1GB PCI Graphics card slower than 256MB Card

He AO,

I know this is a comp sec forum (or was at one time :p) - but I need a little advice:

So my stepdad has an old Sony Vaio PCV-RS410(UC). It's got a 2.6GHz Pentium 4 (single core), and I've added 1GB RAM. I also slapped a 256MB GeForce FX 5500 PCI card I had in it.

He plays a lot of Microsoft Flight Simulator X (FSX), and the card does alright for the game, but he can't play it on the highest detailed settings - so, like, he can't land a helicopter on the Empire State Building, stuff like that... :rolleyes:

I thought I'd get him a better card for an early Christmas after I found that NewEgg still sells PCI video cards - I bought him a VGA JATON|VIDEO-498PCI-TWIN 9400GT 1GB PCI video card.

I got it installed, and the thing runs worse than the 256MB card! I tried different drivers (from the CD, from nVidia and from the Jaton website), updating DirectX, playing with the nVidia panel settings - but nothing - graphics are just slooow!!! And sometimes leaves little short horizontal lines on the screen :mad:

But the PSU I had was only 180W :eek: (I thought it was a 430W - I work on lots of computers and get mixed-up sometimes :P) - So I went out and dropped $60 on a CoolerMax 500W PSU, thinking maybe it just wasn't getting enough power... but meh - no difference...

So what do you guys think? Should I RMA the card, and just wait until I have $200 to upgrade to a better mobo and CPU and get a PCIe card? Or do you think the card is just defective, and I should try another one? I'm $140 into this thing, and the game runs worse than it did when I set out to "do something nice"... :(

That's what happens I guess... :rolleyes:

Anyway, thanks for anyone who actually read through all this mess. I really appreciate any feedback I could get on the matter. (or maybe just a "tl;dr" :P)

Thanks guys!

Can you get more spec's on this system? Also out of curiosity did you happen to try uninstalling the flight sim, then doing a clean re-install so you would then need to reconfigure the graphics settings within the game.

Hi wiskic10-4,

That is a pretty weird PC! It has a P4 2.6GHz processor and supports DDR, yet doesn't have an AGP slot?................and only 1GB of RAM???

I have just had a look upstairs and the only machines I have that are PCI only (or PCI and ISA!) are Pentium I/133, Pentium I/150 and Pentium II/266 (OK I am ignoring the x86 boxes :D). And they all use 72-pin EDO RAM!.

Even my IBM Deskpro PIII/533 has an AGP graphics slot and supports 512MB of PC133 SDR (Windows NT 4.0 era)

A quick Google suggests that the FX5500 is more commonly an AGP card and the 9400GT is PCI-E, so I don't think that a PCI connection is actually "native" to the architecture.

Also the old PCI connection is the slowest at 33MHz I believe?

Actually, I am not really surprised that the FX5500 is faster, as I do recall people complaining back in the day that they had bought a 256MB or 512MB card and it was slower. I am afraid I cannot remember why, but large amounts of video RAM don't seem as useful in gaming as they might be in CAD or graphics manipulation.

Basically, what you have there is NOT a gaming machine, and I wouldn't rate either of those cards as "gaming" kit either.

Time to move on my friend :)

nihil not surprising there is no AGP slot, the AGP is built-in for the integrated video thus not available for external cards.

How did you install it?
The choice of PCI slot is important. The board has three PCI slots, how many are used? PCI slots are usually shared, one shared with the onboard VGA, which is the one you want to use.
If you have devices, such the modem, which are not being used I would take them out and remove the drivers for them.
Your manual should tell you which PCI slot to use for the video, but should be one most inboard, closest to the processor ( maybe )


With something like this you have to make sure ALL the previous drivers are removed from the system.
I normally would:
remove all video drivers from device manager
restart, reset integrated video in bios
shut down machine, remove old add-in card
restart in VGA mode ( do not let it install drivers for video )
look for ghost devices still lingering and remove them
see this link, finding hidden devices
( do this as administrator, and don't forget to check "Show hidden devices" after you open the device manager from the command prompt )
Also, remove the old integrated video driver and AGP drivers!
note: you can also use third party software, such as Driver Sweeper
but afterwards I would restart and use above method to make sure they were gone )

Shut down and install the new video card.
restart, go into bios and turn off integrated video
( don't forget to move the video cable! )

restart, then install the new drivers. check with System Information and see if there are any conflicts with the new drivers.

