• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

.

If the text at bootup is jumbled you probably have a failing shader cluster. Improper characters in Text mode is one of the classic symptoms of this, as well as colored artifacts on graphical modes. I'd try baking it if I were you. Then if that doesn't work, it was a 5ish year old card anyways. It was time to move on.

GT630 would be a solid replacement.
 
1: Pre-heat oven to 200C

2: Put the graphics card on a tray raised up (so the graphics card doesn't touch the tray, usually use balls of tin foil for this)

3: Put the tray with the graphics card on it in the oven.

4: Remove after 8 minutes.

5: Leave to cool off.

Basically it melts the solder joins and can fix some graphics cards.
 
Jorona said:
it was a 5ish year old card anyways. It was time to move on.
Click to expand...

I respectfully submit that this is really the case. The rest of your machine is probably solid, but now is a great time to look for a replacement/upgrade to that card. Spazturtle's recommendation of an R7-250 or even something a little higher up the chain like a gtx 750 are both great options. :)
 
JYeager11 said:
Now that I know what "baking" is, there's NO WAY I'm doing that. ;) Sorry, I just don't trust myself not to melt the entire card.

So it's R7-250 vs GT630? Again, I don't need 3D performance. This is strictly a 2D rig. It's for very advanced Photoshop work and 2D video playback. Those are the only two things I care about.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that either of those cards would be more than sufficient for your needs :)
 
2GB won't help video playback. You'll be fine with a 1GB card.
Also note the Ti version cards usually require an aux 6-pin power to be plugged in. Not a big deal, but something to think about.
for the $100-150 range, I'd look into the GTX750's they are newest series, and might last you a little longer into the future, with less power consumption to boot.
 
Last edited:
JYeager11 said:
But which one? ;) The GTX 650 alone has 3 versions @ 1GB.

Also, a lot has been said about Photoshop not using NVIDIA's CUDA advantages, so buying an NVIDIA card for Photoshop work would be "a waste". However, NVIDIA has countered by creating a section on their site boasting superior Adobe CS6 performance.

http://www.nvidia.ca/object/photoshop-cs6.html

However, the above link makes no mention of which cards make use of the Mercury Graphics Engine that Photoshop CS6 seemingly uses. Are we to assume ALL NVIDIA cards are using it? Or only modern ones? Where's the cutoff for "modern ones"? Whether or not this is all hot air to counter the negative "non-CUDA" murmurs, or if there's actually reason for me to believe that the GTX 650 is going to kick the GT 240's butt in Photoshop performance because of this Mercury Graphics stuff, I have no idea. Maybe someone can help me there..?
Click to expand...

Personally, I'd just go with the cheapest.
 
I think the thing you're getting hung up on is nothing more than the word "gaming". Just because a card is adept at gaming does not diminish in any way it's ability to provide acceleration for things which use it, in fact, it is the opposite.

Now, you could look into the professional version of workstation cards which are the same exact thing as the "gaming" cards but carry a higher price tag for well supported drivers, but why would you do that when you can get a "gaming" card and have great performance as well?

Also, despite your point about the "2D" work you're doing, you're doing that work using a system that calls on "3D" APIs to help push the pixels on your screen. If someone were to recommend something like a GTX780 or an R9 series to you, that would be ridiculous. However, the idea of using something like a 750 (non-ti would be fine, I'm sure) for your work, or an R7-250 is very much a good idea. Also, you would most assuredly experience a large gain in the speed with which you're able to manipulate those extremely high resolution documents. <- I really want to emphasis this since you pointed out dealing with files that are 6-7GB, higher bandwidth on the graphics card means that even just scrolling around in a document that large will be smoother.

Also, price-wise, you're right there at the "staying near the $100" mark ;-)

GTX 570 - $120
R7-250 - $90 - $10 rebate
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
seriously...buy the 750 and call it a day.....these people are trying to help you
 
cortexodus said:
I'm pretty sure Mercury is driven by OpenGL and OpenCL, which works on Nvidia cards as well as AMD cards. Also, despite your feeling that "2D is what I'm doing and 3D power is not what I need", the better the GPU you have, the better it's going to work in terms of accelerating photoshop.

This appears to be a good rundown of what you're after / what you can expect.
Click to expand...

Remember that at the moment the NVIDIA driver uses a significant amount of CPU resources whilst the card is running OpenCL code whilst the AMD driver doesn't.

Now this could be fix in a later driver but it hasn't been in the last 3-4 years.
 
Spazturtle said:
Remember that at the moment the NVIDIA driver uses a significant amount of CPU resources whilst the card is running OpenCL code whilst the AMD driver doesn't.

Now this could be fix in a later driver but it hasn't been in the last 3-4 years.
Click to expand...

I didn't know that. In that regard, maybe an AMD card is a better bet. In either case, it would be a MASSIVE improvement just in end-user experience within his specified applications.
 
JYeager11 said:
I'm actually close to pulling the trigger on it, I just wanted to offer some counter-arguments I've been hearing for peace of mind.

