ElectroSoldier wrote on 2024-06-12, 16:39:

The latest GTX750Ti I bought was £35 delivered... There is another on ebay now for £55+shipping. […]
Show full quote

The latest GTX750Ti I bought was £35 delivered...
There is another on ebay now for £55+shipping.

An HP Z230 with an E3-1225 V3 Xeon is on there for £68.99 inc shipping.

If thats to much I have little to nothing more to say to help...

I agree that the Z230 SFF, if the drivers for XP are available, is a very good SFF option, perhaps the best currently, even in my country, if you want to buy a complete computer, for the person who started the thread it could be a good option.
I think we all know that prices vary a lot, depending on countries, geographical areas, and availability, and even the currency used, of course, living in the EU, for me buying in the UK or the US is not a logical option because although the price is lower than in the EU, import taxes and shipping prices make it much more expensive. A few years ago buying in the UK was a good option, but since what we already know happened, buying in the UK does not worth it for me, and I bought a lot of things in the UK before the change.
And for those of us who buy many hardware components frequently, it is clear that previous experience determines it.
Speaking of the graphics card...
The GTX 760 OEM cost me €25 a year ago, the OEM version has lower frequencies and only 1.5 GB of RAM, but both the GPU and memory chips are the same as the normal version, so I modified the BIOS to convert it into a GTX 760 with 1.5 GB RAM instead of the usual 3 GB, more than enough VRAM for the use I give it.
A month ago I bought an RX470 4 GB mining card for €35, on which it was easy to get the HDMI port working and change the BIOS (it has 4 BIOS chips); the cheapest low-profile GTX 750ti I can find costs more than double what I paid for the K620, which was €30, and €30 already seems like a lot to me compared to what I paid for the 760 OEM or the RX 470, but the low profile changes the relative price, even the non-low profile GTX 750ti that I see here are priced around double what I paid for the RX 470, and I think a 750ti is quite a bit below an RX470, so, a 750ti? Thanks, but, no, thanks, and I don't care if it's the low profile version or the normal version, around here, people ask too much for a 750ti.
Although the 750ti in its low profile version may be the best low profile option for XP, perhaps that influences the price, and I wonder what temperatures it will reach (60W TDP) with such a small heatsink in a small case, taking into account that the normal versions almost all have a fairly large heatsink.
By the way, it's not that I need this computer, it's been a while since I lost count of how many old computers I have at home; The H61M-VG3 came on a batch of damaged motherboards and only needed a quick and easy repair, so when I saw that it had official support for XEON and drivers for XP; Since I have never built a small computer for XP with the intention of making it relatively powerful, it seemed fun to build it, in the case I used I had a much simpler computer mounted, an Atom D525.

I believe the Z230 SFF is Haswell, that won't have chip set drivers for XP.
The similar Z220 SFF series is is Ivy Bridge, and it has XP drivers on the HP support page.

I also already mentioned that the HP Z230 does not have drivers for XP on the HP website, I have not looked at what chipset it uses, but I think the same, Haswell has to be complicated for XP, I also think that the best option for XP is SandyBridge /IvyBridge because of the official support. But maybe somebody here has experience with Haswell and XP.

I do have a Z230 I can use however I would need to setup another PC to replace it before I do any lab testing on it. It is in use 24/7 at the minute, however I have plans already afoot to replace it with a much more energy efficient machine.

Received T730. Preliminary test show that this is indeed much more powerful thin client. F.E.A.R. 1280x720 2x AA / 8x AF scored 72 fps average (T620 Plus scored 34 fps), and that's with DDR3L-1600 (can be upgraded to 1866 Mhz JEDEC). So 2x faster than T620 Plus. That's very serviceable for Windows XP, if it has GPU drivers.

T620 Plus = GeForce 8500GT
T730 = GeForce 8600GTS

Both GPUs maintain stable 600+ Mhz clock speed, but well HD 8400E in T620 has only 4 ROPs and 8 TMUs with memory 64-bit memory bus shared with CPU, so performance around middle-end late DX9 GPU (GeForce 7600GS/GT) is not surprising.

The Firepro W2100 should also be at the level of an 8600GTS, but I have not been able to get it to work properly in XP, I think it is equal to an R7 240 but my knowledge of driver modification is limited to add the DEVID to the .inf file, and always ended up giving the error code 10 when loading the driver; someone with more knowledge, maybe could make it work.
Luckily, I only paid 13€ for the Firepro W2100, with a Display port to HDMI adapter, it will replace the Geforce 210 I have in my HTPC.

