Video Specs

[appalachian_fox]

I was doing my once-weekly romp through the Newegg deals pages when I noticed this:

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...N82E16813138264

 

It has an "nVIDIA GeForce 6100" onboard video card on it. Reviewers consistently mention that it plays older games (Doom 3 at low settings plus older games) fairly well.

 

I know, I know, onboard video = baby-eating, but understand that I generally stick to the Ghost Recons, HL mods and such: older games. Not needing to buy a PCI-E vid card right now would be cool, plus I get the satisfied feeling of upgrading my AMD XP 2000+.

 

So, keeping in mind I don't need anything that intense, can anyone point me to benchmarks for this, especially benchmarks side-by-side with other cards? I'd Google it myself, but I'm lazy. That, and I spent my break salivating over cheap stuff, I need to get back to work.

 

I also accept comments on the board itself if they are relevant to long-term upgradability and significant performance issues (+- at LEAST 5%) compared to boards $75 and under.

 

Thanks in advance!

[HWarrior]

Opinions:

Note: No hands-on opinion of that board/chipset but here are some overall thoughts.

 

Upgradeability is there (PCI-E, X2, etc) so you shouldn't have a problem holding on to that board for a while.

 

All the 6100 boards are fairly new. May want to give them some time to get one round of bios updates out and then recheck forums for complaints/praises. nForcersHQ-Forum is really good for researching problems and there is always Newegg.

 

Integrated video for gaming is ok but at 800x600 and moderate settings. FPS drop is too significant at 1024.

 

Just keep in mind that most integrated video use passive cooling with a glued on heatsink (big heatsink next to CPU for Biostar board u linked). After gaming for hours, instability may pop up as heat increases.

 

Reviews:

FIRST LOOK: NVIDIA GeForce 6100 Performance - Anandtech comparison GeForce 6100 Integrated vs ATI RS480 Integrated

 

PERFORMANCE UPDATE: NVIDIA GeForce 6100 vs. ATI RS482 - Update of previous comparison after ATI called Anandtech to tell them their results were off.

Edited October 18, 2005 by HWarrior

[Cujo]

umm how did you read reviews and somehow not see benchmarks???

 

i'd say go for it. if you don't play source or any other new games then it's just fine. it'll handle original hl and cs just fine.

 

for me, i wouldn't be caught dead with one of those... lol. unless it was for a system i was building for someone's mom or something.

[NOFX]

I was thinking about doing that fox, basically because I can't shell out the cash for a new mobo/processor and video card. If I had a mobo such as that, I could use it for a few weeks while I saved up for a video card. But, I saw 3dmark benches and they are nowhere near a good, meaning 9500 pro and up, video card

Edited October 18, 2005 by NOFX

[Cujo]

the 6150 should be arriving shortly and will be a bit better. still not as good as add-on but very good for onboard.

[appalachian_fox]

Here's a summary of helpful comments so far (I'm keeping track in case I actually do spend money...)

 

Opinions:

Note: No hands-on opinion of that board/chipset but here are some overall thoughts.

 

Upgradeability is there (PCI-E, X2, etc) so you shouldn't have a problem holding on to that board for a while.

 

All the 6100 boards are fairly new.  May want to give them some time to get one round of bios updates out and then recheck forums for complaints/praises. 

 

Integrated video for gaming is ok but at 800x600 and moderate settings.  FPS drop is too significant at 1024. 

 

Just keep in mind that most integrated video use passive cooling with a glued on heatsink (big heatsink next to CPU for Biostar board u linked).  After gaming for hours, instability may pop up as heat increases.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Score. Didn't even think about the passive cooling issues for an extended period of time. 800x600 works for me for now, so that's good. Waiting for BIOS revisions is always good, too.

 

I was thinking about doing that fox, basically because I can't shell out the cash for a new mobo/processor and video card.  If I had a mobo such as that, I could use it for a few weeks while I saved up for a video card.  But, I saw 3dmark benches and they are nowhere near a good, meaning 9500 pro and up, video card

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not surprised. Again, I can deal with low-res, low-def graphics for a while. Heck, I am dealing with it right now! Good to know the benches, though, and how they compare (or don't).

