[Noob43]

Hey, I was wondering if my computer would be able to hold a Nvidia GeForce 9800 GX2 graphics card.. The computer isn't very top notch or up to date, but it's not horribly bad. If it doesn't work, what would be a good graphics card for gaming that my computer could use?

Specs:

Processor - 3.00 gigahertz Intel Pentium 4
16 kilobyte primary memory cache
1024 kilobyte secondary memory cache

Motherboard - ASUSTeK Computer INC. 'P4SD-LE' Rev 1.xx
Bus Clock: 200 megahertz

Its only got a gig of ram right now, but I can upgrade that.
Its got windows xp right now, but I can also update that to vista.

If there's anything else you need that I missed, let me know.

Thanks

[Hybr!d]

What GFX card do you have currently?

[ashaiba]

Yes, if you have a PCI-E 2.0, your computer can handle it. But assuming from your processor, you probably have DDR1 Mobo, and you will not be getting the full potential of the Graphics Card.

[anthonyla65]

its compatible but my advise is stay away from any TOP graphics cards if you have pentium 4 cos' trust me i have a 7600GT and my P4 is bottlenecking it when even its at 3.2GHZ. i strongly advise you to stay away from those cards cos' it would just be a waste you aint gonna get anything more than 7900GT performance cos' of the bottlenecks

[Razer]

How the heck can you bottleneck on a 3.2GHz P4?? My X1650 Pro got me through Crysis with all the processor stuff (physics, sound etc) cranked up to high. Loads of room left, 60 something percent usage said task manager.. Hyper threading takes the effective clock speed to 4.8GHz too..

to the OP: Judging by the 3.0GHz Pentium 4, you're running on a 478 socket. This means your best graphics card is for AGP ports.. The 9800 GX2 is a PCI-e card, wont fit. If you have an LGA775 socket and a 3.0GHz Pentium 4 then chances are you can use a PCI-e card. I'd find a tool to see what ports your motherboard has free and see if you have a PCI-e x16 slot open, a 9800GX2 will sit nicely in that.

[anthonyla65]

"How the heck can you bottleneck on a 3.2GHz P4?? My X1650 Pro got me through Crysis with all the processor stuff (physics, sound etc) cranked up to high. Loads of room left, 60 something percent usage said task manager.. Hyper threading takes the effective clock speed to 4.8GHz too.."

First thing, I'm on a Northwood CPU and judging on how you have Hyperthreading i guess your on a prescott. There a performance gaps between Northwood and Prescott also i dont have Hyperthreading. It's a 2.4Ghz Overclocked to 3.2Ghz, When i toggle the FSB and turn it down to 3.06GHz my 3DMakr05 Score goes down by 1000 ~ 2000, when the CPU is faster its goes up, So its bottlenecking.

"Hyper threading takes the effective clock speed to 4.8GHz too." Thats wrong, Hyperthreading are proven to hurt games and even if the games were multi-threaded you won't get much of a performance boost because its not a full dual core, they save 20% CPU power for the next thread how does that take the effective clock speed to 4.8GHz. P4 are old now a days (Unless you have a new Cedar Mill 65nm) even my Laptops Celeron 560 2.133GHz owned my 3.2Ghz easily in CPU benchmark and the CPU Score 3DMarks05 gave me. I bought mass effect yesterday and my CPU was holding back the FPS (9 -15 FPS) because it uses Unreal 3 Engine which is very CPU dependent, now i want a new PC :(

Well back to the subject, I tried searching you motherboard in ASUS Support and found nothing. Well as mentions before i wouldn't go too close to TOP END graphics card with P4 and Even if you have AGP its not the end of the world, there are still good AGP card such as 3850 even though i don't recommend you getting one with a P4. A good choice would be X1950 or 7900GT. But do some research it helps alot..

[Razer]

My computer is rated as having 4.8GHz of processing power.. 3.2GHz clock speed plus hyper threading makes it so. I agree, Hyper Threading on Pentium 4 was as much use as a chocolate fire guard but Hyper Threading has almost 0 effect on the capability. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel,751-22.html That shows the Northwood core was faster at 3.2GHz in some tests too with Hyper Threading being slightly beneficial in the first test and the other three being within a tiny margin less speed.

Having 2 logical processors allows for more data being allowed through at a given point, this means that the processor is faster in essence. The clock speed goes up to 1.5x what it was. This doesn't mean it's faster. I am using the Prescott core at standard 3.2GHz, maybe the Northwood core wasn't friendly with Hyper Threading but it seems the Prescott goes better with it.

In response to the OP, an ATi X1650 is a great little card costing ~£35 and is well worth a look if you don't want to upgrade your system. I recommend you do because the performance boost will be large and you can use the 9800GX2, a word of warning though, watch this video first. It's about the 9800GTX in comparison to the GX2. Look at the benchmarks on there and see if you could save money!

[Carbon]

Hyperthreading has absolutely nothing to do with clock speed, and you cannot multiply or add clock speeds. The processor may be faster in certain applications but this is not because of clock speed, it is because more work is being done per clock, esp. on cache misses.

[Razer]

The clock speed doesn't go up obviously, I mean the speed at which the processor runs at is the equivalent of running it at 4.8GHz instead of 3.2GHz