slow framerate with GeForce 4 Ti 4200!!!

hey kobe, try making your power supply watts to 350, then observe.

There's no evidence of having a more powerful power supply making a game actually have a better frame rate. The card either works or it doesn't, there's nothing in between. If the card works and then dies half way..that may be a power problem. But that's due more likely to overheating. Everyone here have their cards working perfectly in other games EXCEPT this one. That's the catch right there. There's no reason a 350 watt power supply would improve pathetic framerates in this game when everything else runs fine.

The only time I've heard of needing a power supply >300 watts, is with a radeon 9500 pro or a 9700 pro. The reason for this is that these cards have fans attached to them which require direct attachments to your power supply via the same connectors that provide power to your hard drives and other peripherals within your computer. That's not to say that these cards will not provide the same frame rate with a 300 watt power supply. My 9500 pro works fine, and i'm only using a 300 watt power supply myself. There is more than enough juice going into my card, and I am getting adequate frame rates corresponding to what others have gotten with better systems with 350 WATTS of power.
So, either your card is getting enough juice and it's running...or it's not getting enough and you're getting a blank screen.

As far as Geforce4's being better on P4 boards, I seriously doubt it. Are you talking a/b P4 MOTHERBOARDS?..if that's the case, that may only be half true. They may run better on a specific P4 board which is superior to other P4 boards and Socket A boards. It is also possible that there is a Socket A board with an Athlon XP at its core providing better performance with a Geforce4 than a lesser P4 board. All depends what you are comparing with, and you can't make a general statement like that.

For ppl getting crappy framerates with Geforce cards, I know of no solution. This game is very poorly programmed, and that right there is where to blame for sub-par performance with high end GPUs. Don't believe gimmicks such as a lack of memory on the card..the fact you're running on AGP 4X instead of 8X..300watt vs 350watt power supplies. If a radeon 9700 pro can't run this game at max details at 60fps at ALL TIMES, this game just isn't optimized properly. Simple as that.

My setup:
K7S5A
Duron 900
320MB SDram
Sapphire 9100 128MB
WinXP

I can run games like NHL 2003 & Return to Castle Wolfenstein with max settings and things run extremely smooth...
but when I tried running this game even the lowest settings is crappy...

This sucks!

One thing I have found with Nba Live 2003 is that the game is very CPU/platform bound. I recently did a little experiment by overclocking my radeon 9500 pro from defaults (276/270) to 330/310. The game barely ran faster. I then proceeded by overclocking my xp1800+ to the speeds of an xp1900+. The game showed about a 5% increase in framerate. Furthermore, I tweaked my memory timings in the bios (CAS2.5 to CAS2) which resulted in around another 5% increase. This game seems very platform bound to me.

Due to the nature of the poor programming involved in this game, I don't believe anyone can run this game at a constant 60fps with details on MAX w/o VERY high end hardware. Does anyone with anything short of a P4 3.06 and a radeon 9800pro want to prove me wrong?

i dont know if i get 60fps, but my game runs smooth on 1280x1024. Heres my specs:

AMD Athlon XP 2600+ (333MHz FSB)
ASUS A7N8X mb
512mb PC2700 mem.
GeForce 4 Ti4200 64MB
Soundblaster Live X-Gamer
300 watt Antec power supply


as i said, my game runs perfectly smooth but im not sure how many FPS i get. i think the processor makes a huge difference, because it used to be slow when i had my 1700+, now since i got my 2600+ its been really smooth ever since. also, if you have 256mb of memory, the game will run very slow, and you will see a huge performance increase if you double your ram up to 512mb.

There's no evidence of having a more powerful power supply making a game actually have a better frame rate.

A 350Watt PSU will make a performance difference in certain circumstances as in the game the system can become a little too hot and heat is one of the main problems in slow downs and hanging.

So a 350Watt PSU should have a better extractor fan is recommended and in some places they won't sell(&warranty it) you a ATHLON unless you have minimun of 300Watts.

Therefore it should give you better frame rates and work fine!

I have a AThlon 2200+
512DDR400
ATI Radeon128MB
XP SP1
Runs fine other than crashing everynow and then think cause of patches

There's no evidence of having a more powerful power supply making a game actually have a better frame rate.

A 350Watt PSU will make a performance difference in certain circumstances as in the game the system can become a little too hot and heat is one of the main problems in slow downs and hanging.

So a 350Watt PSU should have a better extractor fan is recommended and in some places they won't sell(&warranty it) you a ATHLON unless you have minimun of 300Watts.

Therefore it should give you better frame rates and work fine!

hmm...you might be right...BUT I'm not completely convinced about that. A 350 watt PSU will generate even more heat than a 350 watt one. And theoretically would produce LOWER framerates since heat would increase. It may have a faster spinning fan, but in the end, I doubt that the difference is negligable and would probably cancel each other out. Overall, I don't think in their case a Geforce4 Ti would need a 350-watt power supply. A radeon 9800 pro or a GeforceFX might, but I still think the only reason is to make sure the graphics card does not produce as much of a powerdrain on the other internal peripherals, rather than producing better framerates. It would be interesting if you could prove me wrong conclusively though since I haven't read too much about this.

im running:
2.53GHZ P4
512 MB of RAM
80 GIG HD
Geforce 4 64mb

but i dont have the latest drivers, the game rusn fine, but at times it will erk a lil then go back to normal
any suggestions??

I think minimum 512 MB Ram need for Win XP...

