Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Is this computer good for gaming?


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 dillnut

dillnut

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:01 PM

Posted 19 June 2014 - 11:29 PM

I just want to know if my computer is good for gaming.  I play RuneScape and World of Warcraft. Please post supportive or suggestive comments only. Thank you! :)

 

P.S. - i am also willing to upgrade any parts of the computer if that is at all possible. I'm not very tech savvy so i'm sure as to what my limits are.. appreciate it! :)

 

Win XP

 

Intel® Pentium® D CPU 3.40GHz

3.42 GHz, 2.00 GB of RAM

 

Graphics Card is - NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GT/GTO



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 dillnut

dillnut
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:01 PM

Posted 19 June 2014 - 11:33 PM

I googled the graphics card and it said that the graphics card was the best of 2006, so i can only imagine what my possible upgrade possibilities would be.. please post reasonable suggestions, i'm not trying to play at 1080p HD.. i just want smooth gameplay! at the moment it's smooth but has it's glitches that can cause me to really hurt myself in-game. Again, thanks in advance :)



#3 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 7,015 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:06:01 PM

Posted 20 June 2014 - 12:24 AM

dillnut, Welcome to BC Forums! :)

 

My suggestion for starters, if you truly intend on keeping this computer, would be to add more RAM, though anything more than 4GB will be a waste with XP.

 

 

I googled the graphics card and it said that the graphics card was the best of 2006

The only issue with that is we're now midway through 2014, technology has moved forward. There are games of today that would likely not play well on the card.

 

It would be really great if you could install Windows 7 on the computer, it would run faster & look better while doing what you want. XP is a power hog in itself, the more one gives it, the more it'll take.

 

Do you plan to use this computer online or for offline gaming use only? If offline only, then the focus could be on another card to improve gaming performance. What concerns me is that I don't like to suggest to spend a lot of cash on an older PC. I fell into that trap in the past, but won't again.

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#4 synergy513

synergy513

  • BC Advisor
  • 1,058 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Local time:05:01 PM

Posted 20 June 2014 - 02:12 AM

a pentium d is not a cpu any user would want to invest around, but if you must, a gt640 or r7 250(x)  would be ok prolly.

 

http://pcpartpicker.com/parts/video-card/#sort=a8&c=106,150,161


Moore's Law : 4d Graph in Progress


#5 Grimmskld

Grimmskld

  • Members
  • 26 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mass
  • Local time:06:01 PM

Posted 20 June 2014 - 10:06 AM

Honestly, start saving up to buy a new machine rather than throw 2 more gigs of RAM in there (it is a waste of money imho).  Unless you know someone that can just give it to you, then don't bother. Also, that processor is over 8 years old and isn't really able to handle games within the past several years, let alone new games.  



#6 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 7,015 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:06:01 PM

Posted 20 June 2014 - 11:55 AM

Glad to see others contribute here, as I stated earlier, don't like nor recommeend one to throw a lot of cash into an older computer.

 

I have doubts as to this computer supporting new games, as those of today are written to run best on newer hardware. Not all of my 'newer' computers can handle these, not even my MSI notebook with dual graphics (Intel HD / NVIDIA GeForce GT 425M - 1GB DDR3).

 

For the best gaming experience, it's best to buy new, one designed for gaming, or with a capable CPU & then upgrade GPU, or build to suit the need.

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#7 Kilroy

Kilroy

  • BC Advisor
  • 3,391 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Launderdale, MN
  • Local time:05:01 PM

Posted 20 June 2014 - 12:01 PM

Just to give you a reference, Moore's Law which has pretty much held true for the 20 years basically says that computers double in power every 18 to 24 months.  So, a computer, or component, that is eight years old is about 1/16 as powerful as a system from eight years later.  This is very much simplified, but just to give you an idea.

 

So, you will get more for you money investing in a new machine, rather than upgrading what you have.  Even if you get a bottom of the line machine it will be much better than what you have when it comes to performance.



#8 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 7,015 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:06:01 PM

Posted 20 June 2014 - 12:26 PM

Kilroy, I can attest that's very true. Have seen several older 'high performance' computers replaced with $300-$400 WalMart specials, these ran circles around the older ones.

 

And produced much less heat in doing so. Many of the older ones served a dual purpose, computing & having a leg warmer in the cooler months. One could close the door to the room where the computer was & it would be warmer than the rest of the house after running a few hours.

 

Much of that heat was wasted power. The one I now have, the air going out is barely lukewarm, yet there's much more power under the hood.

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#9 dillnut

dillnut
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:05:01 PM

Posted 20 June 2014 - 01:52 PM

Just to give you a reference, Moore's Law which has pretty much held true for the 20 years basically says that computers double in power every 18 to 24 months.  So, a computer, or component, that is eight years old is about 1/16 as powerful as a system from eight years later.  This is very much simplified, but just to give you an idea.

 

So, you will get more for you money investing in a new machine, rather than upgrading what you have.  Even if you get a bottom of the line machine it will be much better than what you have when it comes to performance.

 

if it doubles in power every 2 years, then an eight year old computer would be 1/4th the power of a present day computer. Not quite as big as the ratio you mistakenly gave me. but again thanks for the advice



#10 jonuk76

jonuk76

  • Members
  • 2,178 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wales, UK
  • Local time:11:01 PM

Posted 20 June 2014 - 02:46 PM

If performance doubled every two years, it would be an exponential calculation.

 

Say system performance of 8 years ago was "100".

 

Start = 100

2 Years = 200

4 Years = 400

6 Years = 800

8 Years = 1600

 

It doesn't always quite work out in real life but the principal is correct.  Sometimes technologies come along which are major game changers, other times improvements are much slower and incremental.  For example, the Core 2 series of processors was a massive step up from the processors that preceded them (Pentium 4 family).  Improvements in recent years have been more modest, mainly refinements and die shrinks which allow the addition of extra cores, higher clock speeds and lower power consumption.  In the area of storage, SSD's are a huge step in performance terms from mechanical hard drives.  Expect them to get larger, cheaper and more reliable as time goes on.

