VOGONS


First post, by Velociraptor

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Being an idiot I went and bought what I researched to be the best price/performance low cost, and most importantly the lowest energy consuming graphics card to use in my machine that's intended to cover Windows XP (and maybe Windows 7). I bought a 1050 ti which of course has no drivers for XP.

Previously I had a Quadro 2000.

The machine is intended for anything that's too much for my P2 system that comfortably runs on XP, plus it's also for modern remakes of stuff - things like Baldur's Gate Enhanced.

Am I right in thinking that while the Quadro 2000 may not be the most efficient card around, it's probably totally fine and I didn't need to "upgrade" to the 1050ti, or is there another card that can go in this that will suit the purpose better?

Reply 3 of 15, by darry

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
infiniteclouds wrote on 2020-10-12, 04:39:

I have a Titan Black which is a slightly better 780 ti (more RAM). I'd recommend either. I got my Titan Black last year for $150 used.

Considering that the OP is aiming for, and I quote, "the lowest energy consuming graphics card", I doubt a card like this, with its 250W TDP, is what he would want .

A GTX 750 TI has a TDP of 60W and is still significantly faster than a Quadro 2000. See https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia- … -Ti/m7708vs2187

Reply 4 of 15, by bloodem

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I have a similar system (Core i5 3570K, 8 GB RAM DDR3, GeForce GTX 760). It's actually very good for dual booting Windows 7 + XP, however I think that the video card is a bit too new for older, classic XP gaming (newer drivers don't work properly with games such as Far Cry).
So I'm actually thinking about replacing the video card with a GTX 285. Another option that I'm considering is to build a separate Vista / XP system with the GTX285.

2 x Socket 3 / 3 x Socket 7 / 4 x SuperSocket 7 / 4 x Slot 1 / 2 x Slot A / 5 x Socket 370
3 x Socket A / 1 x Socket 478 / 2 x Socket 754 / 3 x Socket 939 / 2 x LGA775 / 1 x LGA1155
Current rig: AM4 - Ryzen 5 3600X
Backup rig: LGA1151 - Core i7 7700k

Reply 5 of 15, by The Serpent Rider

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I would suggest GTX 280, because you can voltmod it via BIOS.

Get up, come on get down with the sickness
Open up your hate, and let it flow into me

Reply 6 of 15, by bloodem

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

Thanks, but in my case I already have a Gainward GTX 285 😀 Bought it some months ago for $10, but haven't had a chance to properly test it out, see which drivers have the best bang when it comes to performance/compatibility.

2 x Socket 3 / 3 x Socket 7 / 4 x SuperSocket 7 / 4 x Slot 1 / 2 x Slot A / 5 x Socket 370
3 x Socket A / 1 x Socket 478 / 2 x Socket 754 / 3 x Socket 939 / 2 x LGA775 / 1 x LGA1155
Current rig: AM4 - Ryzen 5 3600X
Backup rig: LGA1151 - Core i7 7700k

Reply 7 of 15, by Velociraptor

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Thanks for the tips - looks like a 750ti is a good option - the 780 ti I don't think I'd use for 4:3 resolution games, I have a 1080 ti in my main PC with an ultrawide so I'm not looking for something as powerful.

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-gtx-7 … 0-ti-oc/26.html

When that was tested it was more efficient that anything else around.

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-gtx-9 … -matrix/24.html

Even a generation later it was still as efficient as it comes.

Having now looked into it a bit the 750ti is the smallest lithography I can get for Windows XP - this probably explains why it's the most energy efficient I'll find. Anything smaller is not directly supported on XP.

I do have another machine which runs DOS/Win98SE/XP and has an FX5500 in it so I hope anything that is not comfortable on the 750ti would be ok on that. But as usual with these types of things there will always be gaps.

Reply 8 of 15, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank Moderator
Rank
Moderator

Yeah remember the DX10 and later cards can't do any dithering at 16bit color so those games would look awful. And it certainly isn't going to bring you any fog table emulation for those DX5 games that use that. FX 5500 would have you covered.

