Graphics Card Woes

[CaptJodan]

First time posting in this section of SDN.

Today my new power supply and graphics card came in the mail. I got a 1 kw power supply so it could run the Nvidia gtx 295 card. I was replacing a Nvidia gtx 260 card.

The strange thing is that the card seems to lag worse than the old card. When trying to find out why, I downloaded a program called PerformanceTest 7.0 (trial version). I bench marked the system, and the only thing really lagging behind other benchmarks is the graphics card itself. When you go to the main page of that program, it shows a graphics card with only 896 MB of memory in the card, half that it's supposed to have. I know it's a two core card, so I'm wondering if one of the cores isn't working. I'm not sure I necessarily trust the program above without some independent confirmation from something else to tell me what the computer is registering. Is there any advice the denizens of SDN can provide that can point me on how to troubleshoot this problem? A particular program that can sniff out the problem, or a solution in and of itself?

System specs
Windows XP Pro 64-bit
Gigabyte EX58-UD5
Intel Core i7 965 3.2GHz
12 GB DDR2 Ram
Nvidia GTX 295 video card (latest drivers installed from Nvidia)
1 TB Harddrive

[Executor32]

The GTX 295 is basically 2 GTX 285 chips on 1 board that run in SLI. They don't share memory, so any texture will be loaded twice, once in each memory pool. I would suggest checking if SLI mode is enabled, since I think you still have to enable it yourself even though it's a single card.

[starslayer]

2 GTX 285 chips

No, it's not; it's actually two 260 chips (a 260 has 896 MB of memory; a 285 has 1 GB).

[Executor32]

Ah, I stand corrected. I was at work and browsing on my phone, so double-checking would have been rather tedious and I was in a hurry to finish my reply.

[Joviwan]

...What the CHRIST do you use this computer for? It is literally impossible for me to imagine spending that much money on a PC.

As for the potential problem... This doesn't directly address your issue, but I'd like to posit that Windows XP x64 is a WILDLY inadequate operating system for this unholy waste of money you've created. When you have as much digital beefcake in a machine as you do in this case, you really, really, really should NOT be using an OS that's two generations old and completely hacked together after x64 bit architecture became popular. My first advice is to upgrade to Vista or Windows 7.

My second advice (That directly applies to the issue) is what Executor says: Check BIOS or your graphics card's configuration program to make sure that SLI mode is enabled and that you're using all those features you're paying too much for.

[Executor32]

I don't really see the point of getting a 295 anyway, since the benefits of SLI are nowhere near as great as just buying a better card. Case in point: the GTX 295 retails for over $500. For over $100 less, you could have gotten a factory-overclocked GTX 285 with 2GB of memory, which is all in one memory pool so you could go crazy and turn everything in GTA4 up to High. I guarantee you'd experience better performance with that, with a considerably smaller void in your wallet.

Also, like Joviwan said, get Windows 7. Home Premium is fine unless you want to keep your massive e-peen going, in which case you'd better get Ultimate. Now that I think about it, you probably could have gotten a Windows 7 Home Premium Upgrade with the money you would've saved by not getting that overpriced piece of silicon.

[Mr Bean]

Also, like Joviwan said, get Windows 7. Home Premium is fine unless you want to keep your massive e-peen going, in which case you'd better get Ultimate. Now that I think about it, you probably could have gotten a Windows 7 Home Premium Upgrade with the money you would've saved by not getting that overpriced piece of silicon.

Professional is the top home version. Ultimate gives you nothing but serious administration utilities. If your going with Ultimate it's either through ignorance or you seriously need one of the terminal functions listed here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7_editions

[Executor32]

Oh, I know. I was joking, making the logical extension from the wanton excess of the rest of his system.

As a side note, if I want to do an in-place upgrade without doing a fresh install of Windows, I have to get Ultimate, since this free copy of Vista I got from the Live Search Club is Ultimate. Of course, by the time I get around to upgrading to Windows 7, a fresh install will be long overdue anyway.

[CaptJodan]

Thanks for all of the suggestions and advice, guys. I checked the bios and SLI issues, and didn't see anything out of the ordinary. I'm thinking tomorrow about putting the card back and going back to the 260. It seems to run everything I need for now (the reason for beefy system, so I don't have to upgrade every 2 months), and it's a pretty good card. Save the money, keep an eye out on whatever comes down the tube for a later upgrade.

As to the excessive nature of the system, given the specs, I don't think I payed THAT much for the system. It's about ball park for what I usually do. I use it for games, and I want the power to run those games as needed is all, and I hate upgrading something each month. I really hadn't considered it was THAT great, save for perhaps the little bit of excessive RAM (which I do plan on upgrading to 24 GB some day).

