A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Video Cards » Nvidia Videocards
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Best Nvidia Card for Gaming?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 9th 09, 02:57 PM posted to alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia
Tom Lake
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 418
Default Best Nvidia Card for Gaming?

I'm looking for the best Nvidia card for gaming given the
constraint of a 475 Watt power supply. I have room in the
Dell XPS 9000 case for a full-length, two slot card. I'm not
adverse to installing a bigger power supply if the Dell uses
standard connectors. Does anyone have any recommendations?
Thanks for any advice you may give.

Tom Lake
  #2  
Old December 9th 09, 03:05 PM posted to alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia
David W. Hodgins
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 147
Default Best Nvidia Card for Gaming?

On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 08:57:46 -0500, Tom Lake wrote:

I'm looking for the best Nvidia card for gaming given the
constraint of a 475 Watt power supply. I have room in the


Don't know which will fit in that power supply, but can tell you
to avoid the GeForce 9600 GT. It recommends a mininum of 26amps
on the 12v rail. With a 500w ps that only put out 24amps on the
12v rail, the system would spontaneously reboot, or lockup. Had
to replace the ps with a 650w ps that puts out up to 50amp on
the 12v rail. Pay close attention to the max output on 12v.

Regards, Dave Hodgins


--
Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)
  #3  
Old December 9th 09, 06:35 PM posted to alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia
deimos[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 225
Default Best Nvidia Card for Gaming?

Tom Lake wrote:
I'm looking for the best Nvidia card for gaming given the constraint of
a 475 Watt power supply. I have room in the
Dell XPS 9000 case for a full-length, two slot card. I'm not
adverse to installing a bigger power supply if the Dell uses
standard connectors. Does anyone have any recommendations? Thanks for
any advice you may give.

Tom Lake


A GTX250 will both fit easily and doesn't consume more than a decent
400/450W can put out. Plus it has good all around performance and is
readily available.

For reference a 250 is a slightly faster rebrand of the 9800GTX+, which
was an overclocked process revision (55nm) of the previous 9800GT/GTX,
which itself was the offspring of the 8800GT (G92b)... confusing yes.

If you feel like upgrading to a decent PSU, like a Corsair 650W or so,
you could easily run a GTX260 or 275, both of which are approx the same
length as a 250 full length reference card. A good quality PSU of 550W
or more is SLI capable as well, so basically it can run any single card
config.
  #4  
Old December 10th 09, 12:53 AM posted to alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,364
Default Best Nvidia Card for Gaming?

Tom Lake wrote:
I'm looking for the best Nvidia card for gaming given the constraint of
a 475 Watt power supply. I have room in the
Dell XPS 9000 case for a full-length, two slot card. I'm not
adverse to installing a bigger power supply if the Dell uses
standard connectors. Does anyone have any recommendations? Thanks for
any advice you may give.

Tom Lake


The info available for that Dell is disappointing in quality.
I couldn't find a picture of the label on the power supply.

The practical limitation may be the capabilities of the
12V1 rail of the supply. Since I don't have a picture of the
label, instead of working with the real limit, I can try a
less accurate power calculation instead.

95/0.9 =105.5 95W processor at 90% Vcore efficiency (12V2)
2x12 = 24 (2) 3.5" hard drives
5x1.5 = 7.5 CDROM with no media in tray
5x1.5+12x1.5 = 25.5 Another CDROM with media in tray
50 = 50 Motherboard chipset + RAM, estimated
10 = 10 Power for USB peripherals
12x0.5 = 6 Power for fans from 12V rail
--------------------
228.5 Very rough estimate

475 - 228.5 = 246.5 What is left for the video card.

Now, you can't use all of that, because it is virtually impossible
to load a power supply in such a way as to extract the power limits
from it. Usually, one of the power supply rails is loaded to the
max, while the others are coasting. And that is why *everything*
written on the power supply label is important.

Xbitlabs measures video card power consumption, using specially
equipped motherboards. They have current shunts inserted in the
slot rails, to measure the current. In this example, a GTX 260
is about 112W in 3D mode.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...m_5.html#sect0

Their "details" graphic, shows how the power breaks down. A very
small portion comes from slot 3.3V. Most comes from the various
12V sources. The bottom row of the table here, is a GTX 260 with
a certain clock speed applied to it.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/video...power_full.png

So what you need, is a calculation that focuses on the 12V loading
in the machine.

