![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
that cpu is below min req for nearly every big game made in the last 1-2 years. and even the ones where it technically passes min req, its still too slow to push any decent card and in some cases too slow to provide acceptable framerates in general. I got rid of an even faster 5000 X2 nearly 3 years ago because it limited any decent gpu at that time. there is no point in wasting money for a faster gpu than that 7900 with an old cpu like that.
I hope nobody is stupid enough to buy that pc thinking the 9800gtx+ will let them play all newer games. they are in for a reality check in the form of crappy framerates in most newer games. oh well at least they will learn what the term bottleneck means...
what do you mean? you said you wanted to sell that pc but I am saying you should not be calling it a gaming pc by any means just because it has a decent gpu in it. somebody that's ignorant about computers will have no clue why many newer games will not be playable.
it has nothing to do with maxing settings. that cpu is a pos for modern games and as I have already said does NOT meet minimum requirements to play many newer games. taking advantage of someone that does not know that just shows lack of character.
well call it whatever you want to help yourself sleep at night. I have more values and character than to mislead someone just to make a sale.
No, it does not. Athlon X2 normally means AM2+ or AM3 class, not socket 939 X2's from 6 years ago.
That guy is getting ripped off and you know it. Way to prey on the ignorant. You should at least give him another $20-30 with those parts for that GPU. Not very honest imo.
That system is worth $80, tops. No way anyone with brains would pay more than that for such an old system (2005 mid-range build). Even if you uped the graphics to a 9800GTX+, maybe $100-110 total. There is just no way you can call that a "gaming machine" and even to call it a business machine would be stretching it.
I just re-worked a very similar system with the same components, different mobo, and it struggled with an HD4850 to play titles from 2008 and 2009 at 30fps. No game in the last two years would even begin to run at a fun or enjoyable refresh rate. You need to call the system a "decent 2005 build" that can play older titles moderately. Doing anything otherwise would be not be respectful of your customer(s) on your part.
even WoW has gotten MUCH more cpu intensive over the years. I bet a 3800 X2 would not even crack 25 fps nowadays in Cataclysm.
3.2 Athlon 2 X2, which is about 80% faster than a 3800 X2, getting just 38 fps. so my guess of around 25 fps would be about right at least on that part of the game. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm-directx-11-performance,2793-10.html
uh maybe it confuses you that turning down the res is not going to make the game faster when the cpu is the limitation. but yes some of the settings impact the cpu along with the gpu so turning those down would help.
No, the ION is faster. Your 8200M has a max memory bandwidth of about 8GB/s tops, and yeah, your memory is shared as well.
Mine, even though shared, runs at 12.8GB/s, and this only impacts performance if AA is used in larger quantities.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-8200M-G.11360.0.html
That shows the ION (9400M) beating your 8200M by 65%. Memory bandwidth isn't everything. 16SP vs 8SP, do the math.
Also, the ION 2, which has dedicated memory, is only 13% faster than the original ION. Dedicated memory isn't everything.
Apparently you need to learn some facts yourself.
Computer retail is the lowest form of a career in computers. You can keep it.
yet you keep claiming your 8200m is faster than the ION 9400m? and if you know more than us then why do you keep starting threads here asking for help or advice?