Where the heck you hear that from?
lmao

I ran xp with 64mb's minimum of sd ram.
min is 64 M$s says, recommended is 128mbs.

I currently have 256mb ddr pc2100 and i run all my software and fast speeds pretty much. Including NBA Live 2003
I have all the details up on max. antisco on, @ 1280x1024 and it runs good. I keep it usually though at 1024x768 though. cause it is ALITTLE performance slow i noticed, i still could play it on that if i want.

Jeez yous goto stop beatin up on yours components lol.
j/k

my specs are

AMD Athlon xp 1700+ B core @1.56 OCed alittle not much though from 1.46.
Samsung PC 2100 256mb's
500watt powertech psu
geforce ti 4200 64mbs agp 8x ( running on a 4x's motherboard.)

There's no evidence of having a more powerful power supply making a game actually have a better frame rate.

A 350Watt PSU will make a performance difference in certain circumstances as in the game the system can become a little too hot and heat is one of the main problems in slow downs and hanging.

So a 350Watt PSU should have a better extractor fan is recommended and in some places they won't sell(&warranty it) you a ATHLON unless you have minimun of 300Watts.

Therefore it should give you better frame rates and work fine!

hmm...you might be right...BUT I'm not completely convinced about that. A 350 watt PSU will generate even more heat than a 350 watt one. And theoretically would produce LOWER framerates since heat would increase. It may have a faster spinning fan, but in the end, I doubt that the difference is negligable and would probably cancel each other out. Overall, I don't think in their case a Geforce4 Ti would need a 350-watt power supply. .

Huh? lol.

a 350 watt psu will generate more heat than a 300 watt?
a computer only produces what it needs. The more components you add to the Computer THEN the more heat will be produced. it will NOT lower your framerate from the psu you have, lol, thats pretty silly. yeah more heat increase lowers the performance of your COMPUTER, but your alittle off.
just cause it's 350 watts it wont automatically increase more heat.
Im running a 500 watt psu and my temps are bout 37C , thats with alittle overclock too. Like i said, i get sweet speeds with high max details.
Check out Overclockers.com forums for more info im over there alot.

The nvidia cards ( as far as ti 4200 cards go )SHOULD have a 350 watt psu for best/good performance, it's recommended, and too low of wattage will cause your monitor too blink on and off as well as slow performanc. Mines did it when i had a 250 watt.

i dont know if i get 60fps, but my game runs smooth on 1280x1024. Heres my specs:

AMD Athlon XP 2600+ (333MHz FSB)
ASUS A7N8X mb
512mb PC2700 mem.
GeForce 4 Ti4200 64MB
Soundblaster Live X-Gamer
300 watt Antec power supply


as i said, my game runs perfectly smooth but im not sure how many FPS i get. i think the processor makes a huge difference, because it used to be slow when i had my 1700+, now since i got my 2600+ its been really smooth ever since. also, if you have 256mb of memory, the game will run very slow, and you will see a huge performance increase if you double your ram up to 512mb.

?
nah uh, Im get GREAT Speeds as i said before lol.
True will see huge performance increase if double the ram, but 256 is more than enough.

I also have the 1700+ i bet mines runs just as good as your 2600+

Sorry for the multiple post, just saw these post in the past and had to wait till my account was activated.

Overall, just blame EA, they did a terrible job with alot of things with this game. cant wait to see 2004.

just cause it's 350 watts it wont automatically increase more heat.

Of course not, but it won't automatically decrease the amount of heat either which is what Divan Santana implied.

a computer only produces what it needs. The more components you add to the Computer THEN the more heat will be produced. it will NOT lower your framerate from the psu you have, lol, thats pretty silly.

And I think the notion of having a 350-watt psu increasing your framerate is quite silly too. It can result in less odd unpredictable crashes and overall better general stability for your system, but to say your framerates are gonna jump by 20 or something due to a 350-watt psu compared to a 300-watt one then that's just ridiculous.

Then again, I'd gladly accept the fact I'm wrong if you can find me a website which conducted a difference in framerate (not stability) in multiple games beyond a reasonable doubt due to a 350-watt psu over a 300-watt one.

Im running a 500 watt psu and my temps are bout 37C , thats with alittle overclock too. Like i said, i get sweet speeds with high max details.

There are a lot of factors influencing temperature in a case:
The size of the case and efficient airflow.
The amount of fans you have blowing and it's placement.
The amount of cards attached to your motherboard.
The type of CPU you have and the HSF on it.
The room you placed your computer in.
The time of day.
etc.
So saying your temps are around 37 doesn't mean much in itself.
Besides, depending if you got a quality 500-watt psu or not, your rig might still die when loads reach up to even 300-watts or if sudden spikes occur.

The nvidia cards ( as far as ti 4200 cards go )SHOULD have a 350 watt psu for best/good performance, it's recommended, and too low of wattage will cause your monitor too blink on and off as well as slow performanc. Mines did it when i had a 250 watt.

I don't doubt your monitor blinking on and off but the part about "slow performance.": Prove it.
And I doubt they recommend a 350watt psu. If you said 300watt it would be more believable, since most of ATI's R300 core graphics cards recommend the minimum for that, and they DEFINITELY draw more power than the Geforce4 Ti line of cards. Sure it'd be nice to have a 350watt psu, but only for stability purposes, not framerate.
I have a Radeon 9500 pro in my system (athlon 1800+, abit kr7a), and I only have a 300-watt psu. By your claims, my computer should be choking everytime I run a game. Not so. Rock solid unless I overclock.