But depending on the manufacturer, not all GTX 750 cards are created equal. I believe the Asus has two DVI outs while most other companies offer only one. Are there more differences like these I need to look into before picking my manufacturer, or are they otherwise all equal?
Click to expand...

Outside of display connectivity, I'd say the major difference in any given card will be the loudness of its cooler. Might double check anything you're hovering over the buy button to see if anyone thinks it's more/less quiet than you may want. ;)
 
JYeager11 said:
Alright, so this is what I'm seriously looking at :
http://www.asus.com/Graphics_Cards/GTX750PHOC1GD5/

And here is where I'm thinking of buying it :
http://products.ncix.com/detail/asus-geforce-gtx-750-oc-e8-94415.htm

Any objections from anyone? It's about $50 more than I was looking to spend, but by most accounts would provide the best bang for buck. My only worry is that something in my rig won't be good enough to take full advantage of it.

Can someone look at the rig in my sig and let me know if anything there will hinder the GTX 750's performance in any way? In other words, am I spending extra on something I won't be able to enjoy 100% of the benefits of? (Example: Does the fact that the motherboard ram is DDR3 adversely affect the DDR5 ram that the GTX 750 boasts, or how about the fact that the motherboard is PCIE2 and the card PCIE3?)
Click to expand...

All looks good...I'm guessing you live in Canada since you ordering from ncix....you aint got to worry bout no bottle neck...lol.....that's a very low end card to begin with (just maybe if it was some kind of dual chip 780 or 290x) my card is a least twice as powerful as the brand new card your buying....and there is ZERO bottleneck and in case you haven't noticed we both have PCIE2...might not be a bad idea to put it in an x16 slot if possible:)
 
Last edited:
You don't need an overclocked Ti version of the 750 for what you're asking for, but for what it is, it's gonna be a huge improvement for you. The difference on NCIX between a 750 and a 750Ti appears to only be $10 anyway.

There are still plenty of gamers running way more intense gear than you on Nehalem i7's so there's nothing "missing" from your system to take advantage of that card.
 
If you happen to find yourself waiting on high cpu intensive tasks...you could always put a hexacore in pretty cheap....but only you would know this (i honestly don't do a lot of Photoshop work)
 
primetime said:
If you happen to find yourself waiting on high cpu intensive tasks...you could always put a hexacore in pretty cheap....but only you would know this (i honestly don't do a lot of Photoshop work)
Click to expand...

While OpenCL tends to make a much larger difference, you are correct that PS6 loves the whole 'moar core argument..One of the $80 hexcore Xeons from eBay would be a nice upgrade for him, and he could sell his 920 to offset most (if not all) of the upgrade cost.

OP, I would personally stick with an AMD card since they do have superior OpenCL performance (in terms of the system impact like the high CPU usage mentioned above) and the R250 or 260 would be a great card at the same price point of the 750TI you are looking at.
 
JYeager11 said:
Just to confirm.. a PCIE3 card can run in a PCIE2 slot and not be adversely affected in any way? I dunno, that just doesn't sound right.
)
Click to expand...

for gods sake already...there's NO BOTTLENECK:eek:lol If your not going to listen..why ask the question? How many ways you want to hear the same answer?
 
Last edited:
JYeager11 said:
Just to confirm.. a PCIE3 card can run in a PCIE2 slot and not be adversely affected in any way? I dunno, that just doesn't sound right.

As for why not a Ti version (cortexodus), the Ti version requires an additional 6 pin power source, so I'm assuming it's using more juice... after bad drivers fried my CURRENT card, that's a turn off (even if it's not a fully logical one). ;)
Click to expand...

It's totally peachy. There's no issue with running a card like the 750 in a PCI-E 2 slot on the system that you're sporting. You're good to go :cool:

I was mistaken on the card, I thought you were actually pointing out a Ti version of the card as your choice. As for what fried your old card, I'd bet 40 hojillion dollars it had less to do with drivers than it did with a defective surface component or just flat-out age, but that's neither here nor there at this point ;)
 
JYeager11 said:
Thanks cortexodus! The decision of which card to buy has been made (GTX750). Thanks for your help, and everyone else's as well.

Just one last thing... why does PCIE3 even exist if it will perform just as well on PCIE2?
Click to expand...

No problem, I'm sure you'll be pleased with the new card when you get it up and running. Make sure and let everyone know how it goes, that way if someone else down the road has the same questions and such, your experience will help them out.

PCIE3 ~just about~ doubles the bandwidth of the bus from PCIE2 (which itself doubled from PCIE1) and accommodates graphics cards that are way beyond the requirements that you've indicated.

It's my understanding that there isn't much out there(if at all) that will max out an x16 PCIE2 slot at this point, let alone PCIE3, but I think that there is some performance impact between the two when you're doing things like SLI/Crossfire and/or using ultra-high end GPUs.
 
JYeager11 said:
Just one last thing... why does PCIE3 even exist if it will perform just as well on PCIE2?
Click to expand...

Its exist because technology is always advancing....and if you were in the market for ultra high end professional card like tesla, titans, quadro, Firepros, R9-290X2 (yet to be released)
then and only then it "might" be a factor....right now the 3.0 interface is way ahead of the needed throughput of today's video cards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top