Improving Game Performance?

[Miruku]

I'm looking to improve my framerate (play with reduced slowdown on 1920 x 1080) on games like Fallout 3 and Oblivion.

Here are my computers stats:

Windows 8 (no improvement needed)
AMD FX-4130 Quad Core Processor - 3.80 GHz
8.00 GB (no improvement needed)
64-Bit Operating System (no improvement needed)
NVIDIA GeForce 610 Graphics Card - !GB Cache (I think)

Suggest any improvements, other than overclocking or setting image settings to "performance" (probably no adjustment needed)?

[darkstar64]

A computer like that should handle Fallout 3 and Oblivion like Doom. I'm running a much less powered computer than yours and both those games run great, including Skyrim. Shadows, Anti-Aliasing, and Water Reflections tend to use more resources, so try lowering them or turning them off.

You can also update your graphics card drivers, making sure your games are also updated, and your card should have an Nvidia panel that lets you customize your graphic settings.

EDIT: I looked up your graphics card, and replacing it with something more powerful would definitely be one of your best options, if not the best.

[Dark-Assassin]

Yea, I'd agree with the graphics card. Looks like a low powered budget model.
A GTX series would be perfect. 650 or 660 (with or without TI or OC).

[-Jes-]

No offense, but who designs a computer with a BEAST of a cpu (a 3.8!!! ghz quadcore) and .. a statistically insignificant budget card like a 610!?

A 610 will not beat ANYTHING, not even a 480.

Seriously people; in the GPU world, the first number is the SERIES number, and the following number(s) is the PERFORMANCE typically ranging from 10 (budget) to 80 (high-end).

[Balrog]

I'm looking to improve my framerate (play with reduced slowdown on 1920 x 1080) on games like Fallout 3 and Oblivion.

Here are my computers stats:

Windows 8 (no improvement needed)

<citation needed>

If you're playing 3-year-old AAA games that were probably meant to run on XP, Windows 8 is definitely something you need to improve on. Downgrade to 7, set up a dual boot, or even run XPSP3 in a virtual machine.

Also, your graphics card is most probably shit for what you're working with.

[mr fiat]

id say replace the graphics card everything else is fine, id recommend a GTX650 or a amd radeon hd7770. as the GT610 is currently nvidia's most low end gpu.

[ibm5155]

NVIDIA GeForce 610 Graphics Card
NVIDIA GeForce 610 Graphics Card
NVIDIA GeForce 610 Graphics Card
REALLY? common, you have a ferrari inside a Volkswagen Beetle? D:

I bet 100 cookies that my intel hd 3000 is more powerfull than this nvidia gpu haha

[Sicamore]

AMD FX-4130 Quad Core Processor - 3.80 GHz

As an important side note, Intel pls. AMD is the worst, and don't tell me I'm a fanboy and don't know what I'm talking about. They can add 100 ghz to their models but their structure is craps. Video cards are the only thing keeping their chips afloat.

Anyways, that's not the problem because your AMD is powerful enough (and if you are using a store bought pc you have no control anyways), so I would bet on your gpu. It's a bottleneck to your system most definitely, being a low end series.

If you are looking for a good priced, same-size, powerful and quiet card but aren't afraid of switching to ATI, I would recommend the single slot 1 gb GDDR5 xfx hd 5770 - I had one and it ran battlefield 3 clean at 60 fps on high. It should run your games no problem. Oh, and it's also single slot as mentioned above, which means it takes up less space like your old one and the cooling is not worse as is commonly stated about powerful single slotters. You can also run three of these in your system with crossfire if you really want (and this could potentially work better since you have an AMD processor already. ATI cards and their mother AMD processor are rumored to pair better than an ATI and and intel).

[spoiler][/spoiler]

[mr fiat]

AMD FX-4130 Quad Core Processor - 3.80 GHz

As an important side note, Intel pls. AMD is the worst, and don't tell me I'm a fanboy and don't know what I'm talking about. They can add 100 ghz to their models but their structure is craps. Video cards are the only thing keeping their chips afloat.

Anyways, that's not the problem because your AMD is powerful enough (and if you are using a store bought pc you have no control anyways), so I would bet on your gpu. It's a bottleneck to your system most definitely, being a low end series.

If you are looking for a good priced, same-size, powerful and quiet card but aren't afraid of switching to ATI, I would recommend the single slot 1 gb GDDR5 xfx hd 5770 - I had one and it ran battlefield 3 clean at 60 fps on high. It should run your games no problem. Oh, and it's also single slot as mentioned above, which means it takes up less space like your old one and the cooling is not worse as is commonly stated about powerful single slotters. You can also run three of these in your system with crossfire if you really want (and this could potentially work better since you have an AMD processor already. ATI cards and their mother AMD processor are rumored to pair better than an ATI and and intel).

[spoiler][/spoiler]

HD5770? are you kidding me? that card is ancient, im sure his case is large enough for the much never HD7770 if not the HD7750 which probably still pwns the HD5770. also amd isnt as bad as you claim they still offer great perforamce for their money. and the upcoming FM2+ based apus wil be very powerfull.

