TPU's Nostalgic Hardware Club

[Retrorockit]

Again, who in their right mind would pair a very old CPU with newer top-tier GPU, except for testing purposes?

Who in their right mind would come to a Nostalgic Hardware Forum to bitch about all the old hardware? That's what this thread is all about. Enjoying old hardware. LGA775 is just now becoming old enough to be discussed here precisely because it IS obsolete. Many of us had a lot of fun with LGA775 and have a bunch of it sitting around to play with. QX6850 was launched in 2007. I'm glad somebody had the money to throw a GTX1080 at one of these things. I haven't been able to screw up the courage to try anything beyond GTX1060.

Sure, though the 1060 is being choked to death by that X5470.

But it runs better with the GTX1060 than without it.
The challenge with a Micro BTX is just finding a card that can fit in there.
I do have a single slot Fury Nano with a water block I could stuff in there.
Here is the uderbenchmark chart.

Please click the green human to continue - UserBenchmark

It's better balanced than it was with the GTX1050 41%CPU/31% GPU
Now it's 40%CPU and 56% GPU. And I've got all the CPU there is for this system. Those were sold as 2 core, 4GB max. systems. None of the other Optis can take an X5470 swap.

 

[Ruru]

Does Crossfire with older cards work without the bridge? Still haven't tested those HD 4890s because of that. And I can't find my CF bridge anywhere, dammit. I'm 100% sure I have one somewhere.

Got a 8800 GT today, that will be also in my GPU roundup, plans are:

7800 GT
8800 GT
HD 4890
HD 4890 Crossfire
HD 6850
GT 1030
GTX 980 Ti

Going to use my gaming PC with a fresh install of Win7 because driver support for those older cards on Win 10 is kinda... meh.

 

[Jism]

To be honest, I want to fullfill my dream which is to benchmark a HD 4890 CF 1GHz

My nostalgia goes back to 10 years ago, I had a reference HD 4890 which clocked 1040MHz

The Asus HD4890 TOP (not the reference card) did exactly what you want here. I had a card that ran over 1150Mhz or so.

It was one of the first cards that had a Capacitor on the back for that extra more steady voltage compared to a normal VRM:

I just never pushed it on a Vapochill or so. I'm sure it would have made over 1300Mhz or so. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-eah4890-top-super-ml/3.html Here's a inhouse review of the thing.

 

[Ruru]

I remember having a card which had a similar capacitor, and it was just pure marketing BS. OC'd just like any other card with the same GPU.

 

[Jism]

Well i was able to push it on just 1150Mhz on AIR, which was pretty high compared to what TPU for example benched with. Marketing or not, related to power delivery every stage of ironing out the supplied voltage is welcome.

 

[Komshija]

Who in their right mind would come to a Nostalgic Hardware Forum to bitch about all the old hardware? That's what this thread is all about. Enjoying old hardware. LGA775 is just now becoming old enough to be discussed here precisely because it IS obsolete. Many of us had a lot of fun with LGA775 and have a bunch of it sitting around to play with. QX6850 was launched in 2007. I'm glad somebody had the money to throw a GTX1080 at one of these things. I haven't been able to screw up the courage to try anything beyond GTX1060.

First sentence, you've missed a train.
Absolutely, enjoying old hardware. IMO old or retro hardware should be a matching pair, eg. LGA 775 CPU, GPU, RAM and the rest of the components from the same era. Meaning just like an ordinary person or a PC enthusiast would build their system in 2007 from the existing components on the market at that time. Because QX6850 + GTX 1080 are not retro but rather ridiculous combination unless someone wants to test an old CPU to see how it performs in modern games or with modern software.

Another thing is that there are people who want to build a fast machine which is also good for gaming but for under 300€; oh and that is often going to be their ONLY computer. So they invest 200-300€ for such PC and start thinking that it's still fast and good gaming machine. Unfortunately it isn't anymore. It was back then, but now it's just not going to cut it. Older systems are just not compatible with modern software.
Imagine a situation where you build a Pentium 3 + GF 2 system, somehow manage to install Widnows 8 and start using it as your main PC. IMO pretty ridiculous, because such retro system should run with appropriate software like Windows 98 SE or similar.
There are hardware enthusiasts who build retro systems or simply play with older components because they like that, but often such individuals also have a powerful modern machine as their main computer.

 

[Ruru]

I see what you are talking about. But if someone throws a high-end card to an older system, it's reasonable IF she/he is going to upgrade other components also, just gets the GPU first. And after the whole system is upgraded, it's easy to see how much that old CPU bottlenecks the new GPU.

I remember getting a GTX 470 when I had a Phenom II X4 965 BE, it ran games fine, but after I got an i5-2500K the GPU showed its full potential. Felt like totally a new GPU.