In the pictures I could see of the machine, the power supply looks
taller than a regular ATX. I can't tell from the pictures, whether
the dimensions are abnormal in some way, or it is just the camera
angles used. You can replace the supply with something else, if
they use only standard connectors. If they've added some Dell specialties
to their supply, then it'll take more info from enthusiasts who dissect
such things, to decide what to do about it. ATX supplies are standard
in width and height, but there have been some higher power supplies
that are longer than normal. A long supply, coupled with an inflexible
wire harness, can bump into the optical drive across from it.

Post a picture of the supply label, and a list of the hardware inventory,
for a more refined calculation.

Paul
  #5  
Old December 10th 09, 09:00 PM posted to alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia
Phat_Jethro aka Jethro[AGHL]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default Best Nvidia Card for Gaming?

Tom Lake wrote:
I'm looking for the best Nvidia card for gaming given the constraint of
a 475 Watt power supply. I have room in the
Dell XPS 9000 case for a full-length, two slot card. I'm not
adverse to installing a bigger power supply if the Dell uses
standard connectors. Does anyone have any recommendations? Thanks for
any advice you may give.

Tom Lake


You may not want to hear this but I got a ATI 5770 running in my sons PC
with a 420W PSU. Supposed to be very efficient GPU. nVidia's aren't
known lately for their power efficiency.

--
Jethro[AGHL] aka Phat_Jethro
Reply Email: jethro86 (at) gmail (dot) com
  #6  
Old December 10th 09, 10:57 PM posted to alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,364
Default Best Nvidia Card for Gaming?

Phat_Jethro aka Jethro[AGHL] wrote:
Tom Lake wrote:
I'm looking for the best Nvidia card for gaming given the constraint
of a 475 Watt power supply. I have room in the
Dell XPS 9000 case for a full-length, two slot card. I'm not
adverse to installing a bigger power supply if the Dell uses
standard connectors. Does anyone have any recommendations? Thanks
for any advice you may give.

Tom Lake


You may not want to hear this but I got a ATI 5770 running in my sons PC
with a 420W PSU. Supposed to be very efficient GPU. nVidia's aren't
known lately for their power efficiency.


The wonderful thing about their GPU, is the idle power. It still draws power
when it is working hard. But the improvement in idle power is to be
commended. It still means you need to match your power supply to the
peak power draw of a card though.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...0_5.html#sect0

5770 idle 13.8W peak 61.2W

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...0_5.html#sect0

5870 idle 14.7W peak 107W

5970 idle 43.2W peak 190.9W

Planning for the latter one, you'd still need room for 191W of
power, coming from some 12V rail (like 12V1) on your power supply.

The 5970 has two PCI Express power connectors, to make room for that
kind of power.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/video...970_front2.jpg

If I pick another card at random, like the Nvidia 9600 GT, the power
there is

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...s_7.html#sect0

9600GT idle 25.5W peak 59.7W

and when you compare that to the 5770, you can see the improvement in the
ratio between idle and peak. It means when you install a gaming card,
and you aren't gaming, things run cooler. Other than that, it is the
same old "battle of the gate counts".

Part of the trick with ever-shrinking silicon geometry, is controlling
the leakage current. A notable example, was the Prescott processor
from Intel, where 25% of the power was squandered as leakage, doing
no useful work. When Intel designed their latest processes, they've
been more careful to add extra structures to control leakage. So
some structures still waste power, but they're only used where needed.
By mixing different kinds of solutions, the leakage current is coming
down.

If Nvidia uses the same fab as ATI, and pays as much attention to
clock gating (which they're capable of doing), there is no reason
they can't match that ratio. And it would still be in their best
interest to do so, if they hope to fill data centers with GPGPU
cards.

Paul
  #7  
Old December 13th 09, 09:57 PM posted to alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia
Augustus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 738
Default Best Nvidia Card for Gaming?