Nice read about power supplies:
http://firingsquad.gamers.com/guides/po ... efault.asp
notice the lack of mention of frame rate problems in underpowered systems which WOULD be a big issue.

Overall, just blame EA, they did a terrible job with alot of things with this game. cant wait to see 2004.

So true. This game is too CPU-bound as Pierce_34's new system and my own overclocking experiments prove.

just cause it's 350 watts it wont automatically increase more heat.

Of course not, but it won't automatically decrease the amount of heat either which is what Divan Santana implied.

a computer only produces what it needs. The more components you add to the Computer THEN the more heat will be produced. it will NOT lower your framerate from the psu you have, lol, thats pretty silly.

And I think the notion of having a 350-watt psu increasing your framerate is quite silly too. It can result in less odd unpredictable crashes and overall better general stability for your system, but to say your framerates are gonna jump by 20 or something due to a 350-watt psu compared to a 300-watt one then that's just ridiculous.

Then again, I'd gladly accept the fact I'm wrong if you can find me a website which conducted a difference in framerate (not stability) in multiple games beyond a reasonable doubt due to a 350-watt psu over a 300-watt one.

Im running a 500 watt psu and my temps are bout 37C , thats with alittle overclock too. Like i said, i get sweet speeds with high max details.

There are a lot of factors influencing temperature in a case:
The size of the case and efficient airflow.
The amount of fans you have blowing and it's placement.
The amount of cards attached to your motherboard.
The type of CPU you have and the HSF on it.
The room you placed your computer in.
The time of day.
etc.
So saying your temps are around 37 doesn't mean much in itself.
Besides, depending if you got a quality 500-watt psu or not, your rig might still die when loads reach up to even 300-watts or if sudden spikes occur.

The nvidia cards ( as far as ti 4200 cards go )SHOULD have a 350 watt psu for best/good performance, it's recommended, and too low of wattage will cause your monitor too blink on and off as well as slow performanc. Mines did it when i had a 250 watt.

I don't doubt your monitor blinking on and off but the part about "slow performance.": Prove it.
And I doubt they recommend a 350watt psu. If you said 300watt it would be more believable, since most of ATI's R300 core graphics cards recommend the minimum for that, and they DEFINITELY draw more power than the Geforce4 Ti line of cards. Sure it'd be nice to have a 350watt psu, but only for stability purposes, not framerate.
I have a Radeon 9500 pro in my system (athlon 1800+, abit kr7a), and I only have a 300-watt psu. By your claims, my computer should be choking everytime I run a game. Not so. Rock solid unless I overclock.

Nice read about power supplies:
http://firingsquad.gamers.com/guides/po ... efault.asp
notice the lack of mention of frame rate problems in underpowered systems which WOULD be a big issue.

I don't doubt your monitor blinking on and off but the part about "slow performance.": Prove it.
And I doubt they recommend a 350watt psu. If you said 300watt it would be more believable, since most of ATI's R300 core graphics cards recommend the minimum for that, and they DEFINITELY draw more power than the Geforce4 Ti line of cards. Sure it'd be nice to have a 350watt psu, but only for stability purposes, not framerate.
I have a Radeon 9500 pro in my system (athlon 1800+, abit kr7a), and I only have a 300-watt psu. By your claims, my computer should be choking everytime I run a game. Not so. Rock solid unless I overclock

Heres the site of my graphics card, *BUT* I swear to ya that on my box it says 350 minimum Requirements. That shows 300 minimum on the site.

http://www.pny.com/products/verto/geFor ... 200agp.asp
I never said that it will increase framerates btw. Stabibility yes it deff will do.
My whole point to your post was ...
" A 350 watt PSU will generate even more heat than a 350 watt one. And theoretically would produce LOWER framerates since heat would increase"
The point that you said that a more powerfull psu would make it generate more heat and make him get lower framerates wich is far from true.
I guess if you got a really cheap psu then you might get one that doesnt even have a exaust fan lol.


As for psu's and differnt things mattering that determine your case temps , of course.

I just built my computer, every thing is new except the harddrive, and keyboard. Nice size case, i have 2 air fans connected, one in the front lower part by the front usb's i put in , and the other a windows ceiling fan blowing in the back vents of the case lol.
my exaust obviously my psu. i made sure it's circulating correct so my front fan blows air towards the exaust. ALL my PCI slots are empty, oh no, my 5.1 sound card is in one slot, everything else is empty.
I have a thermaltake volcano 5 ( should of got the 7 but i was anxios on getting a new computer and didnt give a damn lol )heatsink that is doing pretty good with the stock thermal pad on it.
On hot 90 degree dayz it gets up to around 45 till i kick on the window fan, then it drops to about 40C. I have a temperature alarm set for 60c also. it hits that and it shuts off. All this for my small overclock of 10mhz fsb lol.
just preparing myself for when i get better ddr memory. right now pc2100 is holding me back.

alittle off subject but, letting you know what i have and let you decide if thats a good comp stuff for the degree i told you in post its running at.

my rig dying is not of worry, cause like i said its all brand new, and i know how to manage computers, and fix em. Fixed all my friends comps and i live for it now. i love it. I hear people complain time and time ( like matters in this subject ) and i wonder how they get into those predicaments. no offence or harm meant to anyone in the thread.

But TRUE, friggin EA!