 

the 6150 should be arriving shortly and will be a bit better.  still not as good as add-on but very good for onboard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't think they'll ever be as good as the add-ons, that's the point of modularity and reduced cost. Though, someone could conceivably make a high-end motherboard with a high-end GPU built in...But then no modularity, no upgradability. Waiting might be in order, though, since the 6150 is close to shipping.

 

It's not that I don't like high-res graphics (I have seen enough of them, and they are purty...Especially HL2, *droolz*) it's that I can't justify the increased cost of the system based on the improvements in the graphics. It's not worth that much to me.

[NOFX]

well my man, if your on that tight of a budget, I would purchase a 6600GT for 110 bucks refurbed from newegg. The performance/price ratio compared to a motherboard with onboard video will be the best deal ever.

 

the 100 bucks difference is a HUUUUUUGE video performance upgrade and worth every penny

[NOFX]

heck man, even buy a used 9700 pro probably get those for like 50 bucks on ebay

[appalachian_fox]

The thing is, I do more number crunching than I do video gaming, especially when I bring things like thesis work home. I would benefit much further from the increase in processing power and I would definitely benefit from more RAM long before I would utilize the increase in graphics performance. However, I'll bet that would be my next move when I had more disposable income. There's lots of image processing going on, but nothing real-time, so the GPU is kind of a secondary thing.

 

It's days like this I feel like saying, "Ah, to heck with it: Just buy a Dell, put in on the credit card and upgrade to a decent video card at some point in the distant future *gestures ambiguously*". I wouldn't do that (I mean, if I had that much money I might) but it would be a lot simpler to just get something...granted, it's something I don't really need...

 

Thanks for all the advice, guys, and for the tolerance of my archaic ways.

[Cujo]

the words "buy a dell" and "upgrade" should never be used in any remote proximity to eachother. there's no such thing as upgrading a dell.

 

nofx, when was the last time you saw a 9700 pcie???

[appalachian_fox]

That's not fair at all. I've thrown plenty of video cards into Dells. Just gotta know what you are buying.

 

Instead of perusing Newegg, I mananaged to stumble across the following board (actually, a review of it on Tomshardware.com) and figured it's more along the lines of what I want:

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...TC-pr1c3grabb3r

 

It's cheaper, it's no uATX (which would work, just not ideally) and it got pretty good reviews. Tom's Hardware talked about as much as a 5% performance hit from the Fatal1ty board, but honestly, it's way more than 5% cheaper than the board and it would satisfy my needs by allowing me to port my AGP card over. Now I just have to consider if this is really what I want to spend my money on.

 

I think I have PC2700 (DDR333 iirc) RAM in my current machines: Since the board is specified at PC3200 (DDR400) will it be backwards compatible to my current RAM? I imagine the answer is yes, but I don't know these things and if I had the free time to look them up right now, well, I wouldn't be posting here

 

Again, still open to any and all advice, just remember I am a cheapskate and I simply do not want "more horsepower for just a few more bucks". I'm looking at the lowest possible 64-bit upgrade path that still leaves me open for the future (SATA, PCI-e, dual-core processing, etc). I would even be open to Intel, but I prefer AMD. Personal preference, nothing more.

Edited October 19, 2005 by appalachian_fox

[Cujo]

you void your warranty if you throw a diff part into a dell, no? plus dells, for the most part, use crap no name stuff and you're stuck with their drivers. also, most i've seen don't have agp slots let alone pcie slots. when i see a dfi board with an amd64 in a dell for the same price as i can build my own then i will cease criticising them.

 

do you not read other threads here? there was a long one like a week ago talking about the asrock board.

 

your pc2700 should work. you'll just have to set a divider on your mobo to let your cpu run at regular speed.

[NOFX]

the words "buy a dell" and "upgrade" should never be used in any remote proximity to eachother.  there's no such thing as upgrading a dell.

 

nofx, when was the last time you saw a 9700 pcie???

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I saw one yesterday...c'mon dude... you just said

do you not read other threads here? there was a long one like a week ago talking about the asrock board.

 

if you read the thread, you would know the AsRock mobo has an AGP slot.....

