28 replies to this topic

[NightFallsOnU]

Ok so i was just wanting to know if anyone had this card in their PC? My PC is running poorly and I am in bad need of upgrading my GPU and PSU so I can play this game at anywhere near competition level play...

---MY system specs are----
AMD Phenom 9100e Quadcore
ATI radeon hd 3200
4gb ddr2 dual
640gb hard drive

http://clients.futur...InfoId=15002250

I get about 4 to 9 FPS (go ahead and laugh it is ok)

can anyone tell me around what FPS i might get with this upgrade?

[Oderint dum Metuant]

It's not possible to tell you what your FPS will be, whilst your GPU is definitely on the poor side, you also have a very early AM2 Quadcore there, upgrading the GPU while it will make a difference, your really just shifting the bottleneck in your system.

[NightFallsOnU]

Ok but do you think it might pull me up to where I can play this game and enjoy it as opposed to watching a flipbook of mechs blowing me to pieces

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Possibly.

[Deathwarrior]

NightFallsOnU, on 17 October 2012 - 06:08 AM, said:

Ok so i was just wanting to know if anyone had this card in their PC? My PC is running poorly and I am in bad need of upgrading my GPU and PSU so I can play this game at anywhere near competition level play...

---MY system specs are----
AMD Phenom 9100e Quadcore
ATI radeon hd 3200
4gb ddr2 dual
640gb hard drive

http://clients.futur...InfoId=15002250

I get about 4 to 9 FPS (go ahead and laugh it is ok)

can anyone tell me around what FPS i might get with this upgrade?

An ATI radeon 3200 is an integrated graphic chip on your motherboard. It is no where near the minimum specification of a 8800GT. It is your bottleneck. Your CPU is far from ideal, but I believe it surpasses (slightly) the minimum of an Athlon 245E dual core, the 9100e being a quadcore is a plus on your end.

You should get better than 4 to 9 FPS, how much better, one can't really say. 7750 is an entry level card though, do not expect to max out settings at 1920x1080. At low graphic settings and at a sub 1080 resolution, I would not be surprised to see you get 25/30 FPS.

Edited by Deathwarrior, 17 October 2012 - 08:48 AM.

[NightFallsOnU]

Thank you Deathwarrior... that has helped put my mind at ease. If you are right and i get even 20 fps (granted 25/30 would be heaven) i would count it as worth the funds i put into upgrading... And I have no prob playing this game on all low settings so long as i can get into my Raven (Wolfhound when we get it) and put some large laser up someones rear panel... ()7 cheers and salutes

[Mason Grimm]

Moving to HARDWARE forum.

[Catamount]

NIghtfalls, one thing that should help enormously is the DX11 release. DX10/11 reduce CPU overhead greatly, and DX11 often increases overall performance over DX9. In Star Trek Online, it was a 30-50% performance increase across the board when they brought in DX11; I got about 40% better. At worst, again, it should alleviate the problem of older CPUs. Crysis 2, which shares an engine with this game, doesn't see a huge flat performance boost moving from DX9 to DX11, not to my knowledge, but it does go from requiring a Sandy Bridge i5 to get good framerates (and at least a quad core to even be playable), to having CPUs basically not matter in DX11.

Barring a very crappy DX11 implementation, when that happens, your system should be fine, not ideal, but certainly good enough. Until it comes, just hang in there. The better GPU will make it playable, and DX11 coming in should actually make it run decently.

[bobHasAVirus]

Please read...important stuff. All Phenom processors that are four numbers in length and end with 00 have an issue called the 'TLB Bug' basically the first generation of Phenom processors would crash the OS (and require a reboot) if you were running a virtualized OS under very very specific conditions of running windows xp 32 bit inside of windows xp 32 bit. AMD decided the best fix would be to require motherboard makers to patch the BIOS and disable part of the CPU. Downside is this fix, because it disables part of the cache on the processor will slow your CPU down a bit. Google for TLB Bug, TLB Patch, TLB patch undo. There's many programs that you just have to run once each time your computer starts and it updates the microcode on the processor to unlock the cache. You can gain 5-30% more CPU performance. I had an old phenom 9200 and I would get a 20% FPS increase in many games by disabling the TLB fix by AMD.

Having said that. Your current bottleneck is definitely your GPU. It's meant for video playing/2D games and such. Any upgrade would be worthwhile. The 7750 might not be the most powerful card on the market, but it is definitely suitable for gaming. You may have to run things at lower quality. But should definitely be playable. While I don't have the exact build you have, I can slow down things to something similar. I ran a Phenom 965 @ 1.9Ghz, and ran an AMD 6870 to have a similar pixel fillrate and memory bandwidth as a 7750. On low settings I was running typically around 30fps. Dipping maybe to 15 at the lowest. While not identical to your setup. Should be similar, and should be very playable.

[UPnADAM]

I have a dell xps 8300 with a i5230 quadcore, it came stock with a crappy hd6450 and i got about 12fps on THE LOWEST settings...Now with the Asus 7750 I play on a mixture of low,med,high settings on 1080p res and get 30-45fps map depending.

[darknothing]

I had the 7750, sold it and got the 6950, 20+ more fps on ultra settings with the 6950

[M E X]

NightFallsOnU, on 17 October 2012 - 02:44 PM, said:

Thank you Deathwarrior... that has helped put my mind at ease. If you are right and i get even 20 fps (granted 25/30 would be heaven) i would count it as worth the funds i put into upgrading... And I have no prob playing this game on all low settings so long as i can get into my Raven (Wolfhound when we get it) and put some large laser up someones rear panel...

