Graphics card upgrade - 32 bit or 64 bit?

[Tyger]

Firstly, sorry for the heading, was difficult to know how to encapsulate my query. Hopefully this is an easy question for someone though. I am looking to upgrade my graphics card to this:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Gigabyte-4550-512MB-HM-DDR3-PCX-DVI-XFIRE-HDMI-Video-/370487785884?pt=UK_Computing_Computer_Components_Graphics_Video_TV_Cards_TW&hash=item5642caf99c

Or that type, might not be from that seller but you get my drift. And I have looked into whether this card is a good option for me, and believe me it is!

Only thing i'm not sure about, which perhaps shows my ignorance of such things, is that several of these on eBay including this one mention "64-bit memory interface". Is this referring to the processor required, as mine is 32-bit, or something else entirely? Or does it mean these are typically installed on 32-bit setups but also compatible with 64?

Any help very much appreciated, cheers!

 

[Terronium-12]

It's referring to the address size the VRAM is able to communicate with on the card. It's irrespective of what kind of CPU you're using, or whether you have an x86 (32-bit) or an x64 (64-bit) OS.

That said, if you're playing games a 64-bit memory bus isn't going to do a darn thing for you. You'd be better off searching for a 4870 or 4890.

 

[Tyger]

Believe me this is a big step up from the standard card on my old Dell and won't need a PSU upgrade, so it should be just fine. Not looking to play top-end latest games as I have my PS3 for that. Thanks for the info!

 

[nick09]

You can't do much gaming with such a small bus. You need at least a 128-bit video card if you are going to game with today's games. Should not require anything more than what your power supply can handle.

 

[Tyger]

As above, not looking for something that's "current" as I have a Dell that's 6 years old or so and has a very old legacy ATI card. It also has a PSU that's, I forget the exact amount offhand, but something like 320-350 watts. I did some googling and got the impression anything above that one I was looking at, I might be overdoing things if I didn't upgrade the PSU also.

OK easier if I give the spec:

Dell Dimension 8400
Pentium 4 3.0Ghz 32-bit (single core)
3.0Gb RAM (upgraded from 1.0, but will upgrade to 4.0 same time as I upgrade the video card)
ATI Radeon "X300/X550/X1050 Series" (always loved that vagueness)

I mostly use my computer for the web, manages fine with most streamed video though anything 720p upwards is stuttery so I usually download/capture. Don't really play games, though I did pick up Bioshock (1) recently, and my setup pretty much laughed at me, but I can still pick it up cheap for my PS3 anyway.

I also (no laughing at the back) use/play Second Life, which runs fairly well at lowish settings but the framerate isn't great, i'm hoping that will pick up some when I upgrade. It's not graphically intensive though (well it can be if you ramp up all the settings, shadows etc.) and a lot of the content is streamed/cached, the program itself has a relatively small footprint compared to most modern games.

So again, any suggestions appreciated. I got the impression I would be better off sticking with ATI rather than nVidia to avoid any compatibility issues. To be honest just the fact that the one i've been looking at has "HD" in the name and often an HDMI out tells me it's a major step up from what I have now, and they seem to go for about GBP20.00-30.00 which suits my pocket too.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

ATI Radeon "X300/X550/X1050 Series" (always loved that vagueness).

That's because you haven't downloaded and installed the drivers for whichever card you have.

To be honest just the fact that the one i've been looking at has "HD" in the name and often an HDMI out tells me it's a major step up from what I have now, and they seem to go for about GBP20.00-30.00 which suits my pocket too.

It's not that much of an upgrade and way overpriced, since it seems like the HD4850 can be had for about the same price. I would recommend that, but your CPU will still be holding you back.

 

[Sharky.]

You'd be better off upgrading to a completely new machine. "Upgrading" from rubbish to, well... rubbish is a monumental waste of money!

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

And then there's always that. ^

 

[Sharky.]