As for 7, I do plan on picking it up within the next few months. I'm giving it time to prove itself. I also heard that it still runs slower than XP/takes more resources, even though it's better than Vista. But I know I can't hold off forever upgrading. And no, I'll probably stick with 7 Pro. I certainly don't need more administration functions.

[Mr Bean]

As for 7, I do plan on picking it up within the next few months. I'm giving it time to prove itself. I also heard that it still runs slower than XP/takes more resources, even though it's better than Vista. But I know I can't hold off forever upgrading. And no, I'll probably stick with 7 Pro. I certainly don't need more administration functions.

Must have 192 gigs of memory.
It runs slower than XP but your talking 2-4 FPS loss. Max, most games don't have a noticeable difference. Also the just quicker boot times and most of all, quicker response times in Windows are a huge benefits.

[Joviwan]

So, I rebuilt your system in a New-egg shopping cart.

Your processor costs more than the entire computer I built for my girlfriend this Christmas, expressly for playing current generation games. This includes case, ram, power supply, hard drive, video card, processor, motherboard, DVD drive, head phones, mouse, keyboard... Everything except the monitor and operating system.

Just saying.

[CaptJodan]

So, I rebuilt your system in a New-egg shopping cart.

Your processor costs more than the entire computer I built for my girlfriend this Christmas, expressly for playing current generation games. This includes case, ram, power supply, hard drive, video card, processor, motherboard, DVD drive, head phones, mouse, keyboard... Everything except the monitor and operating system.

Just saying.

K. Well first, I hope the system will last BEYOND current generation games (which is a nebulous term in and of itself, of course), especially with upgrades. I'm not a fan of replacing processors or motherboards because I have no experience with either. My abilities lie in the graphics card/power supply/ram/ peripherals area. Not brave enough to go beyond that yet.

Second, and this is probably more key, I'm already having FPS issues with certain games now, whether or not you have them. While FSX isn't necessarily intensive in its own right, the various mods I load on here DO bump things down heavily. I CAN strain this system on FSX pretty damned easily. Flying into O'Hare with a traffic mod, and watch the FPS slow to a crawl (in fact it was one of my tests with the new card, and it performed considerably worse). If I try, can probably manage to slow things down on Black Shark too. though perhaps not as easily. I've also heard that Battle of Britain from Oleg will be something of a system hog, so I buy a system that I hope will at least RUN some of the later games several years down the road.

Keep in mind that this processor isn't exactly brand new. It's at least 6 months old...I'm sure others on this board have better shit than I do.

[MKSheppard]

Building ahead a little is always a good idea -- it's always worth it to spend a little extra on your primary gaming computer -- e.g. I spent a bit more and got a Core 2 Quad Q6600 and GeForce 8800 GTS in '07; and that duo combo has served me quite well -- I can maintain decent framerates even with some newer games like Fallout 3 GOTY.

But man, a 1 kilowatt PSU? Wat the chirst for?

[CaptJodan]

But man, a 1 kilowatt PSU? Wat the chirst for?

For if I ever want to crossfire two high end cards. I assume that if 1 high end card like a 295 or whatever recommends a 700+ watt PSU, that if I'm running two you'll need a bit more power, plus a little extra for that safety margin.

Come to think of it, could you even run two cards even with 1,000w supply? If the card itself requires a minimum of 680w (as noted on the Nvidia website), would two pull double that? I've never actually used Crossfire yet.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

For if I ever want to crossfire two high end cards. I assume that if 1 high end card like a 295 or whatever recommends a 700+ watt PSU, that if I'm running two you'll need a bit more power, plus a little extra for that safety margin.

Come to think of it, could you even run two cards even with 1,000w supply? If the card itself requires a minimum of 680w (as noted on the Nvidia website), would two pull double that? I've never actually used Crossfire yet.

I ran a 9800GX2 with a HX 620Watt Corsair power supply with no problems. And seriously, I doubt you'd ever do a dual setup unless you seriously have lots of money to waste. Also, they tend to over recommend the power requirements because many PSUs tend to have sub-standard efficiency.

And 2 Geforce GTX 295 cards in SLI mode is pure insanity what with the immerse heat output that will cook your internal components.

[Edi]

Since this thread is already here, speaking of cooking internal components, I had a run-in with this bit yesterday. My computer had been experiencing micro-freezes for about a week now and a friend of mine who knows more about graphics cards than I do helped me troubleshoot it. Turned out my Radeon HD4870 was severely overheating because the fan wouldn't work. Not until you set it to manual control, at which point it cooled things down beautifully. But the automated fan control was zero control and zero fan use.

Put two monster cards in a single case and even if your fans work, it'll still get pretty damn hot. And heat will fry components, which will then fail and cause more overheating, and it will cascade sooner or later. It's bad when your motherboard has scorch marks around components that suffer from heat-failure, which can happen.