Heres the site of my graphics card, *BUT* I swear to ya that on my box it says 350 minimum Requirements. That shows 300 minimum on the site.

I believe you, and of course it's always better to have a little more headroom. But keep in mind, at the time when the Geforce4 Ti family was first released, 300watt psu's were the norm for systems as hardware was not as demanding as it is now due to both the R300 core and the ridiculous GeforceFX and it's crazyass fan. Therefore, there should be no problems running a Geforce4 with a 300watt psu. A little more couldn't hurt obviously but the manufacturer would not advertise something that their product wouldn't work on obviously.

http://www.pny.com/products/verto/geForce4/ti4200agp.asp
I never said that it will increase framerates btw. Stabibility yes it deff will do.

Actually you implied that performance increases when you said:

The nvidia cards ( as far as ti 4200 cards go )SHOULD have a 350 watt psu for best/good performance, it's recommended, and too low of wattage will cause your monitor too blink on and off as well as slow performanc

Right at the end. Not true. But regardless, I just wanted to prove whoever said a more powerful power supply increases fps is definitely dead wrong.

My whole point to your post was ...
" A 350 watt PSU will generate even more heat than a 350 watt one. And theoretically would produce LOWER framerates since heat would increase"
The point that you said that a more powerfull psu would make it generate more heat and make him get lower framerates wich is far from true.
I guess if you got a really cheap psu then you might get one that doesnt even have a exaust fan lol.

=) yes you're right, I was wrong about that. I was trying to twist around a previous poster's logic in which he implied that a 300-watt psu would cause greater heat production. Obviously I mixed myself up in the process.

As for psu's and differnt things mattering that determine your case temps , of course.

I just built my computer, every thing is new except the harddrive, and keyboard. Nice size case, i have 2 air fans connected, one in the front lower part by the front usb's i put in , and the other a windows ceiling fan blowing in the back vents of the case lol.
my exaust obviously my psu. i made sure it's circulating correct so my front fan blows air towards the exaust. ALL my PCI slots are empty, oh no, my 5.1 sound card is in one slot, everything else is empty.
I have a thermaltake volcano 5 ( should of got the 7 but i was anxios on getting a new computer and didnt give a damn lol )heatsink that is doing pretty good with the stock thermal pad on it.
On hot 90 degree dayz it gets up to around 45 till i kick on the window fan, then it drops to about 40C. I have a temperature alarm set for 60c also. it hits that and it shuts off. All this for my small overclock of 10mhz fsb lol.
alittle off subject but, letting you know what i have and let you decide if thats a good comp stuff for the degree i told you in post its running at.

But but...what's the cpu and mb?hehe..u left out the most important parts for me to judge along with the rest of your system!
Actually I was wondering why you even need a 500watt psu, which is definitely an overkill since as you said you only have one pci slot used.

just preparing myself for when i get better ddr memory. right now pc2100 is holding me back.

same here, but actually my whole system is holding me back at the moment. My system is:

Athlon xp 1800+ (palomino core)
512mb ddr266 (samsung 2-2-2)
abit kr7a-133R (nothing special)
80gig ibm deskstar (regardless how many horror stories i've heard about this drive, mine still hasn't died yet )
radeon 9500 pro (o/c slightly to only 330/292..cheap 3.3ns infineon mem not even stable @ 303mhz)

I'm pretty sure the bottleneck in my system is my mb, cpu, ram. I wish I bought a motherboard capable of at least a 166fsb so I could stick a 2600+ into my system and buy ddr333 ram so I could run my mb/mem syncronously. An Asus A7N8X wouldn't hurt either so I can run in dual channel ddr. Man, how only ONE year makes such a diff in the computer world.
My temperatures are pretty high compared to yours. I'm using stock hsf that came with my cpu when I built my system. I hover around the 55oC mark. Still, no spontaneous crashes or problems. From what I remember, the Athlons work fine even at temperatures above 60, but start to mess up above 70.

Oh did you say that you were running this game smoothly at high details? I don't see how you can cuz I can't either and I have similar specs to u except my gfx card is slightly faster. With the in-game framerate counter with full details I get around 30fps constant. That is NOT smooth in this game at all. I need 60 minimum. Just wondering what do you get???

oh and just for other geeks here:
I picked out my dad's computer the other day an i'm picking it up tomorrow:
Intel P4 2.8C (hopefully it can o/c that little bit to 3.0)
1GB PC3200 DDR400
Asus P4P800-Deluxe
Radeon 9200 OEM (he plays no games whatsoever)
120GB WD1200JB 8MB Cache

Pretty powerful system, but he does encoding and all sorts of weird stuff. I just wanna shove my R9500 Pro into it just to see how much more it can spread it's wings compared to my system.

Comments? Just wondering if you have a diff opinion on my choices.

Oh i posted my specs somewhere back on a page or something on this but...

AMD Athlon xp 1700+ Bcore <--- ( best Overclockers on da market, have you read the stories on these babies? got it for $42s on newegg.com too. )

Biostar m7viw Board with kt266A via chipset.( generic nothing big, i just had to get something decent price and up to date on specs )

The reason i have a 500 watt power supply is because more never hurts to have. and you answered it also with ....

Actually I was wondering why you even need a 500watt psu, which is definitely an overkill since as you said you only have one pci slot used.

TechnoNRGKid wrote:
just preparing myself for when i get better ddr memory. right now pc2100 is holding me back

^^^ Later i will be gettin color mods for my fan, case, and all that good stuff. will come into big effect as i will be going all out on lighting, but yet still having to keep it cool as it will warm up with all the lights and stuff.
But like i said, it does'nt hurt to have extra wattage, like we mentioned, it helps for a more stable computer in the end.