Also check to make sure the monitor is properly configured and you are using modes which it supports!

One last thing, you say you upgraded DirectX. XP only supports DirectX 9, which is what the game calls for. Unless you want to try out hacked versions of 10 I would make sure the latest version of 9 is installed.

If that doesn't work, well, ....

HYBR|D - No, I didn't reinstall the game - but the performance lag is noticeable in other areas of the system too - sometimes there are small horizontal lines on the desktop after boot up or changing resolution. The graphics stress-test (FurMark) proggie I use also runs slower than the 256 card... I tried all the different settings in the game - low to high - it's even choppy on the lowest settings... :(

nihil - There's a place on the board for an AGP port to be soldered on, but it was not included in this particular setup. I agree - it's time to move on.

IKnowNot - I tried everything that you suggested with the exception of looking for "hidden devices" - but I stayed up until 1am pissing with it to no avail - I've been working on computers for fifteen years, so I know the procedure for properly installing a video card and the usual complications. It is installed fine, and functioning without conflicts or freezing or hanging up - it's just slooow at rendering 3D effects - on any setting. After exhausting every option I could think of or read about, I'm 98% sure it is a hardware issue. I could put it in another computer with better specs just to be sure, but personally, I'm tired of ****ing with it. ;)

I've decided that either (a) the card is defective or (b) the card sucks. Either way, it is going back to NewEgg for credit and the PSU is going back to Altex for cash. I'll just have to build him a new 'puter somewhere down the line, but not before Xmas.

Thank you everyone for your feedback! :thumbsup:

Yea, sorry, don't mean to offend: I try not to assume too much when I post, especially since others read it.

But when you get a chance you might want to experiment with that part about finding ghost devices if you never have. You would be surprised how much junk builds up in a system over time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IKnowNot

Yea, sorry, don't mean to offend: I try not to assume too much when I post, especially since others read it.

---

Nah - No offense taken - I just wanted to point out that I am an experienced technician, and that it was not likely that it was a driver conflict, etc - anything is possible.

It could be any number of things - however, I seriously doubt it's a conflict with any "ghost device" as this is a relatively new install, and the only other card I've had in it were the onboard (disabled) and the other NVidia card, which I uninstalled according to procedure. ;)

Quote:

---

nihil not surprising there is no AGP slot, the AGP is built-in for the integrated video thus not available for external cards.

---

Only if the manufacturer decides to make it so. I recall buying Dell Optiplexes (PIII) back in 1999/2000 that had onboard graphics and supported an external AGP card. I also have an AMD Athlon 1900+ (1.6GHz) that supports both onboard and AGP slot graphics. What you are describing would be typical of low end office equipment of the day. Sony make this machine out to be something much better than that.

Sony marketed this machine as a "home entertainment" package. And from the processor, I would guess it to be 2003/4 vintage? By that time:

1. PCI video cards were obsolete.
2. PC 2100 memory was obsolete.
3. World + dog knew that you did not ship Windows XP with less than 512MB of RAM. Unless it was for a very basic office environment.
4. 180W PSU ????????????? hell, I didn't build with less than 350W from 2000!

@wiskic10_4

I guess you are trying to "make a silk purse out of a sow's ear" as we Brits would say :D

If you are getting artifacts from the video card in "normal" use, then I would send the card back. This is something that I would generally associate with a hardware problem, rather than firmware or applications. As you have already noted, you could confirm this on another machine.

Are you sure about the 180W PSU? that seems very low, even for a miniATX, which that box is not. Obviously the 500W Coolermaster is total overkill :eek:

My guess is that the best you can hope for is to find a second user PCI gaming card.

As I said, I would be inclined to start over, and the 500W Coolermaster would certainly fit into that?

