Cheapie fanless video card?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rhys
  • Start date Start date
R

Rhys

Hello,

Looking to get a cheap AGP card which must be fanless (dont like
noise!). Performance not much of an issue coz I wont be playing
games, just looking for anything better than onboard graphics.

Dont need anything like a Radeon 9000/9200 - can even be as low as a
32 MB card. Any Recommendations?

TIA.
 
What's wrong with onboard video? If you're not gaming it should be fine...
Ran mine for a long while at1600x1200.
 
Hello,

Looking to get a cheap AGP card which must be fanless (dont like
noise!). Performance not much of an issue coz I wont be playing
games, just looking for anything better than onboard graphics.

Dont need anything like a Radeon 9000/9200 - can even be as low as a
32 MB card. Any Recommendations?

TIA.
Click to expand...

"better than onboard grahpics" in what way, exactly?
What onboard grapics (chipset, motherboard, etc) are you currently
using?

What's the use of the system, the need for better video?


Dave
 
"better than onboard grahpics" in what way, exactly?
What onboard grapics (chipset, motherboard, etc) are you currently
using?
Click to expand...

Well Im sure not all of them are as bad as the savage chipset on the
cheapo eMachines my neighbor bought recently. It really stunk in that
, it had really severe problems with various add in TV tuner cards,
Ive had problems with my pinnacle in my system but their were confined
to the TV cards functions , but this one would make other programs
just go nuts when you added in the card. Suddenly other programs would
corrupt the screen. It would go away when I took out the card or just
put any other video card in. I finally gave him an old Voodoo 3 card
which seemed to work about as good and didnt have any problems with
the ATI tuner add on card.
 
It's a pc chips 810lmr mobo using a sis chipset. I just bought a
scanner and find myself running out of Ram (just a little). My two
Dimm slots are full with 1x512Mb and 1x128Mb of SD Ram.

I thought adding a dedicated graphics card would free up memory and
also take some of the load off the cpu(?). What do you think about
the last part of that sentence?
Click to expand...

Yes it should free up memory, but you must be manipulating some fairly
large images for the (<=64MB) shared system memory to make much of a
difference in a system already having 640MB. Certainly the shared
memory is slowing it down some, though it isn't really increasing the
load on the CPU, only the memory bus, perhaps the northbridge a little
bit (I'm uncertain of that, have no hands-on experience with Sis 730
video). With 640MB you should just about be able to scan and edit a
full bed 300DPI image with no virtual memory/swapping, but of course
it would also depend on the other tasks, memory load outside of the
imaging job.


The primary reason an integrated video will increase load on the CPU
is when it has less hardware funcitonality, and in 3D gaming there is
software doing the T&L, opposed to a DX8, 9, video card capable of
doing it "in hardware".

However, if you're running out of memory, so I presume the page/swap
file is being used, you may see more of a benefit by adding more main
memory, or do you mean that the manipulation of the image is
"sluggish" when scrolling around in it at magnified zoom? In that
case a video card with a lot of memory can help a lot.
I think I might go with a Radeon 7000 64Mb from ebuyer as its less
than £30.
Click to expand...

I would monitor the paging file and see how much it changes when
you're scanning/editing the larger images, to determine whether a
system memory upgrade is beneficial.

Perhaps a video card would benefit you, I can't be certain not having
used the Sis 730 video, not knowing how it compares to most other
integrated video.


Dave
 
Rhys said:
It's a pc chips 810lmr mobo using a sis chipset. I just bought a
scanner and find myself running out of Ram (just a little). My two
Dimm slots are full with 1x512Mb and 1x128Mb of SD Ram.

I thought adding a dedicated graphics card would free up memory and
also take some of the load off the cpu(?). What do you think about
the last part of that sentence?

I think I might go with a Radeon 7000 64Mb from ebuyer as its less
than £30.
Click to expand...

What you are trying to do is the equivilent of taking the hubcaps off
your car to increase gas mileage. Less weight means better mileage,
right?

The money would be better spent on replacing that 128meg stick of
memory. Onboard video doesn't make any difference as far as CPU
usage - as long as you aren't gaming.

BTW, what makes you think you are running low on memory? What speed
CPU? What OS?
 
Rhys said:
Looking to get a cheap AGP card which must be fanless (dont like
noise!). Performance not much of an issue coz I wont be playing
games, just looking for anything better than onboard graphics.
Click to expand...

Sapphire ATI Radeon 9000 is fanless... Sitting in my machine, so I can speak
from experience... ;)


--
Radniko tuce u helikopteru sepav slonog volija jucer ?
By runf

Damir Lukic, (e-mail address removed)
a member of hr.comp.hardver FAQ-team
 
Some One said:
What you are trying to do is the equivilent of taking the hubcaps off
your car to increase gas mileage. Less weight means better mileage,
right?

The money would be better spent on replacing that 128meg stick of
memory. Onboard video doesn't make any difference as far as CPU
usage - as long as you aren't gaming.

BTW, what makes you think you are running low on memory? What speed
CPU? What OS?
Click to expand...


It's a 1Ghz Duron running Windows 2000. I'm scanning in images at 600
and sometimes 1200 dpi. Task manager is telling me that I'm using as
much as 750Mb in memory. When using the swap file my system takes a
significant performance hit.

Performance seems sluggish anyway. When trying to skip through the
images (like in a slideshow) in Irfanview or opening up the image
files in PSPv4, then it just seems slow. I had thought that a
dedicated video might speed up things (more so than onboard video
anyway). Seems that might not be the case.

Many thanks to all who have replied to me!
 
MCheu said:
The PowerColor GeForce2MX400 card with 32 or 64 megs uses a passive
heatsink. Not great performancewise,and no TV-out, but certainly
better than onboard grfx.

Not all GF2MX400 boards use a passive heat sink though, some have a
fan. It's not easy to pick them out, as passive cooling wasn't a
selling point at the time(quite the opposite actually).
Click to expand...

The Abit Siluro version is also a passive heatsink. I put a fan off a 486 on
mine 'cause it was there.
 
Back
Top