 

Comparison of performance of some high end desktop processors of their day.  The Pentium D is about 8 years old, while the Core i7's are 5 years old and bang up to date respectively.

 

Attached File  Compare.PNG   48.19KB   0 downloads


7sbvuf-6.png


#11 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 7,015 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:06:01 PM

Posted 20 June 2014 - 08:10 PM

 

Just to give you a reference, Moore's Law which has pretty much held true for the 20 years basically says that computers double in power every 18 to 24 months.  So, a computer, or component, that is eight years old is about 1/16 as powerful as a system from eight years later.  This is very much simplified, but just to give you an idea.

 

So, you will get more for you money investing in a new machine, rather than upgrading what you have.  Even if you get a bottom of the line machine it will be much better than what you have when it comes to performance.

 

if it doubles in power every 2 years, then an eight year old computer would be 1/4th the power of a present day computer. Not quite as big as the ratio you mistakenly gave me. but again thanks for the advice

 

dillnut, I believe that the calculation that Kilroy provided is very close to being fact, as I have a couple of computers, both with Intel dual core CPU's built in 2010 & 2011, that would easily break the 1/4 rule (4x more powerful) than you suggest, & my latest is at least 12-16x more powerful in in most every category imaginable.

 

The older one I'm comparing with is a Dell Dimension 2400 with an Intel 3.06 GHz H/T CPU & 2GB DDR RAM. The newest one is 9 years newer, the others are 6 & 7 years newer. Maybe a coincidence, but that old P4 has a 512KB L2 cache (0.5MB), no L3, while the one in my specs below has a massive 8192KB (8MB) L3 cache. That is 16 times faster, exactly.

 

There are other variables, such as DDR2 RAM being twice as fast over DDR & DDR3 doubling the speed of DDR2. Same goes for graphics, where there is at least one 12GB GDDR5 card on the market, though at $3,000, is out of reach for many, including myself. However 4GB GDDR5 cards are commonly used by power gamers.

 

SSD's also gets faster with most every model released & PCIe type SSD's are already here, which will be my next hardware upgrade in the coming 6-8 months, as pricing falls & more selection becomes available. PCIe will eliminate much of the bottleneck of today's SSD's & will break the SATA 3 mark (already has).

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/plextor-m6e-pci-express-ssd,3763.html

 

Computers simply gets faster with every new makeover, which takes place every 12 to 18 months & hardware is constantly upgraded, with DDR4 RAM on the horizon for consumers with the next Haswell release (has been in the works since 2010/11). Again, that will be 2x faster than current DDR3 RAM, though unlike DDR2, I don't expect DDR3 to fade anytime soon.

 

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/display/20130916233046_Intel_Demonstrates_System_with_Haswell_E_Microprocessor_DDR4_Memory.html

 

Looks like Moore's Law is holding up fairly well to me. It's up to each consumer to stay in the race as close as practical, or cling to the old, which over time, the energy savings will fairly much pay for the newer hardware. Seriously, I've noticed lower electric bills since removing that old Dimension 2400 from 12-16 hours of daily use.

 

I miss the leg warmer though. :)

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#12 badr0b0t

badr0b0t

  • Members
  • 328 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Local time:06:01 PM

Posted 20 June 2014 - 08:51 PM

The question is if there is still any hardware upgrades available for that CPU. Maybe you can find on ebay but still not enough to play the games of today.

 

Cheers!


sig07.gif?psid=1

                                                           (Click sig to enlarge.)                                                    

 


#13 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 7,015 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:06:01 PM

Posted 20 June 2014 - 09:12 PM

I doubt it would play the games of today either. Probably would the older ones of it's time, which many still plays to this day.

 

Though it does has potential of being a Windows 7 PC, to have a supported OS. 64 bit at that, though more RAM would be needed. These are the CPU specs that I found that's the closest match to dillnut's description.

 

http://ark.intel.com/products/27520/Intel-Pentium-D-Processor-945-4M-Cache-3_40-GHz-800-MHz-FSB

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 


#14 badr0b0t

badr0b0t

  • Members
  • 328 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Local time:06:01 PM

Posted 20 June 2014 - 09:16 PM

That computer can be a lot more fun running Linux. :)


sig07.gif?psid=1

                                                           (Click sig to enlarge.)                                                    

 


#15 cat1092

cat1092

    Bleeping Cat


  • BC Advisor
  • 7,015 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA
  • Local time:06:01 PM

Posted 07 July 2014 - 01:47 PM

Normally I allow the older topics ride, however badr0b0t makes a great point. 

 

These older computers, if in good condition, doesn't have to be tossed, makes great Linux computers & Steam is available for some Linux distros. Without the overhead that Windows OS's has, will also run much faster. 

 

Many Linux distros requires no hardware upgrades, however it's recommended to go with a 32 bit version for best compatibility with hardware. There are members currently installing 64 bit Linux on these older ones & having driver issues, as well as that of some apps not properly launching. Google Earth for starters. 

 

Best of all, most consumer editions of Linux are free. Linux Mint Mate (main edition) is a good choice, the Cinnamon version is best ran on newer hardware for optimal experience. And with Linux, one doesn't have to be dealing with infections as with Windows. While it's not impossible for a Linux OS to get infected, the probability is low & would manually executed by "sudo", the physical entry of the admin (root) password). 

 

Cat


Performing full disc images weekly and keeping important data off of the 'C' drive as generated can be the best defence against Malware/Ransomware attacks, as well as a wide range of other issues. 





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users