Good Luck!

@ IKnowNot,

Many thanks for that very interesting link. It isn't something I have really looked into before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nihil

I guess you are trying to "make a silk purse out of a sow's ear" as we Brits would say

---

Well, you can put a diamond in a goat's ass - but it's still a goat's ass... :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nihil

Are you sure about the 180W PSU? that seems very low, even for a miniATX, which that box is not. Obviously the 500W Coolermaster is total overkill

---

100% - I have it right here - it's a NMB p/n 146874512 - 185.6W max

500W is overkill - but the box says the minimum system requirements for the Jaton card is a 450W PSU - and that was the closest thing they had at the local computer store.

A guy on another forum said this:

Quote:

---

FlightSim is CPU limited, not GPU. As you have 'upgraded' your GPU from complete rubbish to slightly less rubbish, you are putting more strain on the CPU and chipset throughput thus the diminished performance.

---

Quote:

---

FlightSim is CPU limited, not GPU. As you have 'upgraded' your GPU from complete rubbish to slightly less rubbish, you are putting more strain on the CPU and chipset throughput thus the diminished performance.

---

WTF!!!!!??????????/

Processor handles comms to GPU............if GPU can't handle it, then it doesn't happen. If processor and GPU can handle it then it will work.

If CPU can't handle it, then it doesn't get sent to GPU to fail????????????

The guy is talking crap IMO...............if the CPU can handle it, it will.........it does not look to see what the GPU does, other than if it is ready for more?

What he is saying seems to relate to speed or refresh rates rather than to the supported resolution?

If I read your earlier posts correctly, the issue is about video resolution? OK, I can readily accept that if your processor is not up to it, then this may be impacted upon..........but NOT a 2.66GHz P4???............that should pass stuff through OK IMO.

And none of that explains artifacts (diagonal lines) when in non-gaming situations?

I guess that at this point I have 2 questions:

1. What does the game manufacturer suggest as H/W specs?
2. Has your stepdad updated the game software recently.........like so the H/W is now out of spec?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nihil

The guy is talking crap IMO...

---

Probably. I don't know really - it kind of made sense - like, if the CPU is spending all of it's resources sending information to the GPU since it can handle such a load? I don't know. Makes my head hurt. :p

In my pea-brain, a more powerful GPU should only help, never hinder performance. But I didn't ever pay much attention in Data Structures class either - bored me to tears. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nihil

If I read your earlier posts correctly, the issue is about video resolution?

---

No. Did I say something about video resolution? I tried the game on every resolution available, it didn't seem to make any difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nihil

And none of that explains artifacts (diagonal lines) when in non-gaming situations?

---

No, it doesn't. That's clearly a hardware problem. (They were small, horizontal lines)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nihil

1. What does the game manufacturer suggest as H/W specs?
2. Has your stepdad updated the game software recently.........like so the H/W is now out of spec?

---

The minimum specs for FSX are very low, but there are no recommended specs on the MS site. From what I've gathered around the Intarwebz, the "recommended" specs for MS FSX are a 3GHz dual-core processor, at least 1Gb DDR2 memory and a 512 MB GPU or better.

I updated the game for him a while back, but I don't think it has affected the game graphics-wise.

Regardless, I'm sending the card back. It's either defective or it won't work on that system. The computer is like ten years old, so it's time for an upgrade. I have a Biostar G31-M7 TE still in the plastic. So I will probably use it with nice quad-core processor and 4GB RAM to upgrade their system. Then I can buy a PCIe graphics card and not have to worry about whether it will work or not. I just bought a Radeon HD 5770 1GB card for $100 for my computer, and I'm very happy with it.

Quote:

---

In my pea-brain, a more powerful GPU should only help, never hinder performance.

---

If you improve the worst performing module you would expect to progress to the next worst, in theory at least.

Quote:

---

Probably. I don't know really - it kind of made sense - like, if the CPU is spending all of it's resources sending information to the GPU since it can handle such a load? I don't know. Makes my head hurt

---

It might make sense if you created a system that was so imbalanced it basically became unstable. Normally the CPU dictates to the GPU, not the other way round. Anyway I cannot see the situation where a PCI videocard could stress a 2.66GHz P4, the connection is too slow.

