Question:
Why have I not seen any performance what so ever even though I just had a massive upgrade?
lozerpop
2009-07-18 03:26:54 UTC
I usually just play WoW on my computer, but I would only get around 10-15fps on the lowest possible settings with a 800x600 resolution, and I had a latency that was usually between 100-200ms, so I know the poor performance wasn't cause of my connection. Here are my old system specs:

Intel Pentium 4 Processor 2.8Ghz
512MB DDR RAM
Intel Onboard GPU 96MB
80GB IDE 2MB cache hard disk

I recently just built a new computer that was a massive upgrade over my last. But when I finally installed WoW, I was shocked that there was no improvement what so ever on the exact same settings. I still have 10-15fps, and the frame rate drops below 10 when there is a lot of activity going on, and it is still set to the lowest possible settings. Here are my new system specs:

Intel Core 2 Quad 2.33Ghz Processor
2GB RAM
Nvidia Geforce 8400 GS 512MB Graphics Card
500GB SATA 32MB Cache Hard Disk

I mean, I quadrupled my RAM, the processor is unbelievably more powerful then my old one, tha hard disk can recover data faster, and any video card is a huge upgrade from an onboard GPU. So what's the deal? I am using Windows XP Service Package 2, and I have updated all my video card, Windows, and Direct X drivers, as well as my BIOS. The only difference I have noticed is my computer can handle more programs at once and also boots up much faster. But when I try to play a game, it all goes to hell. Is there something that I didnt do? WoW is one of the most least demanding games out there, and my computer should run this perfectly, but WoW is totally owning my system...
Six answers:
anonymous
2009-07-18 03:44:34 UTC
right you have bought budget which is never good you have the slow quad core and generally a fast duo core can beat them you graphics card sucks as it is budget and ram doesn't make a difference if it carn be used properly and by this i mean it carnt be utilized by games as the graphics sucks also your quad core wont be fully used on xp as xp was never made for multi core support and wow does need it im running a p4 3ghz 2 gb ram and a radeon 4650 and i can run maxed no lag.

so my advice to you is to get a new graphics card i believe for you at least a gefroce 8600gt or the 9600gt as these are main stream cards which arent amazing but they get the job done. Also if you go for the ati range any card from the 2 series up would do as long as it is a -600 and by that i mean 2600 or 3600 or 4600 also ati pro is the least you want xt is the best generally.



UPDATE

You say you have seen crysis run on a geforce 8400 well it must have been on direct x 9 then that is possible but crysis is meant to be run no directx 10 and if you cart accept your graphics sucks than you dont know what your on about as 4 people have said your graphics card is the weakest part of your machine. If money is an issue get a radeon hd 4650 its mainstream supports directx 10 fully and play the majority of stuff out there and to be honest your quad core isnt all that its the early 8 series a good duo core beats it sorry to be so harsh but you need to upgraded your gpu if you want games to accutly work just an extra note the GS geforce is the lowest of the 3 so dont get a GS get atleast a GT.
pdl756
2009-07-18 03:56:08 UTC
One of your problems is definitely the graphics card. It may have more memory than the old integrated, but other than that it's not much of an improvement. It has worse specs than a 9400GT which is currently considered as nvidia's bottom-of-the-barrel card.

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=578&card2=529

To find out more, go to this site and let it check your system for the game you want to play.

http://www.systemrequirementslab.com/referrer/srtest



EDIT

If you'll notice, the answers posted tend to agree that the problem you're experiencing may be due to the outdated, low grade graphics card that you're using. You have a powerful processor and enough memory, so, when all else fails, suspect the weakest link, which is your graphics card. In my opinion, your graphics card IS the bottleneck.



If you didn't want our honest opinions, maybe you shouldn't have posted the question.
?
2016-05-26 21:48:32 UTC
Radiohead. The lead singer actually has a good voice so they sound just as good live. Was a huge fan then became a bigger fan afterward. Luckily they just did a world tour in june of this summer. NO THEY DID NOT DO CREEP!!! Which is one of my favourite songs. They did do Karma Police at the end which I was not exactly expecting. That made up for it. I have no idea why the do not do Creep, its their signature song. In fact they sang nothing from their first album Pablo Honey but the lead singer was a low key and they sounded really good.
anonymous
2009-07-18 03:38:59 UTC
"the processor is unbelievably more powerful then my old one".



No it's not!



The old one had a speed of 2.8Ghz, while the new one only has 2.33 Ghz.



Even though the new one is multi core, the speed of each operation is still only 2.33Ghz.



"...is my computer can handle more programs at once and also boots up much faster".



The extra cores mean it can handle more tasks at a time so that statement proves it's working. But the game only uses one core, and the new one is slower by about 500 Mhz!
Aaron N.
2009-07-18 04:04:15 UTC
A new graphics card is the biggest upgrade you can make for the time being. How much money you got/willing to spend?
?
2009-07-18 04:32:34 UTC
its your video card dude get a new one like the ATI HD 4870

it will run max setting and much much more for only $150

or even a HD 4850 will do the job that you want done.



get one from here you wont be disappointed

http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCategory.aspx?SubCategory=48&name=Desktop-Graphics-Video-Cards


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...