But of course, testing and benchmarking with mixing with old & new hardware is fun.

 

[Retrorockit]

New GPUs are nice because they can be moved to a newer system later. Same with big ATX PSUs. Old CPUs on the other hand are tied to their old MB and other systems of their era. I'll spend on a newerGPU but cheap out on old CPUs, and MB. So you put GTX750 on your overclocked QX6800. It's stuck at 720P basically. Or you put a GTX1060 in there and it's doing 50fps @ 1080P medium. Which one is better? Also newer DX## versions only come with new GPUs.

 

[biffzinker]

Easy, the GTX 1060 but is it the crippled 3GB or the 1060 with 6GB?

 

[lexluthermiester]

IMO old or retro hardware should be a matching pair, eg. LGA 775 CPU, GPU, RAM and the rest of the components from the same era.

My approach is a bit different. I figure out what OS needs to be used for a given purpose and then select the best hardware that have drivers for same. For example, you can choose a Pentium 3 for a Win9x build, but the series of OS will run on a 3.2+ghz Pentium4.

 

[Retrorockit]

Easy, the GTX 1060 but is it the crippled 3GB or the 1060 with 6GB?

I used the 3GB because most of the old systems I play with have an 8GB limit. A 6GB GPU on an 8GB system is asking for trouble. In fact I moved to the GTX 1060 3GB to get away from the 4GB GTX1050Ti. I own a pair of 6GB GTX1060 full size cards to use with X38 sytems, and x58 systems that can handle 12GB or more RAM. The GTX1060 3GB is actually a sweet spot for old systems IMO. But for a Dell BTX mini Tower The MSI OC1 GTX10603GB can be cut down to 1 slot and trimmed to fit. I've actually stuffed it sideways into a Dell Optiplex XE desktop POS system. But got too busy to make it run.

 

[lexluthermiester]

A 6GB GPU on an 8GB system is asking for trouble.

How so?

 

[Retrorockit]

My approach is a bit different. I figure out what OS needs to be used for a given purpose and then select the best hardware that have drivers for same. For example, you can choose a Pentium 3 for a Win9x build, but the series of OS will run on a 3.2+ghz Pentium4.

Fortunately Vista drivers work just fine for Win7. Dell isn't writing any Win7 drivers for a lot of their old stuff.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Fortunately Vista drivers work just fine for Win7. Dell isn't writing any Win7 drivers for a lot of their old stuff.

I think you may have misunderstood. I find hardware that have existing drivers for the OS needed.

 

[Retrorockit]

How so?

GPU texture caching to system memory. I had trouble running some Unigine benchmarks with the 4GB GTX 1050Ti. It seems they would like 12GB of RAM. But the 3GB GTX1060 runs them just fine with 8GB. Only some programs seem to have an issue. I learned this back in the Dell E520 32 bit OS days with a 2GB GTX 750. The 4GB RAM "limit" was being taken up by the 2GB GPU. I ran 5GB so the GPU could grab adresses from the top down for textures, and still leave 3GB for the OS. The OS couldn't see the extra RAM, but the GPU could find it. I got that from an old Anandtech article. I've been keeping my eye on it ever since. Seems to still be true.
The 32 bit OS could actually only use 3.5GB. But with 4GB a 512k Gpu could use the other .5GB with no hit to the system performance. A 1GB GPU wasn't too bad either. But 2GB is where the trouble began.

 

[lexluthermiester]

GPU texture caching to system memory. I had trouble running some Unigine benchmarks with the 4GB GTX 1050Ti. It seems they would like 12GB of RAM. But the 3GB GTX1060 runs them just fine with 8GB. Only some programs seem to have an issue. I learned this back in the Dell E520 32 bit OS days with a 2GB GTX 750. The 4GB RAM "limit" was being taken up by the 2GB GPU. I ran 5GB so the GPU could grab adresses from the top down for textures, and still leave 3GB for the OS. The OS couldn't see the extra RAM, but the GPU could find it. I got that from an old Anandtech article. I've been keeping my eye on it ever since. Seems to still be true.
The 32 bit OS could actually only use 3.5GB. But with 4GB a 512k Gpu could use the other .5GB with no hit to the system performance. A 1GB GPU wasn't too bad either. But 2GB is where the trouble began.

Have never had any of those experiences. Weird.

 

[Retrorockit]

A lot of people would have though the 4GB 1050Ti was bottlenecked by the X5470. But I tried this old trick and the GTX1060 3GB runs just fine. The 2 fan 6GB card won't fit so I can't really test his theory 100%. I always try to proportion my GPU RAM to my system memory. Maybe the newer cards do it all on the GPU? Maybe not always. But if I did try the 6GB 1060 and it fell on it's face everybody would blame the CPU i"m sure.