My card is , well was @ 250/600 <--
Im back down to 250/513 right now.

Oh did you say that you were running this game smoothly at high details? I don't see how you can cuz I can't either and I have similar specs to u except my gfx card is slightly faster. With the in-game framerate counter with full details I get around 30fps constant. That is NOT smooth in this game at all. I need 60 minimum. Just wondering what do you get???

I did'nt test it with the fps , i'll do that, but i usually look for the slow downs in game, little glitches, things like passing the ball and seeing it slow up a quick second, all that stuff. i study things pretty close by eye. Im use to that from having a slow system in the pass seeings things freak out lol.

but playing in game now, i see no slow downs. Did i mention im a tweakin freak? lol.
Running on xp, i tweak/disable the services i dont need and are useless.
registry tweaks, device manager tweaks and such. plus i format my drive almost weekly, sometimes less. on a fresh install with out tweaks the game still runs great. maxed. Dont forget about the Bios tweaks, and such too. Also having only one PCI Card on my mother board frees up more resources, same with if you disable serial ports in bios you dont use.

I got a billion of em.

AMD Athlon xp 1700+ Bcore <--- ( best Overclockers on da market, have you read the stories on these babies? got it for $42s on newegg.com too. )

Interesting...I thought if you were to buy an AMD today you'd aim for at least a Barton core..but like you said..yours should o/c's like crazy. What have you been able to get to so far with it?

Biostar m7viw Board with kt266A via chipset.( generic nothing big, i just had to get something decent price and up to date on specs )

hmm..interesting choice again..just out of curiosity why not go with the proven Asus A7N8X? I know it's sorta played out..but there's no denying that the nforce2 chipset is the way to go..the via chipsets have lost their edge..and the kt266a is kinda dated now. But anyways, is it a good overclocking board?..I've never heard of it.

My card is , well was @ 250/600 <--
Im back down to 250/513 right now.

ic ic..is it unstable at 600? I get memory artifacts at 606 on my 9500p after playing GTA: Vice City for a while, but I can run 3dmark01 and 03 a few times at 330/660...I wish I'd spent the extra money and just got the 9700non-pro..easily overclockable to pro speeds

I did'nt test it with the fps , i'll do that, but i usually look for the slow downs in game, little glitches, things like passing the ball and seeing it slow up a quick second, all that stuff. i study things pretty close by eye. Im use to that from having a slow system in the pass seeings things freak out lol.

hehe yeah that was like me too..but you can really tell if it's running under 60fps when you throw a cross court pass while on a fast break..
A lot of ppl have different tolerances for jerkiness..which is why I use the counter to make sure what I feel is actually smoothness. Some people can't stand 30fps (myself), while others can live with it and think it's smooth as silk..crazy ain't it?

but playing in game now, i see no slow downs. Did i mention im a tweakin freak? lol.
Running on xp, i tweak/disable the services i dont need and are useless.
registry tweaks, device manager tweaks and such. plus i format my drive almost weekly, sometimes less. on a fresh install with out tweaks the game still runs great. maxed. Dont forget about the Bios tweaks, and such too. Also having only one PCI Card on my mother board frees up more resources, same with if you disable serial ports in bios you dont use.

I got a billion of em.

haha i tweak too..but not to that extent where I disable unused serial ports. I recently tweaked my memory timings to cas 2.5-2-2-2 and I saw around a 10% boost in framerates. Not bad getting something from nothing!

Wow I just noticed how off-topic my last few posts have been.

Well guys if you have slow framerates and have nice systems its cause of your motherboard chipsets. My old board ran live ok on max detail bewteen 30-35 fps. Now with my new board 50-60 fps.

AMD Athlon xp 1700+ Bcore <--- ( best Overclockers on da market, have you read the stories on these babies? got it for $42s on newegg.com too. )

Interesting...I thought if you were to buy an AMD today you'd aim for at least a Barton core..but like you said..yours should o/c's like crazy. What have you been able to get to so far with it?

Biostar m7viw Board with kt266A via chipset.( generic nothing big, i just had to get something decent price and up to date on specs )

hmm..interesting choice again..just out of curiosity why not go with the proven Asus A7N8X? I know it's sorta played out..but there's no denying that the nforce2 chipset is the way to go..the via chipsets have lost their edge..and the kt266a is kinda dated now. But anyways, is it a good overclocking board?..I've never heard of it.

ya didnt really read my post did you? lol
I had to get something at least decent and up to date, and in my money range.
i was running on a pentium 2 hewlett packard that SUCKED. integrated agp 2x ati pro turbo card, and other crap. 300mhz is baaaaaaaaaaad.

I thought if you were to buy an AMD today you'd aim for at least a Barton core.

Lots of overclockers by the thorougbred over a barton. Because of like i said the overclockability.why pay up to $100s or more when you can get a $42 cpu that does the same speeds or more?
Easily with the right motherboard and ram you can get up to 2.2 ghz with it. The Voltage for the thoroughbred b core is the best , thats why there the best overclockers. you goto know bout them?
once again, check out www.overclockers.com and goto there forums. read the post in the AMD cpu forums.
I havent been able to OC far because of my ram is holding me back. farthest i went was too abot 145 fsb or something. think about 1.57 or something ::shrugs::
but temperatures kinda scared me, and random ie crashes in xp wich i never had before. i goto get new freakin ram.
The Via Chipset , i know all bout it, and just overall like said, it fit my money range for the time. I got speeds that are good enough for me right now and got me back into the computer race. Its not a great overclocking board. But i got a little fiddling to do with Overclocking, wich is all i need for now. next board is probably the Asus 7333 i think that was it.