I call it as I see it

You should be able to get yourself a decent if unspectacular mid-range computer for around 400-500 quid, which would be a far greater upgrade than anything you could possibly do to your current system.

 

[Terronium-12]

Off-topic, but I've been wanting to get this sorted out since forever: what's a quid?

I hear it on TG all the damn time (obviously, considering they're in the UK) but pounds, quids - it just loses me every time they bring it up. It is like our cents and dollars, or completely different?

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

A quid is one pound which is like a dollar to us.

 

[Azuremen]

You'd be better off upgrading to a completely new machine. "Upgrading" from rubbish to, well... rubbish is a monumental waste of money!

This. The whole setup is so painfully dated that it is time to just go with a whole new setup.

 

[Tyger]

That's because you haven't downloaded and installed the drivers for whichever card you have.

Umm very presumptuous there bordering on patronising, yes I have, periodically from the ATI site, but it's the Catalyst software suite and covers a number of cards/drivers. You get the same installer whether you specify Radeon X300, X550 or X1050.

If you could tell me how to find out which particular one I have though out of the above, it would be appreciated, as it's a bit of a vicious circle, ie. to download the specific driver I want, I need to know the specific graphics card, and all applications that give me info on the card (such as ccleaner) seem to just say "X300/X550/X1050". Perhaps I need to open the thing up and check the label.

Regarding the other replies, thanks for the advice, perhaps I should have stated i'm not in the position to spend £400-£500 on a new computer, but am in a position to spend £20 on a new graphics card. And i'm not entirely convinced the one i've highlighted will show little or no improvement over what I already have, as there were numerous cards and at least a couple of years between them, but will let you know how I get on

 

[Tyger]

This. The whole setup is so painfully dated that it is time to just go with a whole new setup.

"Painfully"? Really? I'm not finding it painful for what I need it to do, which is (again) NOT to play the latest top end 3D games, but it could be a little smoother in some respects is all. It's not a biggie for now if no upgrade will make a difference, but I doubt this is the case.

It is however seriously quite astounding how sniffy and condascending people can come across when you ask for any simple advice regarding PCs. I guess I kinda shot myself in the foot there for asking for advice in the first place =(

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Umm very presumptuous there bordering on patronising, yes I have, periodically from the ATI site, but it's the Catalyst software suite and covers a number of cards/drivers. You get the same installer whether you specify Radeon X300, X550 or X1050.

Sorry, I'm not familiar with the process of downloading drivers without knowing the graphics card. Even windows update sticks in my card name if I haven't installed a new update in a while.

You could try GPU-Z to figure out your card.

"Painfully"? Really? I'm not finding it painful for what I need it to do, which is (again) NOT to play the latest top end 3D games, but it could be a little smoother in some respects is all. It's not a biggie for now if no upgrade will make a difference, but I doubt this is the case.

The problem is that your CPU is also slow. Playing streaming HD video is pretty CPU dependent.

 

[Tyger]

Sorry, I'm not familiar with the process of downloading drivers without knowing the graphics card. Even windows update sticks in my card name if I haven't installed a new update in a while.

You could try GPU-Z to figure out your card.



The problem is that your CPU is also slow. Playing streaming HD video is pretty CPU dependent.

Thanks, ran GPU-Z, neat little program, although it came up with the "X300/X550/X1050 Series" description again, so I guess there is little or nothing to call between them, odd though.

However it does tell a layman like me a few more things, namely that I should see at least some improvement by going from 128Mb-512Mb, DDR-DDR3, DirectX 9-10 etc. I know my CPU is old but with the reasonable amount of RAM it manages most tasks I need it to do pretty well, and will multi-task OK if I don't ask the world of it. With HD video it struggles to play it whilst streaming but will happily play it off my HD, though I stick to 720p as I don't think my monitor supports 1080p.

Even just having any sort of video out will make it worth the money, as from next year I might need to stream the live coverage of a certain motorsport to my TV

 

[Azuremen]

Your CPU will give you issues streaming even 720p. That is a very dated processor in today's world.

