Doom 2016 on Nvidia GTX 650 / Core i3 2120 / 8GB RAM (PC)

[@tumblevveed3586]

Well I think it’s about time to retire my old 2006 HP with Athlon 64 5200 and 4GB ddr2 Ram,. It starts stuttering a little when a lot of stuff is going on. I was thinking video card till I watched this. The 650 seems to do just fine. If HP didn’t lock this damn motherboard bios, I could probably get a little more life out of it. Thanks for the video.

[@OldsXCool]

I would advise against getting a GTX 650 for a few reasons. First of all this is footage of just the first area. The game gets much more GPU intensive later in the game so the 650 may not be able to hold up as well as you see here. Second, unless you get the 650 REALLY cheap like $10-$20 cheap I would shoot for nothing less than a GTX 750 or 750ti. I have a GTX 950 now and it does a good job at keeping me at 60 frames, but at 1400x900 resolution which is the native resolution of my monitor. Plus keep in mind that I'm running at 1024x768 resolution in this video. Whenever you try to buy really old cards the price to performance ratio is usually not very good. Sure 40 to 50 bucks can get you a 650, but it can also get you something much better and the 750 can wipe the floor with this card. I know because I have one of those too.

[@tumblevveed3586]

OldsXCool Thanks for the input. I ended up buying a Radon RX 560 and wow, my computer is running 10X better. Best Buy didn’t have the GTX 780 or 980 and I was impatient. The game is sooo much easier to play. I’m wondering if I just got a bad card or driver issue for the 650 but after swapping it out with the RX 560, it’s great. First Round in the UAC in Arcade I cleared 1,800,000 points where I was lucky to get even 800K with the old one. Much smoother, no jerking, stuttering or pauses in the game and graphics were far better. I have never used an AMD card and the install did not go as smooth as the Nvidia cards. The install kept failing but through online help, finally got it working.

[@antikz3731]

Wow I know it's 3 years old but I can't believe you were using an Athlon 64 in 2018 maybe 2017 lol! I just got back into PC gaming then though and my Athlon II X2 wasn't powerful enough with 4gb of ram. It started by picking up a Celeron PC on side of the road and trying to play fortnite lol I realized how bad the 07 hardware was lol A 50 dollar Dell t3500 desktop with a dual core Xeon and $40 8gb of ram and a $20 gt 630 2gb and I was up like 5x in performance lol 😂 Currently have an LGA 1150 system with a Pentium G3240 (came with board), 7gb of 1333mhz ddr3, Zotac GTX 650 and running Manjaro Linux. It's a pretty decent $50 system I think lol. Get an i5 soon to upgrade and it'll be rocking. I wish miners never fucked the earth though as I would have just built a Ryzen 3 system. Went from the i7 3770 to the R3 1200 in 2018 and what a powerhouse of a quad core that thing was!!

[@sistrazdas2855]

I have a GTX 650, intel core i3 and the game actually ran at the same fps with shadows and lights set to low.. But I had a very annoying problem where whenever my game gets to lower fps like 24-29 it slows down dramatically, like I'm playing 2/3 of normal speed. So I was messing around with the settings, aspect ratio to be exact, i set it to 16:9 - performance was just about the same and then I switch back to 16:10 which was set as default and now I get like 29 fps at maximum and 16 fps at minimum, which is just unplayable - with resolution that worked perfectly fine before !!. Not only that, the slowmotion bug doesn't go away, especially during fights :-(

[@OldsXCool]