[Sicamore]

First of all, 2009 is not ancient - it can still run many of today's games on max is not high settings without overclock. Second, we are discussing what is making his system performance worse. I just thought it was necessary to recommend a personal favorite of mine that seems within budget and could serve as a good companion, however the main question is NOT discussing cards. If we were discussing what card he should get or what card would be better for his system I would say no lower than GTX Titan because the question is so open ended.

Concerning AMD, I never said they can't deliver performance, all I said was that the chips they produce that are supposed to rival Intel models are funny. If you spend 300$ on an AMD, you just got ripped off, because that chip will fall drastically in price anyways in 4 or 5 months as noone will buy or use it. You might say this is because Intel gets people more interested, therefore noone tries out any AMD because of their slow reputation, but I know for a fact it is because they are worse. I've had 4 AMDs before and I can say the process handling is nothing short of shit. If you don't believe their fluctutation in the market, take a look at this:

Released in 2011:

AMD A-Series A10-6800K @ 4.4 Ghz

Price now: $14997 + mail in rebate

Released in 2009:

Core i7 950 Nehalem @ 3.06

Price now: over 250$ (If you can still find one, as they are discontinued)

The last processor I had was a Nehalem and it still runs better and handles more jobs than the FX-8350 WHICH WAS RELEASED IN 2012. I don't know who is setting these prices, but surely it's the people who make the last decision.

[Hypnotoad]

and don't tell me I'm a fanboy and don't know what I'm talking about.

You're a fanboy and you don't know what you're talking about.

They can add 100 ghz to their models but their structure is craps.

I ran Fallout 3 and Oblivion on an Athlon II x4 640 perfectly fine @ 3ghz, FX-4130 @3.8ghz is absolutely more than enough for those games, almost any game in fact.

Video cards are the only thing keeping their chips afloat.

Actually it's because they are priced competitively, very competitively (bang for you buck).

I would bet on your gpu. It's a bottleneck to your system most definitely, being a low end series.

Agreed.

I would recommend the single slot 1 gb GDDR5 xfx hd 5770 - I had one and it ran battlefield 3 clean at 60 fps on high. It should run your games no problem.

That is my old card, it served me well but you could easily do better these days for a reasonable price. I would only recommend if you're on a tight budget.

---

in 4 or 5 months as noone will buy or use it.

Wrong, this only applies to the botched bulldozer series. Phenom II BE is still a very decent CPU for the money and still sells strong.

but I know for a fact it is because they are worse.

Everyone knows Intel are better, but AMD are simply better value for money.

Released in 2011:

AMD A-Series A10-6800K @ 4.4 Ghz

Stop right there, an APU and a CPU is simply not the same and have different goals, this is new technology and you cannot compare it to an i7 or any regular cpu.

Price now: $14997 + mail in rebate

What the fuck? http://www.amazon.co.uk/AMD-Processor-A ... =a10+6800k

I don't remember the exchange rate being that bad.

Core i7 950 Nehalem @ 3.06

Flagship Intel cpu at the time vs a completely different technology? wat

---

Let's actually do a fair comparison, using this: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gam ... 106-5.html

So equivalent to i7 -950 is a Phenom II BE 965?

Phenom II 965 BE = http://pcpartpicker.com/part/amd-cpu-hdz965fbgmbox $90

i7 950 @ 3.06ghz = http://pcpartpicker.com/part/intel-cpu-bx80601950 $490... yeah no.

Wait, how about we compare it to an FX-8120 instead: http://pcpartpicker.com/part/amd-cpu-fd8120frgubox = $139.99

Okay let's be reaaally generous, and compare your quoted price ($250), to the very best AMD gaming cpu you can currently buy (yes there are better ones but not available for purchase atm)

So let's go with FX-8350 http://pcpartpicker.com/part/amd-cpu-fd8350frhkbox

$179.99....

So the best AMD gaming cpu you can buy, is STILL cheaper than a now old largely discontinued i7 950 released years ago at your quoted price.

Sorry, price wise AMD wins.

---

The last processor I had was a Nehalem and it still runs better and handles more jobs than the FX-8350 WHICH WAS RELEASED IN 2012. I don't know who is setting these prices, but surely it's the people who make the last decision.

How the hell did I miss this?

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-9 ... MD-FX-8350

Wrong again!

[Sicamore]

Well you sure like to do your research - now the real question is did you do it to prove me wrong or prove to everyone that I am a dumbass of sorts?

As for your last part, I am talking about personal experience. Reviews and tests are great, but if it doesn't run what I need, what good is it? AMD is good price wise but I personally don't see any better performance. I ran them and I saw what they did. I don't care what websites say, for it is not what is going to make me keep it or throw it out.