My card is , well was @ 250/600 <--
Im back down to 250/513 right now.

ic ic..is it unstable at 600? I get memory artifacts at 606 on my 9500p after playing GTA: Vice City for a while, but I can run 3dmark01 and 03 a few times at 330/660...I wish I'd spent the extra money and just got the 9700non-pro..easily overclockable to pro speeds

K im totally new at overclocking graphics cards, but im kinda like wondering right now, you overclock untill you see artifacts, then you back off a bit. prob is i went to 600 seen NO artifacts or nothing. like your card is at 606, it makes me wonder, how come i dont see any. lol.
I could easily go up it looks like,but im afraid ,even though warnings are artifacts and such. i should just keep pushing it till i see them though and see, it's probably gonna show some with in the next few mhz's. im surpised it can go up that far. thats why i went back down. ima check it out tonight.

I did'nt test it with the fps , i'll do that, but i usually look for the slow downs in game, little glitches, things like passing the ball and seeing it slow up a quick second, all that stuff. i study things pretty close by eye. Im use to that from having a slow system in the pass seeings things freak out lol.

hehe yeah that was like me too..but you can really tell if it's running under 60fps when you throw a cross court pass while on a fast break..
A lot of ppl have different tolerances for jerkiness..which is why I use the counter to make sure what I feel is actually smoothness. Some people can't stand 30fps (myself), while others can live with it and think it's smooth as silk..crazy ain't it?

I'll tell ya in a bit whats it at. I know it's up @ like 45 or higher on everything maxed with the highest resolution. still i go down a tad on resolution to give it some breathing room though.

but playing in game now, i see no slow downs. Did i mention im a tweakin freak? lol.
Running on xp, i tweak/disable the services i dont need and are useless.
registry tweaks, device manager tweaks and such. plus i format my drive almost weekly, sometimes less. on a fresh install with out tweaks the game still runs great. maxed. Dont forget about the Bios tweaks, and such too. Also having only one PCI Card on my mother board frees up more resources, same with if you disable serial ports in bios you dont use.

I got a billion of em.

haha i tweak too..but not to that extent where I disable unused serial ports. I recently tweaked my memory timings to cas 2.5-2-2-2 and I saw around a 10% boost in framerates. Not bad getting something from nothing!

I do the serialports cause its really NEVER probably gonna be used by me lol, seems a waiste.
Im still learning memory timings. you cant goto 2 on your cas latency?

Lots of overclockers by the thorougbred over a barton. Because of like i said the overclockability.why pay up to $100s or more when you can get a $42 cpu that does the same speeds or more? Easily with the right motherboard and ram you can get up to 2.2 ghz with it. The Voltage for the thoroughbred b core is the best , thats why there the best overclockers. you goto know bout them?

Yeah I've heard a/b the great o/c stories with the thoroughbred B's, but still I never understood why people are so obsessed with o/c'ing them. A 2500+ Barton here is about $52 CAD more than the 1800+ at the moment. As you said, in order to o/c the 1800+ to great speeds, you have to spend more on the right motherboard and also get quality Ram (corsair, kingston, blah blah blah), extra cooling, voltage mods, etc. I just don't see the point of going thru the extra trouble outweighing the $52 necessary to just BUY the processor you're o/c'ing to. The money you spend on good RAM will already be more than the $52 difference btwn the two processors. Even though the 2500+ runs only at 1.83Ghz, keep in mind you can still o/c that as well. I don't know, I just don't see the trouble (and extra money) you have to spend o/c something outweighing just spending money on the actual chip. Less hassle to me and besides, the difference is < 20% in the end which is too tiny to justify. I guess my philosophy is just totally different. I'd rather put off buying a little longer and save up for midrange stuff, than to buy older stuff and hope to push it to the limit and always looking towards upgrading again in such a short time.

I havent been able to OC far because of my ram is holding me back. farthest i went was too abot 145 fsb or something. think about 1.57 or something ::shrugs::

hmm..you could just run your RAM asyncronously from your fsb. You're not running in dual channel anyways so the penalty shouldn't be as pronounced. Even if you bought ddr333 today, you're not gonna push your fsb up to 166 anyways. But just out of curiousity how do you know it's your ram?

K im totally new at overclocking graphics cards, but im kinda like wondering right now, you overclock untill you see artifacts, then you back off a bit. prob is i went to 600 seen NO artifacts or nothing. like your card is at 606, it makes me wonder, how come i dont see any. lol.
I could easily go up it looks like,but im afraid ,even though warnings are artifacts and such. i should just keep pushing it till i see them though and see, it's probably gonna show some with in the next few mhz's. im surpised it can go up that far. thats why i went back down. ima check it out tonight.

Yeah, the ti4200's are such nice overclockers. I feel bad for ppl that bought ti4400's. What a waste.

I'll tell ya in a bit whats it at. I know it's up @ like 45 or higher on everything maxed with the highest resolution. still i go down a tad on resolution to give it some breathing room though.