Hoping wrote on 2024-06-13, 04:26:

I also already mentioned that the HP Z230 does not have drivers for XP on the HP website, I have not looked at what chipset it uses, but I think the same, Haswell has to be complicated for XP, I also think that the best option for XP is SandyBridge /IvyBridge because of the official support. But maybe somebody here has experience with Haswell and XP.

There are modded drivers for XP/Haswell, but in my experience it's not worth the trouble if you can choose an SB or IB machine instead. Even those are complete overkill for XP gaming, there's nothing but maybe benchmark scores to gain from running XP on Haswell.

Hoping wrote on 2024-06-16, 09:41:

The Firepro W2100 should also be at the level of an 8600GTS, but I have not been able to get it to work properly in XP, I think it is equal to an R7 240 but my knowledge of driver modification is limited to add the

Firepro W2100 is dramatically faster, that's GCN 1.0 chip with better quantity specs.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2024-06-16, 18:05:

Firepro W2100 is dramatically faster, that's GCN 1.0 chip with better quantity specs.

Well, I was going by fillrate rates that they have on the Techpowerup GPU database, I don't like to get my hopes up on performance until I see it, I'm not saying you're wrong, I don't have much experience with Nvidia's 8000 (G80) series, other than how much they failed 😉, I have two 8800 GT (G92), but it wouldn't make much sense to compare an 8800 GT with the W2100, and 8800 GT's are not low profile.
I did check that the W2100 works fine on a 32 bit Windows 7, so it's not faulty, so without a fix for the drivers in XP it's not much use.
Too bad, because you can get them at reasonable prices for hardware ten years old or more, and not knowing in what condition it worked, and they don't have much utility for a Windows 7 computer.
At the moment, I'm waiting for the K620 to arrive and try it out, hopefully it will work, because if I don't get it to work in XP, it will be money wasted considering the price, because y have better cards for Windows 7 that aren't low profile.
But sometimes, we take that kind of risks, right?

Hoping wrote on 2024-06-16, 18:58:

8800 GT's are not low profile.

Funny of you to mention that, because low-profile GeForce GTS 250 (fully unlocked G92b) actually exist. Not one slot thick though.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2024-06-18, 14:42:

Funny of you to mention that, because low-profile GeForce GTS 250 (fully unlocked G92b) actually exist. Not one slot thick though.

I've never seen them before, Sparkle's low profile GTS 250 looks quite strange, I especially wonder what temperature it will reach with that small heatsink and a 150W TDP.
Even getting one I imagine it won't be very useful for most cases, because of its power consumption, the power supplies in small cases don't usually have much power either, also because of its temperatures, I've also seen G92s fail in the same way as G80s, and because it's dual slot which in my case wouldn't work, it doesn't have room in the case.
A low profile GTS 250 doesn't seem to have much logic to exist, but it's curious, I see then as those kinds of things that get done only because they can be done, not because they are really useful.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2024-06-18, 14:42:

Hoping wrote on 2024-06-16, 18:58:

8800 GT's are not low profile.

Funny of you to mention that, because low-profile GeForce GTS 250 (fully unlocked G92b) actually exist. Not one slot thick though.

I actually had a low profile Sparkle GTS250 "Green Power" (I believe that's what is was called) back in the day. I used it alongside my GTX 260 and later GTX 470 as a Physx card. I took it out as soon as I stopped playing games that used it of course.

Man, what a space heater that system was...

GTX 750Ti comes in a low profile double slot package.

I think, though I do stand to be corrected, that the 750Ti is the fastest low profile card that has full XP support.

ElectroSoldier wrote on 2024-06-18, 16:16:

GTX 750Ti comes in a low profile double slot package.

I think, though I do stand to be corrected, that the 750Ti is the fastest low profile card that has full XP support.

It looks like a couple of companies produced low-profile GTX 950 models, so that would probably take the crown of fastest low profile XP-supported card. I'm not sure if you need a modded .inf to make a 950 work in XP, but I would think it'd work about the same as a 750 Ti (since both are Maxwell based) once drivers are installed. Just going by some quick numbers online it looks like a 950 should be somewhere around 30-50% faster depending on the scenario, which is pretty huge.

I have no idea how often they turn up however... I have never seen one. Also, even if it is designed to run on just PCI-E slot power, the consumption has to be getting close to the limit of most low profile OEM systems, and some of them are limited to something like 45W or 60W for the PCI-E slot.

If we're limiting the discussion to cards that aren't unobtainium, the 750 Ti would definitely be the highest performing LP card that supports XP... and even those aren't super common or cheap.

Hoping wrote on 2024-06-18, 15:20:

I've never seen them before, Sparkle's low profile GTS 250 looks quite strange, I especially wonder what temperature it will reach with that small heatsink and a 150W TDP.