= http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814121353

ASUS ENGT240/DI/1GD3/A GeForce GT 240 1GB 128-bit DDR3 PCI Express
2.0 x16 HDCP Ready Video Card


A 256bit card is infinitely preferable to a 128bit card for gaming. This
Galaxy GTS 250 512Mb is $99 after rebate. 1Gig of DDR3 on that GT240 is like
a speedometer on a Yaris that goes to 200mph....it's not capable of running
modern 3D titles at resolutions requiring that amount of memory.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-034-_-Product

  #8  
Old December 15th 09, 02:29 PM posted to alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia
Anonymous
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default Best Nvidia Card for Gaming?

deimos wrote:

a 475 Watt power supply. I have room in the
Dell XPS 9000 case for a full-length, two slot card. I'm not
adverse to installing a bigger power supply if the Dell uses
standard connectors. Does anyone have any recommendations? Thanks for
any advice you may give.

Tom Lake


A GTX250 will both fit easily and doesn't consume more than a decent
400/450W can put out. Plus it has good all around performance and is
readily available.


Sorry, but I can't believe that's true. I own a 260 and I don't think
that a 250 needs that much less than a 260 and the box of my card states
that the absolute minimum required by NVidia's specs is 550W, while the
card maker (XFX in my case) recommends 630W or greater. 680W or greater
are required for SLI.

While the card may work for a while with less than that, if you start
playing games (or use other applications that make the card draw more
power than when displaying the desktop) the safety fuse of your PSU may
immediately cut the power at any time. I speak from experience.

For reference a 250 is a slightly faster rebrand of the 9800GTX+, which
was an overclocked process revision (55nm) of the previous 9800GT/GTX,
which itself was the offspring of the 8800GT (G92b)... confusing yes.

If you feel like upgrading to a decent PSU, like a Corsair 650W or so,
you could easily run a GTX260 or 275, both of which are approx the same
length as a 250 full length reference card. A good quality PSU of 550W
or more is SLI capable as well, so basically it can run any single card
config.


550 is hardly enough for a single 260 card. I recommend a good 700W PSU.

Bye!
  #9  
Old December 15th 09, 05:20 PM posted to alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia
Paul
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,364
Default Best Nvidia Card for Gaming?

Anonymous wrote:
deimos wrote:
a 475 Watt power supply. I have room in the
Dell XPS 9000 case for a full-length, two slot card. I'm not
adverse to installing a bigger power supply if the Dell uses
standard connectors. Does anyone have any recommendations? Thanks for
any advice you may give.

Tom Lake

A GTX250 will both fit easily and doesn't consume more than a decent
400/450W can put out. Plus it has good all around performance and is
readily available.


Sorry, but I can't believe that's true. I own a 260 and I don't think
that a 250 needs that much less than a 260 and the box of my card states
that the absolute minimum required by NVidia's specs is 550W, while the
card maker (XFX in my case) recommends 630W or greater. 680W or greater
are required for SLI.

While the card may work for a while with less than that, if you start
playing games (or use other applications that make the card draw more
power than when displaying the desktop) the safety fuse of your PSU may
immediately cut the power at any time. I speak from experience.

For reference a 250 is a slightly faster rebrand of the 9800GTX+, which
was an overclocked process revision (55nm) of the previous 9800GT/GTX,
which itself was the offspring of the 8800GT (G92b)... confusing yes.

If you feel like upgrading to a decent PSU, like a Corsair 650W or so,
you could easily run a GTX260 or 275, both of which are approx the same
length as a 250 full length reference card. A good quality PSU of 550W
or more is SLI capable as well, so basically it can run any single card
config.


550 is hardly enough for a single 260 card. I recommend a good 700W PSU.

Bye!


You can get measured values for just the video card, suitable for
doing a power budget. The 55nm GTX 260 is 112W at "3D max", and this
is measured with multimeters and current shunts by Xbitlabs. That power
will be coming from 12V1, so should be included as part of the 12V1 loading.
Add 0.6A for hard drive, 1.5A for CDROM, 0.5A for fan headers, and ~9A for
the GTX 260 55nm, gives 12.6 amps.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...m_5.html#sect0

The total power supply capacity, doesn't have to be real high. It's just
a matter of adding the power for all the individual components. Allocate
50W for the motherboard chipset and the DIMMs, where the DIMMs can
be on the order of 2W each now. (Kingston provides numbers in their
downloadable datasheets for memory, when you need numbers.)

The end result is, you should not need a 700W power supply.

Naturally, any person buying a power supply, can pad or margin it all
they want. If the load is 300W max by calculation, and you buy a 700W supply,
there is no harm done. You've just spent more than was absolutely necessary.
A little margin is a good idea, but more than doubling it isn't necessary.