There's definitely something strange about this game. I don't know if it happens to everyone and people with more powerful rigs just don't notice it or what, but I've had issues with GPU usage being abnormally high, especially when I mess with graphics detail settings. Not too long ago I switched my shadow detail from high to medium just to see, and I got no performance boost at all. I then switched it back to high and then my GPU started capping out. This has been a problem since day one. When I first downloaded the game, I used to have to boot the game twice or the game would stutter really badly. So I would boot the game, go into gameplay, watch it stutter, exit the game, reboot the game, go into gameplay, and then everything ran fine. I brought the problem up to Bethesda, and I guess they may have patched it because I haven't had that issue in a while. I just updated to the latest Nvidia driver a few days ago to see if it would fix the issue that it sounds like you're having as well, and I haven't seem to had it yet. To make sure I remember my GPU usage percentage at the start of the checkpoint I'm at before I exit the game to make sure that I'm not having issues when I start the game again. I'm not sure if this is because we are using a processor that is below minimum system requirements or if everyone else's rig is powerful enough that they wouldn't even notice the issue if it did exist. What has remained constant no matter how the game runs, the sound and the frame rate stutter in the menus for about a minute, and then it's fine. Again that could be caused by my under spec CPU. But just so you know, it's just this game and I've also had intermittent performance problems with Wolfenstein. So it only seems to be Bethesda games for me. I don't have weird problems like this in any other game I have. I put up with them because they are both so good.

[@sistrazdas2855]

Yeah, I'll see what I can do, since I haven't updated my drivers in few months I should definitely do it, my game also has the updates 1 to 5 if I recall correctly, but maybe I'm missing some patches, not sure. I also had Wolfenstein and played it on 40-50 fps on high settings without any performance hickups, the same goes with Skyrim - on ultra settings it works fine, I just have to turn off my anti aliasing, otherwise fps drops significantly, so its actually a first bethesda game to work so strangely for me -opposite from Wolfenstein, even if its older than DOOM. But yeah, thanks for all the info, it's not often you get informative answers like this :-D

[@sistrazdas2855]

Fixed it. Turns out all I had to do was to install it to another hdd drive- I was playing it on external hdd.. Never knew it would make such a big difference

[@OldsXCool]

Si strazdas OMG! You should never play any game on a USB drive, it's way too slow!

[@keep_walking_on_grass]

the HDD (hard drive disk) is the most underrated bottle neck in most of the PC hardware of today. wheen using a SSD instead you will notice a huge difference.

[@jachuk1]

i5 2500, gtx650ti, 12GB of ram and 12-16 fps randomly 28

[@onecaleb9741]

I want to know some things: - Which motherboard are you using? - Do you use a cooler? and if so, which one?

[@OldsXCool]

The computer I used here is a Dell Insprion 620 which has its own motherboard. The cooler is the stock cpu cooler.

[@devyfn56]

How to fix it i have same problem plz Help

[@mpoerot8013]

this vs intel hd 630 -- which one is better? Just about to build an i5-8400 tomorrow, and I'm too lazy to move my GTX1060 6GB from my i5-6500 pc.

[@OldsXCool]

The GTX 650 is still better in most ways except for VRAM because integrated graphics uses system RAM. If you have enough system RAM the memory performance will be better. Also the Intel HD graphics will have much better driver support and optimization over an old Nvidia Kepler GPU, so the GTX 650 will most likely perform better than Intel graphics in older games, but I think the Intel graphics will have an upper hand when it comes to newer games. Driver support is really important. Just ask everyone who has a GTX 780ti. Personally I always pair up my best CPU with my best GPU. I say put the GTX 1060 with the Ii5 8400 and use the i5 6500 computer as the low power rig. There's not that much of a jump in Intel HD graphics between Skylake and Coffelake to justify using one over the other. The extra CPU power in the 8400 will be going to waste using Intel graphics.

[@mpoerot8013]

the i5-6500 is already a great pair with the GTX1060, dude. It never bottlenecks the GTX. I think the i5-8400 (or faster i7 back then) are really meant for 1070 or 1080. But I probably will never buy them, just too much for a GPU.

[@OldsXCool]

MPOEROT That's often a misconception with CPUs. It's not just all about the CPU being able to handle all the draw calls from the GPU, but also running the actual game. The 8400 is a 6 core CPU which is more powerful per core than the 6500 and has 2 more to spare. Technically the Core i3 2120 I had in this video should have never caused a bottleneck with a GTX 650. I've been bottlenecked quite a few times on some games that just had too many other things going on in them and the CPU fell behind in its draw calls. These were all games where my CPU was above recommended requirements. I'm not saying that the 6500 is a bad CPU, but as games become more demanding the 8400 will be a better match with the GTX 1060 than Intel HD graphics.

