancements for currently supported topologies.[27]
Following a six-month technical analysis of the feasibility of scaling the PCIe interconnect bandwidth, PCI-SIG's analysis found that 8 gigatransfers per second can be manufactured in mainstream silicon process technology, and can be deployed with existing low-cost materials and infrastructure, while maintaining full compatibility (with negligible impact) to the PCIe protocol stack.
PCIe 3.0 upgrades the encoding scheme to 128b/130b from the previous 8b/10b encoding, reducing the overhead to approximately 1.54% ((130–128)/130), as opposed to the 20% overhead of PCIe 2.0. This is achieved by a technique called "scrambling" that applies a known binary polynomial to a data stream in a feedback topology. Because the scrambling polynomial is known, the data can be recovered by running it through a feedback topology using the inverse polynomial.[28] PCIe 3.0's 8 GT/s bit rate effectively delivers 985 MB/s per lane, practically doubling the lane bandwidth relative to PCIe 2.0.


A pratical explanation about those numbers: the brandwith you need scales with your screen resolution, PCI-e 1.0 gives you playable framerates up to 1440x900, to achieve playable framerates at full hd resolution you need PCI-e 2.0 and for multiscreen setups PCI-e 3.0 is recommended.

I give you my example: got a core2duo e7300 cpu, 8gb ram and a geforce gts450, both overclocked, my old motherboard (PCI-e 2.0) died and because I was on a very tight budget I bought a cheap G41 motherboard which has PCI-e 1.0. My screen has 1440x900 resolution so I have playable frame rates (I dont play very demanding games anyway), on WoW I have aprox. 40 fps on a raid and on LoL got v-sync enable and have 60 fps. But when I tried to record games using fraps, I just couldn't record them at full screen resolution, i need to record them at 1/4 screen resolution to have playable frames.

Between those two cards you mention, I would still go to the GTX650 ti because in the long term you might update your system (that's the good thing about desktops) and because it uses much less power than the gtx 560 and in the long term you will get your $$$ back with a better card, however you won't probably be able to use the card at it's best, but it will surelly work and give you a much better experience than your 7600 :D 

Hope this helps
a b U Graphics card
January 21, 2014 2:24:19 AM

The numbers don't give a very good idea.
In terms of numbers, the pcie 1.0a, also known as 1.1, has bandwidth of 2.5 Gbps. However this includes overheads, which cut down the rate by 20% from 320 MB/s to 256 MB/s.
The 2.0 standard doubles those rates to 5 Gbps, but will 20% overhead as well, going to 512 MB/s.
However the 3.0 standard does not offer double the rate of 2.0 but 8 Gbps, but now the overhead is much less at 1.54%. That brings the rate to 1008 MB/s.

Now this is the rate of a PCIe 3.0 x1 slot.
If you have a x16 slot, then this number is multiplied by 16.
However, as of now, graphics cards don't need this much bandwidth.

3.0x16, 3.0x8, and 2.0x16 slots are still plenty to run any graphics card.
A 1.1 X16 PCIe slot can still allow even cards like the gtx680 to provide 90-95% of its maximum output.
Anything lower than that, however, significantly cuts down bandwidth causing severe degradation in performance.

stingraywinston said:
i was going to up my power supply to around 500 watts and go for a graphics card with pci 2.0 like the Geforce GTX 560se..

would this be a better option with my motherboard and processor?


Don't go for any power supply. Go for a power supply from a decent brand such as corsair, antec, or seasonic (and xfx also I think) with atleast 25A on the +12V rail. The Corsair cx430 has 32A which is plenty and that power supply is around $45(this is the price you should be looking at for around a 400-450W power supply. Ignore the $15-20 ones; they're crap).

Another thing: Your setup is too old. Get a new system ASAP. The idea of getting a 650 Ti and porting it to the new system is also good. However, if your budget allows, go for the 760. It is the newest generation card and will offer fantastic graphics performance.

Nuno Silva said:

A pratical explanation about those numbers: the brandwith you need scales with your screen resolution, PCI-e 1.0 gives you playable framerates up to 1440x900, to achieve playable framerates at full hd resolution you need PCI-e 2.0 and for multiscreen setups PCI-e 3.0 is recommended.

I give you my example: got a core2duo e7300 cpu, 8gb ram and a geforce gts450, both overclocked, my old motherboard (PCI-e 2.0) died and because I was on a very tight budget I bought a cheap G41 motherboard which has PCI-e 1.0. My screen has 1440x900 resolution so I have playable frame rates (I dont play very demanding games anyway), on WoW I have aprox. 40 fps on a raid and on LoL got v-sync enable and have 60 fps. But when I tried to record games using fraps, I just couldn't record them at full screen resolution, i need to record them at 1/4 screen resolution to have playable frames.


Your problem is not the revision of PCI-Express, your problem is a severe CPU bottleneck.
The e7300 is a cpu that is slow by today's standards. Even the i3 2100 has more juice than it.
I have a e4600 and it gives out 12 Gigaflops(google qwikmark). The e8400 which is at my college(faster than yours) gives 15 Gigaflops. My brother's i3 2100 gives 65.
Your CPU is old.

Nuno Silva said:

A pratical explanation about those numbers: the brandwith you need scales with your screen resolution, PCI-e 1.0 gives you playable framerates up to 1440x900, to achieve playable framerates at full hd resolution you need PCI-e 2.0 and for multiscreen setups PCI-e 3.0 is recommended.


Not true. See above.




That's a loose statement from NVidia, so that people with low quality power supplies don't complain. More important factor is amperage and quality of power. As long as there is around 25-28A current from the +12V rail, there should be no issue.

Nuno Silva said:
Taking into consideration that power supplys loose power with age, it's a NO.


I agree to this. A graphics card is a power hungry component. This power supply, assuming bought with the computer, is pretty old. Consider getting a new one.
January 21, 2014 7:15:08 AM

first of all i have e6600 duo 2.4ghtz which is old i know.

Nunu silva said:
Quote:
Between those two cards you mention, I would still go to the GTX650 ti because in the long term you might update your system (that's the good thing about desktops) and because it uses much less power than the gtx 560 and in the long term you will get your $$$ back with a better card.


From doing some research the gtx 560 is way better than the gtx 650. The only differance is the gtx 560 uses more power and runs off pci 2.0. Where as the gtx 650 uses less power and runs off pci 3.0.

Overall guys i will get around to upgrading my system but at the moment i have little cash, so the only route i wanted to take at the moment was power supply and graphics card. I really wish i had the money for motherboard, cpu, gpu and everything else.

Im also not bothered about running games on super high resolutions and ultra settings. Im happy with just 1024x768 and medium settings. Or just happy being able to runs games i cant with 7600gt. for the time being im just stuck with my crappy motherboard and low standard processor until i pass my exams.


a b U Graphics card
January 21, 2014 7:36:07 AM

Get a 650 and a corsair cx430. Plenty for your needs.
!