As I had 4-8 FPS myself with a 8400GT, I am interested in upgrading my GPU to a Sapphire HD7750 Ultimate 1024 MB Grafikkarte PCIe myself.
What FPS do you have with your new GPU now ?

MfG, MEX

[Sen]

You could also keep an eye out for Sale prices on a 6850/6870. . . Newegg HAD a 6870 that was $119 after $30 MIR, but it seems to be gone now. Substantial performance over a 7750

[Cid F]

The 77xx Cards are crap for gaming! Buy a 78xx or 79xx Card. Ort a cheap 68xx Ort 69xx. EBay has the answer.

[Agincourt]

Cid F, on 28 November 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

The 77xx Cards are crap for gaming! Buy a 78xx or 79xx Card. Ort a cheap 68xx Ort 69xx. EBay has the answer.

A 7700 would be roughly comparable to a 6870, so it's not a bad choice for a mid-range card (assuming under 1080p resolution). For the extra cost I'd look at moving up to a 7850 however on the ATI side instead as you suggested, especially if it's paired with a 1080p monitor.

Edited by Agincourt, 29 November 2012 - 05:03 PM.

[NightFallsOnU]

M E X, on 28 November 2012 - 04:39 AM, said:

As I had 4-8 FPS myself with a 8400GT, I am interested in upgrading my GPU to a Sapphire HD7750 Ultimate 1024 MB Grafikkarte PCIe myself.
What FPS do you have with your new GPU now ?

MfG, MEX

I wish i could tell you but i will not be able to upgrade till taxtime... seems i may just get a new system instead

and guys keep in mind some of us can only fit single slot cards

[M E X]

NightFallsOnU, on 10 December 2012 - 07:56 PM, said:

I wish i could tell you but i will not be able to upgrade till taxtime... seems i may just get a new system instead

and guys keep in mind some of us can only fit single slot cards

With a Pentium D 820 CPU & a msi HD7750, crippled by 2GB DDR3 to a memory bandwith of only 25.6 GB/s instead of the usual 72 GB/s, I now get 10-20 FPS ( 1024x768, lowest settings, full screen ) in battles, up to 40 FPS in the mech bay and up to 50 FPS when I am logged out. I asume the low FPS in battles is because of my CPU which only has a Windows subindex of 4.6 ... with your quad core you should get much better FPS in battles at higher resolutions and more details, but take care that you dont get a HD7750 crippled by DDR3 too !
http://www.hwcompare...radeon-hd-7750/
I didnt even find your HD3200 in the tool I usually use to compare GPU, so I compared it with a the lowest I could find: a HD3470.

MfG, MEX

PS: If your CPU subindex is below 6 I would suggest getting a better CPU for playing MWO as even my msi HD7750 crippled by 2GB DDR3 video RAM reached GPU subindexes of 6.8 !
I used 64bit Windows 8 Release Preview to calculate the 4.6 CPU subindex of my dual core Pentium D 820.
What value do you get for a AMD Phenom 9100e Quadcore CPU ?

Edited by M E X, 11 December 2012 - 01:09 AM.

[NightFallsOnU]

M E X, on 11 December 2012 - 12:58 AM, said:

With a Pentium D 820 CPU & a msi HD7750, crippled by 2GB DDR3 to a memory bandwith of only 25.6 GB/s instead of the usual 72 GB/s, I now get 10-20 FPS ( 1024x768, lowest settings, full screen ) in battles, up to 40 FPS in the mech bay and up to 50 FPS when I am logged out. I asume the low FPS in battles is because of my CPU which only has a Windows subindex of 4.6 ... with your quad core you should get much better FPS in battles at higher resolutions and more details, but take care that you dont get a HD7750 crippled by DDR3 too !
http://www.hwcompare...radeon-hd-7750/
I didnt even find your HD3200 in the tool I usually use to compare GPU, so I compared it with a the lowest I could find: a HD3470.

MfG, MEX

PS: If your CPU subindex is below 6 I would suggest getting a better CPU for playing MWO as even my msi HD7750 crippled by 2GB DDR3 video RAM reached GPU subindexes of 6.8 !
I used 64bit Windows 8 Release Preview to calculate the 4.6 CPU subindex of my dual core Pentium D 820.
What value do you get for a AMD Phenom 9100e Quadcore CPU ?

i have windows vista 32 bit and it gives me a 3.8

[M E X]

NightFallsOnU, on 17 December 2012 - 03:02 PM, said:

i have windows vista 32 bit and it gives me a 3.8

A AMD Phenom 9100e Quadcore only has a CPU score of 3.8 in WinDOOF Vista ?
That is even worse than the 4.1 CPU score I got with a SINGLE CORE P4 630 with 3GHZ !

Either your CPU isnt working properly, or Vista uses a different CPU score than Win 8 ...
but I asume that you are just using a old BLOATWARE Vista which you got together with your computer ?

Windows 8 Release Preview is working until January 2013, so best advise I can give you is to put another HDD with at least 40GB into your computer and install 64bit Win 8 RP on it !
Then look what CPU index you get for your AMD Phenom 9100e Quadcore, and try MWO with 64bit Win 8 RP !

I am sure that your AMD Phenom 9100e Quadcore is ok, and only the BLOATWARE Vista you are using is the source of your problems

MfG, MEX

Edited by M E X, 18 December 2012 - 02:15 PM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Bear in mind a 9100e as a socket AM2 1.8ghz quad core.
@1.8ghz its hardly fast by today's standards.