That's pretty impressive to be able to run at MAX details and still have it at around 45fps. I guess my graphics card doesn't scale as well as the Geforce4 series when it comes to processors at our slow speeds. Or it could be my game controller. You ever try pulling out a USB device (even in Winxp) and seeing your framerates jump in that game? It's insane. I'm losing about 10-15fps right now with my wingman rumblepad plugged in compared to it being unplugged. Stupid EA.

Im still learning memory timings. you cant goto 2 on your cas latency?

nope..my ddr2100 was cheap: CL2.5. Oh well, it doesn't make TOO big a difference anyways, since I'm not hardcore and I don't consider 10% that big a deal.

Well guys if you have slow framerates and have nice systems its cause of your motherboard chipsets. My old board ran live ok on max detail bewteen 30-35 fps. Now with my new board 50-60 fps.

hmm..i don't know about that. A chipset can only go so far. I don't know how you can gain double the framerate with everything else being the same except your motherboard. I think your case is more of an exception than the rule. Maybe your old motherboard was REALLY old. Also if this were the case, who would EVER buy a faster graphics card?

Lots of overclockers by the thorougbred over a barton. Because of like i said the overclockability.why pay up to $100s or more when you can get a $42 cpu that does the same speeds or more? Easily with the right motherboard and ram you can get up to 2.2 ghz with it. The Voltage for the thoroughbred b core is the best , thats why there the best overclockers. you goto know bout them?

Yeah I've heard a/b the great o/c stories with the thoroughbred B's, but still I never understood why people are so obsessed with o/c'ing them. A 2500+ Barton here is about $52 CAD more than the 1800+ at the moment. As you said, in order to o/c the 1800+ to great speeds, you have to spend more on the right motherboard and also get quality Ram (corsair, kingston, blah blah blah), extra cooling, voltage mods, etc. I just don't see the point of going thru the extra trouble outweighing the $52 necessary to just BUY the processor you're o/c'ing to. The money you spend on good RAM will already be more than the $52 difference btwn the two processors.

Yeah but still no matter what you get, it's gonna benifit you to get better ram anyway, so its never a waist to get better more expensive ram.
The extra cooling and stuff is not really that much extra, and at least for me, doesnt only go hand in hand with the OC'ing but also with the Lighting mods. So it's still not a none so called needed thing that cost extra just for OCing, id still be gettin it if i was'nt OCing for the lights.
It's not all about the right motherboard, just a decent enough board can get you Oc'ing the 1700+ up to the price of what more expensive cpus are at. plus dont even get on comparing the 1700 to a intel pentium , it's sooo far a way better price/performance/overclock ratio there

I just don't see the trouble (and extra money) you have to spend o/c something outweighing just spending money on the actual chip. Less hassle to me and besides, the difference is < 20% in the end which is too tiny to justify.

It's also nice to say you bought your cpu for $42s and is a lower brand ( so called ) , and others spend $100 and you got the same performance or better too.

I guess my philosophy is just totally different. I'd rather put off buying a little longer and save up for midrange stuff, than to buy older stuff and hope to push it to the limit and always looking towards upgrading again in such a short time.

Dude, you dont understand the situation i was in, i LOVE computers, and I COULD NOT Wait to get anything else. Ibeen in the dark with a crappy system for too long.
"older stuff"? my mother board is 2003 just made by Biostar. it's *generic* doesnt mean it's old, and still for generic, its got a few enhanced features
http://www.biostar.com.tw/products/main ... index.php3

only reason i got one supporting sdram and ddr ram is because i was transfering over from sd to ddr, and only had sd at the moment, it was a *PERFECT* conversion for me imo.
everything else on my computer is pretty sweet. I bet i got the best computer on my block.
Im not pushing it to the limit right now.. Im just pushing it everyonce in a while, i have more than enough speed with what i got, but the term "NEED FOR SPEED" comes into play cause of it's crack addiction

I havent been able to OC far because of my ram is holding me back. farthest i went was too abot 145 fsb or something. think about 1.57 or something ::shrugs::

hmm..you could just run your RAM asyncronously from your fsb. You're not running in dual channel anyways so the penalty shouldn't be as pronounced. Even if you bought ddr333 today, you're not gonna push your fsb up to 166 anyways. But just out of curiousity how do you know it's your ram?

Believe me, its my ram.

Yeah, the ti4200's are such nice overclockers. I feel bad for ppl that bought ti4400's. What a waste.

what you think bout the ti4600's?

I'll tell ya in a bit whats it at. I know it's up @ like 45 or higher on everything maxed with the highest resolution. still i go down a tad on resolution to give it some breathing room though.

That's pretty impressive to be able to run at MAX details and still have it at around 45fps. I guess my graphics card doesn't scale as well as the Geforce4 series when it comes to processors at our slow speeds. Or it could be my game controller. You ever try pulling out a USB device (even in Winxp) and seeing your framerates jump in that game? It's insane. I'm losing about 10-15fps right now with my wingman rumblepad plugged in compared to it being unplugged. Stupid EA.

Really? I goto check this out...
btw , where is the in game fps thingy?

It's not all about the right motherboard, just a decent enough board can get you Oc'ing the 1700+ up to the price of what more expensive cpus are at. plus dont even get on comparing the 1700 to a intel pentium , it's sooo far a way better price/performance/overclock ratio there

Of course it's not all about the right motherboard. My main emphasis was on the fact that excellent memory is a definite requirement to do extreme overclocks, and last time I looked, Corsair memory is VERY expensive; well over the cost of jumping up to another cpu.