 

Ok, well if your number crunching.. I would go with a P4. and forget the Video card. As far as RAM goes. If you only have 256 in a AMD 3000+ running your going to be hurting. this XP machine that has is using over 512 with just XP and Outlook running. You are going to be crawling along if you skimp on memory and are crunching numbers. Your machine will use virtual memory(your hard drive) which is a HUGE bottleneck.

 

get a cheap mobo and the lowest end of a new model CPU, and get alot of cheap ram.

[appalachian_fox]

...also, most i've seen don't have agp slots let alone pcie slots. 

 

do you not read other threads here?  there was a long one like a week ago talking about the asrock board.

 

your pc2700 should work.  you'll just have to set a divider on your mobo to let your cpu run at regular speed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

There are plenty of Dell machines with video expansion slots.

 

I do read other threads, but I don't read every other thread. This is my hobby. I do not define my life by searching out information on everything I come across on the internet. That's why I ask these questions here: There are plenty of people who are more knowledgeable than I am, yourself obviously included. However, I do ask these questions for constructive answers.

 

Thanks for the hint on the RAM. Please continue to add constructive advice to my threads, because that's why I ask questions. Your other banter is not constructive, and quite frankly, it's totally unhelpful when it comes to answering my questions. You ask if I read other threads here, but you don't link the thread. That would have been helpful, for one example.

 

I appreciate that you greatly disagree with my methodology, which I admit may be flawed from an ideal perspective, but it is how I operate and I am not looking to be criticized here. I take enough flack from all of my other obligations in life, when I come in here I don't care what you would do if it is outside of my project requirements, I would simply like advice and criticism within the scope I set.

 

Ok, well if your number crunching..  I would go with a P4.  and forget the Video card.  As far as RAM goes.  If you only have 256 in a AMD 3000+ running your going to be hurting.  this XP machine that has  is using over 512 with just XP and Outlook running.  You are going to be crawling along if you skimp on memory and are crunching numbers.  Your machine will use virtual memory(your hard drive) which is a HUGE bottleneck.

 

get a cheap mobo and the lowest end of a new model CPU, and get alot of cheap ram.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah, I figure on 1 GB of RAM, which is what I have now (or close, I can't remember). The goal would be to re-use pretty much everything, and with an AGP slot I can do that. I wouldn't want to forego gaming altogether, but my requirements for a "gaming rig" are very, very low. I'll have to check what I have when I get home, but 1 GB at DDR400 would be early on my list of things to purchase.

 

Can you recommend a P4 build in the same price range ($200 for mobo and processor) that would take my current AGP card with a PCI-e slot (or have reasonable onboard video with a PCI-e slot) and my current RAM? DDR2 is not necessary, but would be a nice upgrade path.

[Cujo]

if you read the thread, you would know the AsRock mobo has an AGP slot.....

did you read the thread? he posted about teh asrock AFTER you mentioned the 9700. sheesh.

 

i don't mean to pick on you fox but batman just made a thread that's almost identical to this one.

http://www.gamrs.co/forums/in...showtopic=21203

it's even titled "what's the best chipset for a64?" last post was only 4 days ago. oh wow. just reading through it and YOU POSTED IN IT!! come on fox.

 

Yeah, that's my conclusion. I arrived at pretty much the same prices, and I'm at a point where I'd like a new computer, but only to the point where I would do it if I could using some discretionary income I have. I'm not willing to save up money to do it, because there are other things I'd like to have as well, so $200 is enough but $400 is too much now.

 

Oh, well, prices will fall, games will get better and I will be more encouraged to upgrade as this happens. I'll be willing to spend more and I'll get more for it. I'll just be stuck benchmarking my equipment by how fast the Solitaire win screen goes.

 

it's been 6 days... anyway, it's not me that got off topic. you asked about the 6100.

 

for a gaming rig i wouldn't even consider intel. an amd 3000 will get you 10-15fps higher in source than an intel 3.0ghz. last i checked they were cheaper too.

 

out of curiousity, what is your current gpu?

Edited October 21, 2005 by Cujo

[appalachian_fox]

i don't mean to pick on you fox but batman just made a thread that's almost identical to this one.

http://www.gamrs.co/forums/in...showtopic=21203

it's even titled "what's the best chipset for a64?"  last post was only 4 days ago.  oh wow.  just reading through it and YOU POSTED IN IT!!  come on fox.

 

...