Also, you cannot judge the performance of a card on the size of its RAM alone. I saw a review of your FX5500 (AGP) and it just about managed 33% of the ATI 9700 Pro that I have in this machine :)

Quote:

---

No. Did I say something about video resolution? I tried the game on every resolution available, it didn't seem to make any difference.

---

My bad/ I believe the correct term is "rendition" for video? I still go back to monochrome still photography terms :D

Quote:

---

Regardless, I'm sending the card back. It's either defective or it won't work on that system.

---

Given the artifacts, I would say defective, but I don't think the card will help that much anyway. It would seem that the current application has advanced beyond the capabilities of that machine?

Quote:

---

I just bought a Radeon HD 5770 1GB card for $100 for my computer, and I'm very happy with it.

---

Glad to hear that.................mine is "allocated awaiting shipment"........it cost $170 :(............. we get ripped off over here!

2 years ago i got a pny card with a nvidea chipset , it had 1gb of ram it had its on cpu onboard and claimed to be caplible of allowing my computer (2 ghz celeron d 2 gb of ddr ram ,) to play blue rays , i didnt get a chance to try blue rays but it played blue rips with awesome results certainly exceeded my expectations ,i also played fight sim on it no probs they might have a newer generation of the card out ,read the boxes look at the specs look at ati cards too they are starting to release good ones

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by romanticcowboy

2 years ago i got a pny card with a nvidea chipset , it had 1gb of ram it had its on cpu onboard and claimed to be caplible of allowing my computer (2 ghz celeron d 2 gb of ddr ram ,) to play blue rays , i didnt get a chance to try blue rays but it played blue rips with awesome results certainly exceeded my expectations ,i also played fight sim on it no probs they might have a newer generation of the card out ,read the boxes look at the specs look at ati cards too they are starting to release good ones

---

But was it a PCI card? :confused:

At any rate, I've decided that I'm just going to upgrade the system. I don't care to try my luck with another PCI video card. There's just too many good known-to-work-well PCIe cards out there. Besides, a 2.0GHz Pentium w/ 1GB RAM just doesn't "get it" in the gaming world today.

Quote:

---

2 years ago i got a pny card with a nvidea chipset , it had 1gb of ram it had its on cpu onboard

---

Yes, to begin with the graphics boys made their products more capable; presumably to sell to people with lower end and older equipment. Now there seems to be a lot more true integration, and the CPU makers are pushing more work the way of the GPU?

Quote:

---

But was it a PCI card? :confused:

---

I doubt it.........AGP dates back to the late 1990's and PCI-e to 2004.

Also, back then, Blue Ray was pretty much home entertainment video, so the requirements were somewhat different?

Quote:

---

At any rate, I've decided that I'm just going to upgrade the system. I don't care to try my luck with another PCI video card. There's just too many good known-to-work-well PCIe cards out there. Besides, a 2.0GHz Pentium w/ 1GB RAM just doesn't "get it" in the gaming world today.

---

I would totally agree with that. The basic specs of that Sony box are office, or entry level home entertainment. Even if you managed to find a PCI card, I bet all you would do is move the bottleneck somewhere else :)

I think that your last statement is very appropriate! Although FSX is a very old game, it is old in the sense of "long-running", as it has had many upgrades over the years (I can remember it from Windows 3.x days :eek:).

If the worst comes to the worst, I can always send your stepdad my only venture into flight simulators (apart from the blow all aliens to hell shoot-em-ups:D). My wife actually managed to take the plane off, fly it round the airfield and land it (on the runway)! she wasn't best pleased when I showed her it had automatic take off and landing, and pointed out that the Russian air-force do not normally take off on full re-heat :cool:

It is the commercially repackaged version of the flight sim for the Su27 air superiority fighter. What they don't tell you is it would be a great help if you:

1. Were a pilot
2. Had a degree in aeronautical engineering
3. Had fluent written and spoken Russian.

Cheers :drink: