As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

Built computer isn't running well

ViaosHK56ViaosHK56 Registered User regular
edited August 2007 in Games and Technology
Here's the deal. I built a computer from parts a while back and am trying to get it to run well with WoW. The frame rate is staying around 20-24 fps no matter if the settings are the lowest or the highest. I have an Intel Celeron processor - 2.5ghz - FSB - 800/533MHz. It also has an ATI Radeon grahics card. 1Gb ram and a 500 watt power supply. I'm thinking that the problem is the processor, and possibly ram is bottlenecking the graphics card and forcing it to run at less than it's abilities. Any thoughts on the matter? Thanks.

Link to the graphics card: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102085

Don't have a link to the processor, since it got taken down.

ViaosHK56 on

Posts

  • Options
    Lucky CynicLucky Cynic Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Well, it is an older processor, but be sure your system settings aren't too cranked up. Try toning down screen resolution and shadows and other graphical solutions and see if you get a jump in performance. Or, you can press Control + Alt + Delete to bring up the task manager and check the CPU usage from there. Also, try cutting down on the programs running in the back ground. IM clients may be okay, but if you have photoshop, Firefox, and solitaire going on at the same time, well then you are going to have a few problems.

    Lucky Cynic on
  • Options
    ShadowfireShadowfire Vermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Turn off the lighting effects in WoW. Those killed me for a long time. I would get around 15-18 FPS, no matter what resolution I set the game to, or any other options I tweaked. Once I turned off the lighting effects (bloom, don't remember what else.. there are 3), the framerate shot up to around 50, and changes in resolution finally affected it.

    So yea.. get rid of lighting effects.

    Shadowfire on
    WiiU: Windrunner ; Guild Wars 2: Shadowfire.3940 ; PSN: Bradcopter
  • Options
    maximumzeromaximumzero I...wait, what? New Orleans, LARegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    "Full-Screen Glow"

    You want to turn that off.

    maximumzero on
    FU7kFbw.png
    Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
  • Options
    KaseiusKaseius Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    ViaosHK56 wrote: »
    The frame rate is staying around 20-24 fps no matter if the settings are the lowest or the highest.

    Would like to point this out for people who missed it.

    Bloom on or off, resolution 800x600 or 1280x1024, low texture, high texture, all low settings, all high settings, none of it will change the framerate by more than 1 or 2 on his PC and I can't figure out what it is.

    My guess is the processor or RAM are causing him to run less than optimal but I'm not too sure.

    Kaseius on
    www.youtube.com/user/kaseius -- Let's Plays
  • Options
    Mmmm... Cocks...Mmmm... Cocks... Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    It's funny because a while back I got a laptop - WoW ran great - Half Life didn't like it.
    So one day I updated my drivers for HL, WoW then ran like shit. So I had to roll back my driver.
    Perhaps you hit the same snag I did - check it out.

    Mmmm... Cocks... on
  • Options
    Marty81Marty81 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Have you installed your motherboard drivers? It's a long shot, but who knows.

    Marty81 on
  • Options
    MarlorMarlor Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    ViaosHK56 wrote: »
    The frame rate is staying around 20-24 fps no matter if the settings are the lowest or the highest.

    That's a sure sign that the problem isn't GPU-related.

    Your system just can't keep up with all the processing that is going on behind the scenes, so that is throttling the GPU.

    I had a similar problem with Half-Life 2 on my old Athlon XP machine. After having slightly below-par performance, I chucked a 6600GT in it to attempt to improve things, but I still hit the same framerate cap as I did with my Geforce 3.

    Generally it's the CPU that is the real bottleneck in these cases. The strange thing in this case is that the CPU isn't all that bad... surely it should be able to keep up.

    Marlor on
    Mario Kart Wii: 1332-8060-5236 (Aaron)
  • Options
    FremFrem Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    I'm probably talking crap as hardware isn't generally my thing, but could it be that you've got the graphics card plugged into a slow slot? I mean, AGP comes in different speeds, right?
    edit: Or in an "AGP express" slot?

    Frem on
  • Options
    NJD2004NJD2004 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Frem wrote: »
    I'm probably talking crap as hardware isn't generally my thing, but could it be that you've got the graphics card plugged into a slow slot? I mean, AGP comes in different speeds, right?
    edit: Or in an "AGP express" slot?

    Swing and a miss.

    NJD2004 on
    njd2004.jpg
  • Options
    walnutmonwalnutmon Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Marlor wrote: »
    ViaosHK56 wrote: »
    The frame rate is staying around 20-24 fps no matter if the settings are the lowest or the highest.

    That's a sure sign that the problem isn't GPU-related.

    Your system just can't keep up with all the processing that is going on behind the scenes, so that is throttling the GPU.

    I had a similar problem with Half-Life 2 on my old Athlon XP machine. After having slightly below-par performance, I chucked a 6600GT in it to attempt to improve things, but I still hit the same framerate cap as I did with my Geforce 3.

    Generally it's the CPU that is the real bottleneck in these cases. The strange thing in this case is that the CPU isn't all that bad... surely it should be able to keep up.

    There is absolutely no way that a 2.5 ghz processor is the bottleneck, unless it is flat out broken...

    walnutmon on
    xbox: jmbizzo | ps3: walnutmon | steam: walnutmon | SC2: walnutmon.591
  • Options
    SushisourceSushisource Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Well, I doubt it too, but we are talking about a celeron here.

    Sushisource on
    Some drugee on Kavinsky's 1986
    kavinskysig.gif
  • Options
    MarlorMarlor Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    walnutmon wrote: »
    There is absolutely no way that a 2.5 ghz processor is the bottleneck, unless it is flat out broken...

    That's what I meant when I said "The strange thing in this case is that the CPU isn't all that bad".

    From his description, all signs point to "CPU Bottleneck". When a game runs at the same frame rate regardless of graphical settings, the CPU is almost always the issue.

    Yet, it's a 2.5GHz processor. Something strange is going on, and I'm 90% certain it's got something to do with the CPU/mobo/RAM/BIOS-Settings. It's certainly not the GPU that's the issue.

    If I was ViaosHK56, I'd be running PCMark05 and seeing how my result compares to other similar processors.

    Marlor on
    Mario Kart Wii: 1332-8060-5236 (Aaron)
  • Options
    EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Figured I'd post here instead of making a new thread.

    Without going into specs (although, if necesary, I'll pull them out later) what would be the most common reason for a computer to both freeze and reboot (at seperate times)? It only seems to freeze when it is under some sort of load (during or right after boot is a popular time, for it, as well as when I am trying to run multiple downloads. Also, the other day I came home to find it had frozen while Norton had started to run some kind of check.) And it doesn't seem to ever reboot while i'm in front of it, but every once in a while I come home to a log in screen, and a message that it has recovered from a serious error.

    Now, I had a virus on here once, and I fixed it by running a fix I got off the web. Is it possible that might have made some alteration (maybe in the registry, or something) which could have done this? I only remember one time it might have done this before hand, which was when I was dealing with my video card settings, I believe.



    Also, I just put in a new PCI express card, and my computer has stopped recognizing my Slave HDD (bad, because that is where I keep all my files; master is just OS and programs). Is the PCI e card likely to do that (it happened immediately the first time I booted up after putting in the card) or is there another likely reason? If it is the card, is there a fix that doesn't involve getting rid of it entirely? For the record, the slave drive is on the same PATA ribbon as the master drive, and the master drive has been working fine.

    Evander on
  • Options
    redfenixredfenix Aka'd as rfix Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    NJD2004 wrote: »
    Frem wrote: »
    I'm probably talking crap as hardware isn't generally my thing, but could it be that you've got the graphics card plugged into a slow slot? I mean, AGP comes in different speeds, right?
    edit: Or in an "AGP express" slot?

    Swing and a miss.

    For a slightly more informative response, you probably mean PCI-E, or PCI express.

    As far as timeline and graphics prowess, it generally goes onboard<PCI<AGP<PCI-E<SLI
    I think, heh.

    Also, unless i'm terribly mistaken, graphics slots aren't cross-compatible, the way the card interfaces with the mobo makes it impossible to plug say, a PCI card into an AGP slot.

    They also have different power requirements from the mobo.

    redfenix on
  • Options
    urahonkyurahonky Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Has to be the Celeron processor gimping everything. So no matter if it's on high or low, you're already putting a load on the processor.

    Although that is really odd. D:

    urahonky on
  • Options
    RandomEngyRandomEngy Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Open up task manager, play the game a bit then quit. Check your CPU use history. If it's pegged at or near 100%, then you've found your issue.

    RandomEngy on
    Profile -> Signature Settings -> Hide signatures always. Then you don't have to read this worthless text anymore.
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Clockspeed don't matter much but Celerons were never gaming CPUs. They're passable for basic internet and office stuff but as performance chips they're ass.

    nexuscrawler on
  • Options
    urahonkyurahonky Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Clockspeed don't matter much but Celerons were never gaming CPUs. They're passable for basic internet and office stuff but as performance chips they're ass.

    Yeah their cache speeds/sizes are what kills them.

    urahonky on
  • Options
    FremFrem Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    redfenix wrote: »
    NJD2004 wrote: »
    Frem wrote: »
    I'm probably talking crap as hardware isn't generally my thing, but could it be that you've got the graphics card plugged into a slow slot? I mean, AGP comes in different speeds, right?
    edit: Or in an "AGP express" slot?

    Swing and a miss.

    For a slightly more informative response, you probably mean PCI-E, or PCI express.

    As far as timeline and graphics prowess, it generally goes onboard<PCI<AGP<PCI-E<SLI
    I think, heh.

    Also, unless i'm terribly mistaken, graphics slots aren't cross-compatible, the way the card interfaces with the mobo makes it impossible to plug say, a PCI card into an AGP slot.

    They also have different power requirements from the mobo.

    No, I meant AGP express.
    Wikipedia wrote:
    AGP Express
    Not a true AGP interface, but rather a way to allow an AGP card to be connected over the legacy PCI bus on a PCI Express motherboard. It is a technology found on ECS motherboards, and is used as a selling point for AGP card owners who want a new motherboard but do not want to be forced to buy a PCIe graphics card as well (most new motherboards do not provide AGP slots, only PCIe slots). An "AGP Express" slot is basically a PCI slot (with the electrical power of two) in the AGP form factor. While it offers backward compatibility with AGP cards, its disadvantages include incomplete support (some AGP cards do not work with AGP Express) and reduced performance - the card is forced to use the shared PCI bus at its lower bandwidth, rather than having exclusive use of the faster AGP.

    It seemed like a reasonable guess at a bottleneck at the time.

    Frem on
  • Options
    LewishamLewisham Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    urahonky wrote: »
    Clockspeed don't matter much but Celerons were never gaming CPUs. They're passable for basic internet and office stuff but as performance chips they're ass.

    Yeah their cache speeds/sizes are what kills them.

    Don't they also have poor floating point performance?

    Lewisham on
  • Options
    TychoCelchuuuTychoCelchuuu PIGEON Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Celerons suck at everything, basically. That's what I'm guessing is the problem. It's only WoW, and I found WoW to run a little crappy even on my Pentium 4 2.6GHz when there are lots of people around (regardless of resolution etc).

    TychoCelchuuu on
  • Options
    SirsonSirson Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    25 fps isn't bad with the specs you provided especially if thats during raiding etc.

    Sirson on
  • Options
    TofystedethTofystedeth Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Hmm, my built computer ran really slow until I updated the mobo/cpu drivers. That got things goin' nice and smooth. My previous computer was comparable to his, slightly faster celeron, half the RAM, and my performance was mostly around 30 fps except in big cities or busy areas.

    Tofystedeth on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    jb7jb7 Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Frem wrote: »
    redfenix wrote: »
    NJD2004 wrote: »
    Frem wrote: »
    I'm probably talking crap as hardware isn't generally my thing, but could it be that you've got the graphics card plugged into a slow slot? I mean, AGP comes in different speeds, right?
    edit: Or in an "AGP express" slot?

    Swing and a miss.

    For a slightly more informative response, you probably mean PCI-E, or PCI express.

    As far as timeline and graphics prowess, it generally goes onboard<PCI<AGP<PCI-E<SLI
    I think, heh.

    Also, unless i'm terribly mistaken, graphics slots aren't cross-compatible, the way the card interfaces with the mobo makes it impossible to plug say, a PCI card into an AGP slot.

    They also have different power requirements from the mobo.

    No, I meant AGP express.
    Wikipedia wrote:
    AGP Express
    Not a true AGP interface, but rather a way to allow an AGP card to be connected over the legacy PCI bus on a PCI Express motherboard. It is a technology found on ECS motherboards, and is used as a selling point for AGP card owners who want a new motherboard but do not want to be forced to buy a PCIe graphics card as well (most new motherboards do not provide AGP slots, only PCIe slots). An "AGP Express" slot is basically a PCI slot (with the electrical power of two) in the AGP form factor. While it offers backward compatibility with AGP cards, its disadvantages include incomplete support (some AGP cards do not work with AGP Express) and reduced performance - the card is forced to use the shared PCI bus at its lower bandwidth, rather than having exclusive use of the faster AGP.

    It seemed like a reasonable guess at a bottleneck at the time.

    I have played WoW with a Radeon X800 AGP in a normal AGP slot and didn't have any sort of problem.

    I would guess it's the drivers or the processor.

    @Evander-The lazy way to post specs is through a dxdiag file. Also, the best thing to do when you have a serious virus is to just reformat.

    jb7 on
  • Options
    DVGDVG No. 1 Honor Student Nether Institute, Evil AcademyRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    I've got a similar situation. I have:
    2.4 Ghz P4
    1 GB RAM
    256 MB Video Card (Don't recall which one, it's been awhile) (8x AGP in a 4x Slot)

    Which was pretty sexy until I upgraded my 17" CRT to a 20.1" Widesceen LCD. Now I get (quite literally) 5-10 fps most of the time in WoW. It'll go a little better if I run it in windowed mode at 800x600, but not much.

    My Powerbook with 1.25 Ghz/512 MB/64 MB Video actually runs the game slightly better with the same external display.

    DVG on
    Diablo 3 - DVG#1857
  • Options
    His CorkinessHis Corkiness Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Celerons suck gigantic balls. I went from a 2.8GHz Celeron to a 3500+ and doubled my FPS in most games.

    His Corkiness on
  • Options
    TychoCelchuuuTychoCelchuuu PIGEON Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Changing the screen shouldn't change anything. That doesn't mess with your FPS at all.

    TychoCelchuuu on
  • Options
    DVGDVG No. 1 Honor Student Nether Institute, Evil AcademyRegistered User regular
    edited August 2007
    Well I am pushing it at a much higher resolution (1680 x 1050) than I was before. But it definitely feels like it shouldn't have all that much trouble keeping up, given the specs of the computer. I'm not even looking for anything amazing, managing a constant 15 fps would be fucking gold as far as I'm concerned.

    DVG on
    Diablo 3 - DVG#1857
  • Options
    LewishamLewisham Registered User regular
    edited August 2007
    DVG wrote: »
    Well I am pushing it at a much higher resolution (1680 x 1050) than I was before. But it definitely feels like it shouldn't have all that much trouble keeping up, given the specs of the computer. I'm not even looking for anything amazing, managing a constant 15 fps would be fucking gold as far as I'm concerned.

    I think with WoW, at least, there may well be processing and lag bottlenecks as well, meaning by the time the GPU has been given the rendering command, it's already too late.

    But that might be complete nonsense.

    I just don't think WoW is a good benchmark for anything really.

    Lewisham on
Sign In or Register to comment.