I'd even question if your board supports PCI-E. You won't see much of a change from a basic PCI card designed for "media" use because those are all joke bad. I wasn't trying to be condescending, just blunt. Upgrading to more RAM won't make a difference if you aren't on a 64-bit OS, and adding more GFX ram will actually detract from the usable system RAM on a 32-bit system because of it handles that all.

You'd be better off saving some money and dropping 300 to 400 dollars or quid on a new Mobo, ram, CPU, PSU and card.

Honestly, I couldn't even do my photo editing on a P4 properly these days, let alone stream 1080p content while doing anything else. Hell, my 1.9ghz dualcore athlon setup with more ram and a better GFX card has issues handing 720p movies I've downloaded...

 

[nick09]

I'd even question if your board supports PCI-E. You won't see much of a change from a basic PCI card designed for "media" use because those are all joke bad. I wasn't trying to be condescending, just blunt. Upgrading to more RAM won't make a difference if you aren't on a 64-bit OS, and adding more GFX ram will actually detract from the usable system RAM on a 32-bit system because of it handles that all.

If you actually googled his machine you'd know he has a PCI-E. Here's a GPU I found for 30 pounds. Should do what you ask of it.

 

[DQuaN]

Thanks, ran GPU-Z, neat little program, although it came up with the "X300/X550/X1050 Series" description again, so I guess there is little or nothing to call between them, odd though.

Try right clicking on My Computer, select manage, click device manager and have a look under display adapters.

 

[Sharky.]

If you actually googled his machine you'd know he has a PCI-E. Here's a GPU I found for 30 pounds. Should do what you ask of it.

512MB and DDR3. You're kidding right? If you also Googled, you would've seen that his system only has PCI Express 1.0 and uses DDR2 system memory. Both of those techs are seven years old now...

As both myself and Az have said, upgrading that system is beyond pointless. It is a waste of money, effort and time.

You should be able to get yourself a decent if unspectacular mid-range computer for around 400-500 quid, which would be a far greater upgrade than anything you could possibly do to your current system.

This. The whole setup is so painfully dated that it is time to just go with a whole new setup.

Your CPU will give you issues streaming even 720p. That is a very dated processor in today's world.

...

You'd be better off saving some money and dropping 300 to 400 dollars or quid on a new Mobo, ram, CPU, PSU and card.

Just to prove what we're getting at: AMD Phenom X4 965, 4GB DDR3 RAM, Radeon 6770 1GB = £390 including VAT.

Buying an all-new system with similar specs to that is a million times more cost effective than anything he could do with his current system, not to mention a million times faster. Upgrade the video card? The RAM, CPU and motherboard (being PCI-E 1.0) will bottleneck it. Upgrade the RAM, the CPU and mobo will bottleneck. Upgrade the CPU, you'd need an all-new motherboard because you can't get 925X processors these days. By this point you'd have spent the same amount of money as it would take to buy a completely new AM3-based system, if not more.

Depsite all that, nick, you're basically saying you'd still upgrade a machine like the OP's? It runs Second Life - a game from 2003 - on ~low settings at what sounds like a very average framerate, and you're still suggesting it's worth upgrading.

---

Get a system with specs similar to what I just posted and not only will you have no trouble whatsoever with 720p video but you can also play Bioshock (*gasp*).


For the record: you have a 256MB X800 XT

 

[Submerged]

Can I just remind everyone that while its great to have the newest computer parts, not everyone is able to have the cash and/or the ability to acquire them. Sometimes they need to go for the previous generation of parts that are cheap and also allows a future upgrade path as well.

For example, my motherboard is AM3 ready so I can drop a quad core if I require it in the future. It currently is a dual core AMD 240 processor. It has a HD4850 graphics card. When I brought it, there were already the 5000 series coming out, but I required something that was relatively powerful and relatively good value.