The existence of 6-pin PCIe connector does not equal maximum output. That card is more closer to an ECO variant of 9800GT, which had no connector at all.

Further testing of T620 Plus shows that on the CPU side it's more akin to a late Socket A/Socket 478 system really (singe thread performance is roughly half of Core 2 Duo E8400). So while it can run Windows XP games decently, the usual suspects like Doom 3 and Unreal Tournament 2004 won't run with stable 60 fps.

Quake 3 v1.09 Demo001 scores only ~182 fps, but that's predictable with such low memory bandwidth. With external GPU it scores 246 fps.

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2024-06-22, 19:27:

Further testing of T620 Plus shows that on the CPU side it's more akin to a late Socket A/Socket 478 system really (singe thread performance is roughly half of Core 2 Duo E8400). So while it can run Windows XP games decently, the usual suspects like Doom 3 and Unreal Tournament 2004 won't run with stable 60 fps. Quake 3 v1.09 Demo001 scores only ~182 fps, but that's predictable with such low memory bandwidth.

The APU prior to Zen had a great imbalance between the part of the CPU and the GPU, the part of the GPU was much more powerful than the part of the CPU, I have 4 laptops with AMD APUs, the A10 5750m that is allmost the most powerful for laptop and is quite acceptable. The E450 is the simplest I have and the CPU part is very bad, the Laptop in question is a bit weird, because it has an E450 and a dedicated HD 6470m and it is very noticeable that the CPU is not at the height of The GPU.
The A10 7300 is low consumption and for games it has many problems due to the TDP limit that it has to share between GPU and the CPU.
So in my experience it is expected that in the most demanding games with the CPU, the low performance will be noticed wille the GPU will never get to a 100% percent usage, that's what I've seen with the E450 and the HD 6470m.
I did a lot of test with these laptops some time ago but none of then has full driver support for XP, only Win 7 32 and newer up to Win 11.

On the other hand, I already received the Quadro K620 and has exceeded my expectations at the moment with 20539 points in 3DMark 2006 and a minimum of 70 fps and a maximum of 232 fps in FEAR with a resolution of 1280x1024 and the entire configuration to the maximum, AA X4, Aniso X16.
I still want to try more things with the drivers since I used a driver that I found on the Internet that did not even had the HDMI audio driver.
Temperatures are quite good at the moment with a maximum of 67 degrees celsius with the case closed.
Thank you very much to @Ozzunej for the suggestion of the K620.
Edit: I paid 30€ shiping included for the K620, by far, more reasonable than the prices of the 750.

Hoping wrote on 2024-06-22, 20:33:

The APU prior to Zen had a great imbalance between the part of the CPU and the GPU, the part of the GPU was much more powerful than the part of the CPU

For a 25W piece with rather powerful graphics, it's not that bad. The primary imbalance of T620 is memory bandwidth. With 64-bit DDR3L 1600MHz you can't do much without external graphics.
For comparison, T730 scored 477 fps with integrated graphics in Quake 3.

Hoping wrote on 2024-06-22, 20:45:

On the other hand, I already received the Quadro K620 and has exceeded my expectations at the moment with 20539 points in 3DMark […]
Show full quote

On the other hand, I already received the Quadro K620 and has exceeded my expectations at the moment with 20539 points in 3DMark 2006 and a minimum of 70 fps and a maximum of 232 fps in FEAR with a resolution of 1280x1024 and the entire configuration to the maximum, AA X4, Aniso X16.
I still want to try more things with the drivers since I used a driver that I found on the Internet that did not even had the HDMI audio driver.
Temperatures are quite good at the moment with a maximum of 67 degrees celsius with the case closed.
Thank you very much to @Ozzunej for the suggestion of the K620.
Edit: I paid 30€ shiping included for the K620, by far, more reasonable than the prices of the 750.

Wow, that's really impressive for such a cheap, small and easy to find card! I'm glad it's working so well for you! 😀

I can't remember what type of PC you said this was going into, but is there any possibility of doing the same tests with a larger but older card? I'm curious as to how the results would compare with something like a GTX 650, GTX 460, GTX 285, etc. Would also be really interesting to see a Radeon HD 7750 (or any of the other rebadges of it) thrown in as well since that is the most common AMD alternative to the K620.

Going by Serpent Rider's T730 FEAR results from earlier, it looks like the K620 + Ivy Bridge setup may offer around 3 times the performance if you have a little more space for an SFF system.

Just going by some old benchmarks online, those numbers would put the K620 firmly in GTX 280 territory... but the CPU you're using is a lot faster than what the old benchmarks are running so that probably skews results to some extent.