 

it's been 6 days...  anyway, it's not me that got off topic.  you asked about the 6100.

 

...

 

for a gaming rig i wouldn't even consider intel.  an amd 3000 will get you 10-15fps higher in source than an intel 3.0ghz.  last i checked they were cheaper too.

 

out of curiousity, what is your current gpu?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Granted! Haha, I do troll on occasion. However, I wasn't looking for something at the time. This topic started off with requests for information for a totally different board. Never did connect the two. But, granted, perhaps if I had sat down and thought a bit harder I may have recalled the other thread. Of course, I don't think this thread is off-topic at all: The discussion clearly evolved.

 

Obviously the PR numbers used by AMD are roughly comparative to the clock speeds used on P4s, so I would believe the two procs are roughly comparative. When you say AMD 3000, though, are you talking about the AMD 64bit on the Venice core with a PR of 3000? Just checking. Again, mostly the few extra FPS in game won't make much of a difference to me, as long as I can hit about 30, but if the difference is that great (and I think you are right, AMD is cheaper in general) that's worth noting.

 

My current GPU is...Hrm...I don't even recall. I know I got a friend's old card, I believe it was in the Radeon 9600 family, but it wasn't anything special. It runs pretty much all of my games just fine, even HL2, but recall my graphics requirements are very low.

 

Sorry if I was too harsh, but I do appreciate the advice...just not coated with "d00d, n00b!" If I wanted that, I'd go to a linux forum and ask if there's a linux equivalent of the Windows Update site

[Cujo]

yea i was referring the 64bit amd 3000. though even the old 32bit athlon xp 3000 would beat a 3.0ghz in source fps.

 

personally, i'd rather have an a64 3000+ and a 6150 mobo than the asrock and 9600. no specific reasons other than my personal bias against asrock and my love of the nf4 chipset. uli is relatively unknown in the high end. not sure how their driver support is and i know there are some performance dips compared to nforce.

Edited October 21, 2005 by Cujo

[Cujo]

wow right as i finish typing that and continue going through my daily bookmarks i find this:

 

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27129

[appalachian_fox]

Haha, just saw this thread again, that's crazy! Oh, well, I imagine it will be fixed pretty soon and the board will be re-released. I mean, it seems as if the big problem that is unique to the board is the firewall issue, so that shouldn't be a major engineering issue.

 

Though on another note, I noticed that many motherboards have two ethernet ports these days...I wonder why? I have to imagine it's not an expensive addition, but what does the average Joe do with two ports? Wait, I know the answer to that one. What does the average Power User do with two ports? I can't recall a SOHO router that does port trunking or other forms of aggregation, and I can't imagine it would help matters given the router's WAN link is usually the slowest part of the system. I also can't imagine even many power users having a use for failover. Are segmented networks popular for media center-style machines?

 

Oooh, that gives me an idea...Who wants to play Design-A-PC again? I'm thinking a media center PC, but without video capture requirements: I have a DVR that does time-shifting and recording in High-Def, and if I can't get High-Def over cable (I know of only one line of cards that does it, and it only runs on Linux: Not an option for this theoretical project). It's really more of a music "keg", actually, but with MP3s never recorded above 128Kbps, so keep that in mind when speccing audio. Digital audio out would be nice as well for DVD playback. The highest resolution video out would be nice, for playing assorted media. Also, data redundancy is not that important, nor is a contiguous volume, so RAID is likely overkill (though please feel free to bring up something I haven't thought of to prove its utility. I'd definitely consider RAID-5 if it were onboard). As always, cheap is the word: It doesn't have to play games, it doesn't have to process much, just record and playback audio and playback video, possibly store DVDs temporarily (It would be nice to not have to change DVDs when watching, for example, all of 24 in one lazy day), though that's not really necessary. Other functions would be nice (Web browsing, etc.) from the couch, but nothing fancy.

 

As far as formal requirements, I will squash microATX unless someone can find a board and case at the same price as its inexpensive full-sized counterparts.

 

Anyone who chooses to participate, feel free to justify your choices: This is how I learn!

[Preacher]

http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/Shoppi...bmit=ChangeItem

 

and

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...82E16814121193R

[appalachian_fox]

Sorry, the shopping cart didn't link