I'm #1178 on this page. I don't see any other LGA775/771 near me. Lots of i5/ i7 stuff around though.

UNIGINE Benchmarks

Performance benchmarks by Unigine

benchmark.unigine.com

 

[lexluthermiester]

Maybe the newer cards do it all on the GPU? Maybe not always.

I think it also depends on the game and how it shuffles game assets around.

 

[Retrorockit]

It did seem to be specific to certain benchmarks. Anyway I added my Superposition ranking, it went to the previous post, and you can see the other CPUs near my ranking. I'm definitely not in some LGA775 ghetto there.
About 6 places behind me is a Ryzen 2600 with the same GPU.

 

[Jetster]

After High School I moved in with a girl who worked in Oakland, she ran this machine and typed all day, books for scientific research.

It was 1982 The Vydec 1800

http://www.computinghistory.org.uk/userdata/files/data-sheet-vydec-1800.pdf

 

[Retrorockit]

What happens if you stick metal objecs into those holes next to the monitor? Enquiring minds need to know!

How so?

I suppose the way to see if GPU/CPU "RAM balancing" is stilll relevant would be to take a newer system with 12GB+ memory and a 6GB GPU and pull out the RAM down to 6-8GB and see what happens. If 6GB GPU, and 6BG CPU doesn't cause an issue then I don't need to do this any more. But if it does then this may be the key to running newer GPUs on older hardware. Everybody freaked out in 2015 when I put an R9-285/380 on a QX6800. But it was a 2GB ITX version and worked just fine. But OS and games have all gotten greedy for RAM since it became cheap, so it may be worse than ever.

I'm going to wander off into a little speculation here and expand on what the 32 bit OS RAM balancing act could have to do with "newer" old computers. Windows 7 Home basic, and Starter have an 8GB RAM limit. Maybe you want to use the license that's already there. Say the MB can handle 16GB RAM. Many old computers "had" an 8GB limit until newer larger modules became available, or simply weren't tested/sold with the bigger modules. Dell never updates their spec. sheets for this. They tell you to buy a new computer. A Dell XPS 420 X38 for instance. You've got a QX9650 @ 4.15GHZ. ( I own one). To run the 6GB GTX 1060 GPU I would install 12GB RAM. 2x4GB and 2x2GB DDR2-800 (unless I find some 4GB DDR2-1066). The OS can only adress 8 GB, but according to theory (and Anandtech) the GPU will find the unused RAM at startup (top adress down) and cache there. The BIOS/chipset will allow it since the 8GB limit is OS imposed.
On the Optiplex 380 there are only 2 RAM slots and I've already stretched the capacity from 4GB to 8GB 2x4GB DDR3-1066. Reused the Home Basic license. So the 3GB GTX1060 was the "conservative" choice.
It 's theoretically possible to run 16GB on the 380, but it requires x64 low density RAM, and DDR3 8GB modules tend to be newer x128 type. And do I really want to cut down another GTX1060 to fit an Optiplex? (Probably yes if I can find one that can overclock).

 

[Robert B]

nVIDIA Quadro FX 3000 256MB AGP 8x - 370-6803-02 - WOOL EDITION! - As soon as I saw this beast I knew exactly what is was. It works but I didnt have the time to thoroughly test it yet.
Enermax EG465P-VE - 431W - After cleaning it looks amazing. Look at those tasty 3.3V and 5V rails. Just what a hungry AXP / P4 / Dual CPU setup would want.

 

[Retrorockit]

That's interesting. A 220W 5V. rail ,and a 240W 12V. rail. 460W the hard way! Nice. What GPU cables does it provide? Does it have dual 4 pin CPU cables?

 

[DR4G00N]

nVIDIA Quadro FX 3000 256MB AGP 8x - 370-6803-02 - WOOL EDITION! - As soon as I saw this beast I knew exactly what is was. It works but I didnt have the time to thoroughly test it yet.
Enermax EG465P-VE - 431W - After cleaning it looks amazing. Look at those tasty 3.3V and 5V rails. Just what a hungry AXP / P4 / Dual CPU setup would want.

I have the 550/650W version, EG651P-V(E), it's a nice unit for sure, plenty of power for even the most demanding dual slot 1/s370/s462 setup. Kind of a shame it only has 20-pin atx and 4-pin cpu connectors though.

 

[Robert B]

Indeed, the Enermax EG465P-VE only has 20 pin ATX and 4 pin CPU connectors but I can use various adapters and expand its usability. Also it only has MOLEX and FDD connectors and a AUX conenctor for P4 Rambus style of motherboards. Old school all the way. The main reason I bought it are those beefy 3.3V and 5V rails. Plus it is my first PSU that can deliver 220W Max on those rails. I think that it is a member of the last wave of PSUs to do so after which they started switching mainly to 12V rails.