As far as comparing price/performance ratio btwn Intel and AMD, it's definitely no contest *in the low-end sub-2.0Ghz market range*. However, moving up a little bit, a P4 2.4C is a VERY good overclocker itself and is capable of reaching speeds of 3.6Ghz which kills ANYTHING AMD has and is capable of o/c'ing to, due to the limits of the Barton core. So in that sense, buying Intel over AMD is a better bargain in this case since AMD has nothing to compete with at the mid to high end range anymore.

Dude, you dont understand the situation i was in, i LOVE computers, and I COULD NOT Wait to get anything else. Ibeen in the dark with a crappy system for too long.
"older stuff"? my mother board is 2003 just made by Biostar. it's *generic* doesnt mean it's old, and still for generic, its got a few enhanced features
http://www.biostar.com.tw/products/main ... index.php3

True your motherboard is quite up to date with the newest standards, but there are still some glaring holes in the kt266a chipset compared to some newer chipsets:
1) AGP 8X (albeit quite useless even now)
2) dual channel DDR mode (5-10% increase)
3) support for ddr400 (essential for syncronous o/c'ing @ high fsb speeds)
4) inability to support newer Bartons running at 166 fsb unless you have can lock your pci at 33 (mine can't, which means everytime i o/c my fsb i'm also o/c'ing my pci to super high levels )

what you think bout the ti4600's?

Those people didn't get their money's worth, especially if they bought it now. Playing with FSAA and AF slow that thing down like crazy compared to the R300 Radeons. Definitely the Radeon 9700np is the best buy right now.

btw , where is the in game fps thingy?

In your NBA Live 2003 folder under main/cscripts, there is a file called xstartup.cfg. Find the line that says bind +K_TILDE CONSOLE and remove the two slashes in front of it. Save the file and when you go back into the game you can drop the console by pushing tilde (~). Type: r_showfps 1
That should give you a running fps count.

It's not all about the right motherboard, just a decent enough board can get you Oc'ing the 1700+ up to the price of what more expensive cpus are at. plus dont even get on comparing the 1700 to a intel pentium , it's sooo far a way better price/performance/overclock ratio there :arrow:

Of course it's not all about the right motherboard. My main emphasis was on the fact that excellent memory is a definite requirement to do extreme overclocks, and last time I looked, Corsair memory is VERY expensive; well over the cost of jumping up to another cpu.

Wow where have you been shopping?
on newegg.com you can get crucial, corsiar, and kingston pc2600, 3200 , and i believe even higher, 512mbs for $50s. Check em out.

As far as comparing price/performance ratio btwn Intel and AMD, it's definitely no contest *in the low-end sub-2.0Ghz market range*. However, moving up a little bit, a P4 2.4C is a VERY good overclocker itself and is capable of reaching speeds of 3.6Ghz which kills ANYTHING AMD has and is capable of o/c'ing to, due to the limits of the Barton core. So in that sense, buying Intel over AMD is a better bargain in this case since AMD has nothing to compete with at the mid to high end range anymore.

I have'nt done recent research on that so i cant say much. When i want to buy another processor i'll find something close enough lol
Im always gonna be building computers, just for a hobby, so I'll always will be spending money, not caring, and getting better, no problem, i love it. But as for up to date, ( back on the athlon xp 1700+ ) the way it's been bought, it's still pretty current AND dont be suprised if it can hang with a close 3.6 ghz Overclock of a p4. There is one story of someone OCing it somewhere into the 3 ghz's. But i dont think that was for a everyday use, just for show , that it can reach that high.

Dude, you dont understand the situation i was in, i LOVE computers, and I COULD NOT Wait to get anything else. Ibeen in the dark with a crappy system for too long.
"older stuff"? my mother board is 2003 just made by Biostar. it's *generic* doesnt mean it's old, and still for generic, its got a few enhanced features
http://www.biostar.com.tw/products/main ... index.php3

True your motherboard is quite up to date with the newest standards, but there are still some glaring holes in the kt266a chipset compared to some newer chipsets:
1) AGP 8X (albeit quite useless even now)
2) dual channel DDR mode (5-10% increase)
3) support for ddr400 (essential for syncronous o/c'ing @ high fsb speeds)
4) inability to support newer Bartons running at 166 fsb unless you have can lock your pci at 33 (mine can't, which means everytime i o/c my fsb i'm also o/c'ing my pci to super high levels )

Maybe you can help me out with this, i have heard of dual channel ddr , and know it increases speeds, but help me out with what is it exactly? same for ASync/Sync Ocing the FSB, Havent read up to know this part on OC'ing actually yet. Doing just small increments on OCing , nothing big till my ram is better.
From what i knew of also, only the Pentium chips can lock the pci/agp slots , amd is out of luck.

btw , where is the in game fps thingy?

In your NBA Live 2003 folder under main/cscripts, there is a file called xstartup.cfg. Find the line that says bind +K_TILDE CONSOLE and remove the two slashes in front of it. Save the file and when you go back into the game you can drop the console by pushing tilde (~). Type: r_showfps 1
That should give you a running fps count.[/quote]

Heh Cool, i never new nba live had a console, sweet.

xstartup.cfg.

::flashback to Linux Operating system::


*Edit*
I just changed the settings, damn, i thouht the cfg would be alittle bigger than that.

Damn, we made this an official Computer tech topic huh?


Holy crap, take a scrollback and look at the damage we caused, just 2 people. sorry coldkevin