If Tyger has only a budget of 20 quid, it would be best for him to save the money and just work toward a new build. Maybe he can get a slightly faster computer than this for 200 quid with some of the modern component but not all. It would be full of compromises and second-hand equipment though. I am sure if he looked on ebay or gumtree or whichever, there would be some components there for a low price.

But it must be remembered, he came here to ask a question if there was a graphics card that he can upgrade to for his motherboard.

 

[Tyger]

Thanks for the suggestion Nick, much appreciated. It seems some folk here are still totally missing the point. I can't afford £400-£500 for a new system right now, but just want a slight boost in smoothness, framerate etc. and yes, predominantly for that old and not particularly graphically intensive game Second Life. So what you are saying is more "cost effective" simply isn't an option, for quite some time anyway.

Also you are looking at it in your own terms and not mine, it seems "pointless" to upgrade it to you as the whole set up is less than satisfactory for your needs in the first place. And I still don't agree that I will get a bottleneck as it's not an unrealistic CPU-intensive upgrade. As for upgrading the RAM, I had a massive improvement when I upgraded from 1Gb to 3Gb, eveything ran quicker and I was much more able to multitask (and i'm not talking about running the latest game, an HD movie and a bunch of other stuff at the same time as I don't need to).

That said, I have no issues running an HD movie from my drive, at 720p anyway, and often download game trailers to watch in this manner. My system struggles to show such movies whilst downloading, or streaming, but for the most part i'm able to capture the file using the downloadhelper plug in for Firefox, As for editing photos, Photoshop runs just fine and the only issue I ever had was with some pictures that were upwards of 100Mb, again that was exceptional for my needs.

Look at it another way, if you (for whatever reason, please just humour me for now) were buying my system now and you had the option of the graphics card I was looking at for an extra £20.00, would you take it or say there's no point as it won't offer *any* improvement and will bottleneck my processor? Be realistic, and a little less disdainful of someone who happens to have different requirements of their system to you.

EDIT: Thanks also Submerged, hit the nail on the head, though i'm prepared for the relatively small outlay for the upgrade for now and will hopefully be in more of a position to save for a new system next year.

 

[DQuaN]

How much RAM has it got? That may be worth an upgrade too as it can be done very cheap, and will give you a good performance boost.

When you are looking to replace more than just the GPU, may I suggest something like this? It will need a bit of knowhow but using bits from your current system you could have an awesome rig for about £200.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

512MB and DDR3. You're kidding right? If you also Googled, you would've seen that his system only has PCI Express 1.0 and uses DDR2 system memory. Both of those techs are seven years old now...

What would the memory type have to do with an upgrade?

 

[Sharky.]

just want a slight boost in smoothness, framerate etc.

Which you won't get, but hey, it's your money not mine.

@Dogg: nothing, that was more to show just how ancient his system is. Upgrading a system with PCI-E 1.0 and DDR2 memory in 2011 where you can get PCI-E 3.0 and DDR3 just makes no sense. Similarly "upgrading" to a GDDR3 videocard when GDDR5 is the norm and XDR2 is around the corner = why?

 

[Tyger]

How much RAM has it got? That may be worth an upgrade too as it can be done very cheap, and will give you a good performance boost.

When you are looking to replace more than just the GPU, may I suggest something like this? It will need a bit of knowhow but using bits from your current system you could have an awesome rig for about £200.

3Gb RAM, max is 4Gb so will probably go for that too. Thanks for the link, I *might* end up gradually swapping out the motherboard and CPU also (and of course the PSU) but we'll see how it goes.

Which you won't get, but hey, it's your money not mine.

@Dogg: nothing, that was more to show just how ancient his system is. Upgrading a system with PCI-E 1.0 and DDR2 memory in 2011 where you can get PCI-E 3.0 and DDR3 just makes no sense. Similarly "upgrading" to a GDDR3 videocard when GDDR5 is the norm and XDR2 is around the corner = why?