[mr fiat]

First of all, 2009 is not ancient - it can still run many of today's games on max is not high settings without overclock. Second, we are discussing what is making his system performance worse. I just thought it was necessary to recommend a personal favorite of mine that seems within budget and could serve as a good companion, however the main question is NOT discussing cards. If we were discussing what card he should get or what card would be better for his system I would say no lower than GTX Titan because the question is so open ended.

Concerning AMD, I never said they can't deliver performance, all I said was that the chips they produce that are supposed to rival Intel models are funny. If you spend 300$ on an AMD, you just got ripped off, because that chip will fall drastically in price anyways in 4 or 5 months as noone will buy or use it. You might say this is because Intel gets people more interested, therefore noone tries out any AMD because of their slow reputation, but I know for a fact it is because they are worse. I've had 4 AMDs before and I can say the process handling is nothing short of shit. If you don't believe their fluctutation in the market, take a look at this:

Released in 2011:

AMD A-Series A10-6800K @ 4.4 Ghz

Price now: $14997 + mail in rebate

Released in 2009:

Core i7 950 Nehalem @ 3.06

Price now: over 250$ (If you can still find one, as they are discontinued)

The last processor I had was a Nehalem and it still runs better and handles more jobs than the FX-8350 WHICH WAS RELEASED IN 2012. I don't know who is setting these prices, but surely it's the people who make the last decision.

lol you realy do not know what you are talking about, the i7-950 is quite old and is slower then my i5-3350p, also i find it hillarious that you compare a then top of the line cpu to a current AMD midrange cpu, in fact the a10-6800k is fairly close to the i7-950 and it sells for about 3 to 4 times less.

and regarding the gpu, well thing is the HD5770 is now 2 gens behind the current and you probably would get a better value out of a current gen equivalent.

the HD5770 current value is about €100, the current gen equivelant is the HD7770 which sells for about the same, and its MUCH faster.

[Hypnotoad]

I did it for the honour of AMD!

You may be right about the i7-950 being better for you; as is usually the case, that chip may be better at doing certain tasks (that you may do a lot), while the FX-8350 will be better at doing other tasks (that you may do less).

[Sicamore]

I did it for the honour of AMD!

You may be right about the i7-950 being better for you; as is usually the case, that chip may be better at doing certain tasks (that you may do a lot), while the FX-8350 will be better at doing other tasks (that you may do less).

Right. And for the honor of AMD I guess this is fair game. It's the honor after all.

---

lol you realy do not know what you are talking about, the i7-950 is quite old and is slower then my i5-3350p, also i find it hillarious that you compare a then top of the line cpu to a current AMD midrange cpu, in fact the a10-6800k is fairly close to the i7-950 and it sells for about 3 to 4 times less.

Faster in what sense? Core clock? It has better performance for its value but the 950 still has hyper threading and twice the threads. Not to mention more core cache. But like Hypnotoad said, it really depends on what you plan on running. Also just for a side note it's true:

http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/ ... u=A79-6800

:o

And where the hell did you find this?

http://pcpartpicker.com/part/intel-cpu-bx80601950

The release price was 300$ and seeing that they still have 3 brand new ones for around 250$ at my local parts store, I would say that that is a ripoff. However, browsing the interwebs I find that over 400 is the standard for this processor now. For those few markets that still have it, I couldn't find anything lower than that, which really surprised me. I guess everyone wants it or something but I had no idea this is what people are willing to pay for a good but discontinued chip. 250 is still higher than the 179 for the top of the line AMD, but now that I see 250 being unrealistic to find, 400 is definitely out of comparison range.

[katZune]

Get and nvidia 430 GTX its cheap and isn't bad FOR ZANDRONUM, but if you want something better, 670 ti, just a thing, ATI videocards (AMD) have problems with zandronum/Gzdoom (OGL), some videocard doesn't but they dont have the same performance like an nvidia (in zandronum/gzdoom)

[Sicamore]

Get and nvidia 430 GTX its cheap and isn't bad FOR ZANDRONUM, but if you want something better, 670 ti, just a thing, ATI videocards (AMD) have problems with zandronum/Gzdoom (OGL), some videocard doesn't but they dont have the same performance like an nvidia (in zandronum/gzdoom)

True, the openGL on ATI is not as great. Rage and Zandronum were just murdered by my old card.

[darkstar64]

And then there's me, running a dual-core AMD A4-4300M APU 2.5GHz, 6GB of RAM, and an integrated AMD Radeon HD 7420G GPU.

[mr fiat]

Get and nvidia 430 GTX its cheap and isn't bad FOR ZANDRONUM, but if you want something better, 670 ti, just a thing, ATI videocards (AMD) have problems with zandronum/Gzdoom (OGL), some videocard doesn't but they dont have the same performance like an nvidia (in zandronum/gzdoom)

my previous pc had a AMD gpu and it worked perfectly fine in ogl (it was the bottom of AMD's lineup at the time HD6450)

edit* i looked around and the GT430 is rather hard to find and they go for about €60, the much newer GT630 (and plenty available) goes for the same if not less, but we dont know how much OP is willing to spend on a new graphics card.