[@mpoerot8013]

obviously the intel HD graphics is just for fun, never found intel HD graphics usable for 3D gaming :) not planning to run the i5-8400 for gaming at the moment. so far, I haven't found the i5-6500 runned over by the GTX 1060, but then I don't play a lot of games. Doom at 2560x1080@75Hz on the i5-6500 all maxxed out with no v-sync gives the CPU 60% usage with the GTX topped off 100% on rare busiest moments in the game. i3-2120 doesn't look too bad in passmark, what game maxxed it out?

[@OldsXCool]

MPOEROT Oh the Core i3 2120 is an excellent CPU. The game that crushed it allittle bit believe it or not was Sonic and All-Stars Racing Transformed in the Samba De Amigo track with the all the water physics and dancing houses. Serious Sam 3 with its ridiculous draw distance at max settings.

[@shine9094]

so LOOOUD

[@pranavkhandle8150]

GTX 650 How Much VRAM?

[@OldsXCool]

1GB. It doesn't actually matter with the GTX 650 if you use the 2GB or 1GB model since the GTX 650 can't use more than 1GB as a frame buffer anyway, so the 2GB model will run just the same as the 1GB model.

[@pranavkhandle8150]

THanx for the info

[@Mezurashii5]

30 fps is barely videogames. The sad thing is, if I tried running doom on my i5, GTX 770 setup, I'd get less frames than you. I hate computers.

[@OldsXCool]

I am running this game way below minimum spec with a potato of a computer. There's absolutely no way you can get less frames than me at this resolution and these settings unless your computer has something seriously wrong with it.

[@Mezurashii5]

OldsXCool It does have something horribly wrong with it and I haven't been able to find the problem for years :| I'm pretty sure I'm just cursed by some ancient god who's mad that technology exists.

[@OldsXCool]

Perhaps I can help you find the problem but I will need some information about your system. -Is your computer custom built or was it pre-built (Dell) like mine? -If it is prebuilt what is the brand and model number? -What are your exact specs? Include the actual numbers for the i5, RAM, power supply brand and wattage -What OS are you running? -What Nvidia diver version are you running? Restart your computer and let it sit for about 5 minutes and don't open anything. Then open task manager and click the performance tab. What does your CPU usage and RAM usage idle at? Also how many processes is your computer running? That should be enough info for now.

[@Mezurashii5]

OldsXCool +OldsXCool Alright, I'll split this up into two comments for convenience's sake. -My PC was prebuilt, but almost nothing out of the original box is left unreplaced. -i5 760, GTX 770, CoolerMaster GX 750W, 4 GB RAM -Windows 7 64bit -I've tried dozens, now I've settled on 361.75, but the driver version has never made the least bit of difference. To elaborate on the exact problems I have with the PC - it's partially underperforming, yes, but the bigger issue with it is the input lag - even with 120 fps there is still a marginally noticeable delay to everything. I've used 4 monitors and a TV with this computer including a CRT and the lag was never 100% gone with any of them. Then there's also a weird issue where every single benchmark claims I get, say over 100 fps and the image looks like only 40~50 fps is actually displayed. Both on a 75 hz and 60 hz monitor. Last but not least is the hitching\stuttering, which benchmarks don't seem to detect either. I've gotten rid of unnecessary services and startup processes, cleaned the registry, ran some programs detecting malware, corrupted data and old drivers, uninstalled the Nvidia audio component of the driver, tried changing some stuff in the BIOS (but I had very little idea of what I was doing, so I quickly dropped that whole thing and tried not to enable things that seemed likely to make the machine explode or set it ablaze). Oh, and I did some things like applying no scaling in the Nvidia drivers etc. I think I'd have to completely wipe everything and start from a fresh OS and even BIOS (it's pretty glitchy, so god knows if it is part of the problem or not) and install all of the drivers in specific order to get a decent chance of fixing the issues. It's such a troublesome and soulcrushing in case of failure process that I haven't been able to force myself to go through it.

[@Mezurashii5]

i820.photobucket.com/albums/zz130/ope5/perf.jpg There. The CPU spikes were showing up as about 12-16 percent usage. There are 35 processes I think and I also put some temperature info in the JPG