I'll update this thread once i've done the upgrade regarding any differences in framerate etc. or any apparent bottlenecking. The graphics card was a pretty basic choice even back then and i'm not convinced that an upgrade will make no difference, which is what you seem to be suggesting. And as for the last part, for the umpteenth time, I can't afford a completely new system right now.

This thread was never intended to be a forum for people to bash my system, please re-read my previous posts regarding what I require from my PC (there's a clue in that I have a PS3, not everyone needs multiple platforms to run half decent games). The reply to running "gasp" Bioshock reflects just how utterly wide of the mark some of the responses are, and how snotty too.

 

[nick09]

Which you won't get, but hey, it's your money not mine.

@Dogg: nothing, that was more to show just how ancient his system is. Upgrading a system with PCI-E 1.0 and DDR2 memory in 2011 where you can get PCI-E 3.0 and DDR3 just makes no sense. Similarly "upgrading" to a GDDR3 videocard when GDDR5 is the norm and XDR2 is around the corner = why?

Set yourself down to 20-30 quid and you should understand his situation. I know real people who have other priorities that are more important than buying a new computer and if they can afford it, they want it cheap, cheaper, and even the cheapest for the money and performance.

 

[Azuremen]

Set yourself down to 20-30 quid and you should understand his situation. I know real people who have other priorities that are more important than buying a new computer and if they can afford it, they want it cheap, cheaper, and even the cheapest for the money and performance.

So you tell them to get an upgrade that isn't going to have a perceivable difference, minus maybe placebo. A proper reinstall of Windows would likely make more of a difference. If someone can't afford more than a few quid on a upgrade, they should probably form some patience and do a proper upgrade, rather than dumping money into something that isn't ever going to be worth it. It is like putting an entire exhaust system on a Paseo.

Stop talking smart because you can Google things, because that clearly isn't working out too well for you even.

Also, Tyger, you keep talking about RAM and upgrading to 4gb but what version of Windows are you running?

 

[nick09]

How so? I've been running windows 7 on this laptop for two years and I've never reinstalled windows 7. It still runs like new and I don't see any performance loss in the future with the software. I defrag the hard drive once a month and keep it on check for viruses and malware. The only performance issue I had with this laptop is that the thermal paste dried out and I had to replace it.

Sure Pentium 4 cpu's are "painful" for you but it's not your machine. If he does not want to spend 200-300 quid on a new computer right away then so be it. It's his choice and not yours.

By the way, Tyger, I would not recommend upgrading the RAM. With a 32-bit OS you can't make full use of 4GB of RAM. I'd just keep it at 3GB and go for the GPU upgrade before going all out on upgrading the motherboard, cpu, ram, and gpu. Rather getting a modern card you can downgrade to a GeForce 8400gs to see if you can hang on to the old system for a few more years. There is nothing wrong with extending a computer's life before you move to something else.

 

[Tyger]

I'm going to give it a whirl and post my results here. If there is no real perceivable difference i'll say so and then perhaps "form some patience" (nice choice of words but you might want to refer to people you never met in slightly less general and insulting terms) and start saving towards bigger upgrades, or a new system.

Oh and I run XP, the recommended maximum RAM is 4Gb for my set up, confirmed by Dell some time ago as well as the people I previously got my RAM from, who specialise in memory upgrades. Though I am sure someone here will know better. Will stagger the upgrades to see what effect each has, if I get RAM too.

Thanks again guys for the more helpful suggestions!

EDIT - Thanks Nick, not what i'd heard about the RAM but might leave that for now. Can't remember how much I have slotted in where, it's gonna be a little more expensive if some of it needs to be swapped out. I think I have four slots but also have a feeling i have 2x1Gb and 2x512Mb. Oh and my OS seems no slower than when I first got it either, regularly defrag, delete as much temporary stuffs as I can, run a registry cleaner app etc. etc. and seldom really thrash it as I don't need to for every day use.