I could equally say, without doing any math at all, "get yourself a good
1200W supply", with a voice of authority. But instead, you can use math
and work out exactly what you need. Then buy the power supply that
provides a little margin and has a good reputation. That is worth more
than having paid for an extra 5 pounds of unused power supply
sitting inside your computer case.

*******

One thing you should understand, is when a manufacturer gives power number,
they assume the most power hungry processor has been installed in the
system. For example, they might assume the computer has a 130W processor.
Well, I use a 65W processor in mine, and the measured power consumption
of my processor flat out, is 36W (measured with a clamp-on DC ammeter while
Task Manager has the CPU graphs at 100%). You can see, how the manufacturer
making an assumption for my benefit, has just backfired. Now I'm buying
100W more of power supply, than I really need.

Also, there are a number of power supply estimator web pages available
on the Internet. In all the cases I've evaluated, they're giving the
wrong answer. A typical bad web site, works out a figure double what
it should be. The gullible reader of the web site, then takes that
figure and doubles it again, and goes shopping. How silly is that ?

*******

To give another great story, I can tell you about something that
happened at work. One of the staff in our lab, got a breathless
phone call from shipping and receiving. "Come quick, there's this
box down here, and you have to come and get it right away. You
can't leave it here". The guy sounds scared. The warehouse is about
a 10 minute drive from work. The person receiving the call, drives
over for a look, because the person on the other end of the phone
sounded worried, but didn't provide any details. Normally, they'd
just deliver it to us.

At the warehouse, in the middle of the floor, was a box about 3'x3'x3'.
It has a large radioactive sticker on it. The shipping and receiving
staff were so scared of it, they cleared a large area around it, removing
anything even remotely close. The scene looks like ET just landed,
in the middle of the floor.

When the box was opened, there was a smaller box inside. It had
a slightly smaller radioactive sticker on it.

When that box was opened, there was yet a smaller box inside. It
was plastered with radioactive stickers as well.

When we finally got all the way into the box, there was a
small radioisotope vial, the kind your teacher in high school
might have used for an introduction to radioactivity. It might
have had a microcurie of radioactivity, certainly nothing to strap
on a lead apron for.

What had happened, is each person in the supply chain, repackaged the
shipment, putting a larger box around the outside "just to be safe".
Until the box was huge, and the large radioactive sticker on the box,
scared the **** out of people. I'm sure the people in shipping and
receiving, who know nothing about radioactivity, thought they were
going to die.

The moral of the story is, if everyone pads the budget a little
bit, the end result is blown out of proportion. And someone eventually
has to look inside the box, for the truth. And math can help you
find that truth.

Paul
  #10  
Old December 17th 09, 06:00 AM posted to alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia
DRS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 588
Default Best Nvidia Card for Gaming?

"Anonymous" wrote in message

deimos wrote:


[...]

A GTX250 will both fit easily and doesn't consume more than a decent
400/450W can put out. Plus it has good all around performance and is
readily available.


Sorry, but I can't believe that's true. I own a 260 and I don't think
that a 250 needs that much less than a 260 and the box of my card
states that the absolute minimum required by NVidia's specs is 550W,
while the card maker (XFX in my case) recommends 630W or greater.
680W or greater are required for SLI.


Nvidia and its partners (ditto for ATI) routinely vastly overstate the PSU
requirements for their cards. This is simple arse-covering to protect
themselves from vexatious litigation from idiot consumers who do no homework
before trying to run the latest high-end card on their budget Dell desktop.
xbitlabs' reviews consistently show the actual measured power consumption of
these cards is much lower than the manufacturers state, and enthusiasts take
heed and feed those numbers into their calculations.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nvidia 3D Gaming Glasses $10 [email protected] Nvidia Videocards 2 April 21st 08 08:21 PM
Nvidia 3D Gaming Glasses $10 [email protected] Nvidia Videocards 0 April 20th 08 07:53 PM
NVIDIA is clueless about gaming software? John Doe Nvidia Videocards 11 April 15th 07 06:29 PM
NVIDIA Quadro FX 2500M for gaming? [email protected] Nvidia Videocards 4 June 19th 06 01:14 PM
Best Gaming Nvidia Card for approx. $300? Uziyahu Nvidia Videocards 19 April 13th 05 06:54 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.