DGVoodoo 1/2 should do Glide games well on a 750 Ti. Perhaps zeckensack's Glide wrapper too.

Reply 9 of 15, by The Serpent Rider

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

I would argue that that DX10+ cards are the best way to experience Glide emulation. Because, quite ironically, only DX10+ hardware is capable to replicate smooth texture filtering from good pre-DX7 era hardware like Voodoo 2-5, G400 or TNT.

Get up, come on get down with the sickness
Open up your hate, and let it flow into me

Reply 10 of 15, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank Moderator
Rank
Moderator

Radeon 9500/9700, which lack trilinear optimization in hardware AFAIK, and the Radeon X1000 series set to HQ AF should be quite clean. X1000 HQ AF has actually been shown to be superior to the filtering of their DirectX 10/11 cards. But that Quake 3 sky might be more than just a texture filtering issue...

Reply 11 of 15, by leileilol

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
swaaye wrote on 2020-10-16, 05:58:

But that Quake 3 sky might be more than just a texture filtering issue...

Q3's sky issue's more of a nVidia's "gold standard opengl" behavior of clamping was wrong all along and ATI is handling edge clamping properly as intended (for OpenGL behavior standards, not id's nvidia-as-reference).

apsosig.png

Reply 12 of 15, by The Serpent Rider

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

But that Quake 3 sky might be more than just a texture filtering issue...

That's not just an issue with Quake 3, that particular sky texture or OpenGL. Obvious blockiness can be spotted in other places, like here on lightmaps in Unreal Tournament (D3D renderers). I think that it's not an issue with how mipmaps are sampled (which you are referring to), but with linear texture filtering itself. And that problem just "magically" disappeared on DX10 hardware.

Get up, come on get down with the sickness
Open up your hate, and let it flow into me

Reply 13 of 15, by Almoststew1990

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I don't know where you are in the world but I'll give a shout out to my GTX 645. Crucially it works on XP through to 10 just fine, still getting official 7/8/10 driver updates. Can download XP drivers using the normal Nvidia website.

It doesn't need a PCI-E power connector so is up to 75 watts of power.

It's a single slot cooler, which is quiet and is modern enough to spin up depending on load (this started at the 7900 series I think...)

It's comparable to a GTX 275 so plenty powerful enough for XP gaming and fine for Windows 7 gaming if you're doing less than 1080p. It will be lacking for new games, if this is going in your main PC.

It's about £20.

It's my most practical card!

Ryzen 3700X | 16GB 3600MHz RAM | Nvidia GeForce 1070ti | 1Tb NVME SSD | Windows 10
Athlon 3200+ @ 3800+ (Venice) | Some Ram | Nvidia GeForce GTX645 / 7950GT
Slot 1 896MHz | 384Mb 112MHz RAM | Nvidia GeForce 3 ti200 | AWE32

Reply 14 of 15, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank Moderator
Rank
Moderator

I played with a lowly GT 730 (GK208 DDR3 edition) awhile back and it seemed to be as fast or faster than the X850 XT when I tried it with Dark Messiah. That is a wee tiny card. Lots of cheap but powerful options for old gaming.

Last edited by swaaye on 2020-10-16, 18:42. Edited 4 times in total.

Reply 15 of 15, by swaaye

User metadata
Rank Moderator
Rank
Moderator
The Serpent Rider wrote on 2020-10-16, 09:45:

That's not just an issue with Quake 3, that particular sky texture or OpenGL. Obvious blockiness can be spotted in other places, like here on lightmaps in Unreal Tournament (D3D renderers). I think that it's not an issue with how mipmaps are sampled (which you are referring to), but with linear texture filtering itself. And that problem just "magically" disappeared on DX10 hardware.

Yeah I suppose it's reduced precision somewhere in the pipeline that is visible with the right conditions.