Your graphics card's so fat, it's got its own gravity alert Graphics cards are now getting so bulky and heavy that device maker Asus has decided customers need a way to detect any sagging or movement of the GPU in its PCIe slot. The Asus ROG Astral line of graphics adapters now features a built-in sensor, a Bosch Sensortec Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU), intended to detect any changes …
Sometimes I'm glad I'm not a gamer or in need of that level of graphics performance. My current graphics card is ten years old and I'm only using it because I acquired a free second-hand machine (thanks, Windows 11) with one that was better than what I was using, albeit of similar vintage.
In my "gaming" machine I have a slightly elderly Radeon RX580, which doesn't seem to struggle with any of the titles I play at 1080p; the most demanding ones I'm playing right now are Wreckfest and Grim Dawn. Yes, those titles are also slightly elderly, but then... so am I, so it's a perfect match.
I've been toying with replacing the card, but mainly to reduce power consumption rather than for any performance shortcomings.
For everything else I do, integrated Intel graphics are more than adequate, despite the dismal - and justified, let's be fair - reputation of their early offerings. Their hardware video encoding works great in both Handbrake and Jellyfin.
I'm a casual and untalented gamer, but the games I play (mainly Counter Strike S2) still run perfectly well with my now ancient seven-eight year old graphics card, and offer pretty decent graphics quality on a 27 inch display.
For those who want ultra-high res, and every single leaf in the background to be properly rendered, and demand frame rates beyond their ability to see, they might have a use case for the latest graphics cards. But they'll need deep pockets.
> demand frame rates beyond their ability to see
Try, if you can, playing counter strike on an 120 Hz OLED, and then on a 240 Hz OLED. A true Micro-LED display would work too (i.e. every dot is its own LED triplet). That might change your mind. Though your GFX card, if only seven-eight years old, might only be able to do 120 Hz, possibly as custom lower resolution. Though 240 Hz is not a really expensive card any more, if you only target CS. HDMI 2.1 is the only thing needed if you don't target 4k.
You can see the difference to 120 Hz and 240 Hz on the desktop already, before going into the game.
As for the detail level: Depends. Some play with low-res textures and lowest LOD level, but far view distance, by default since for some aspects lower graphics settings are an advantage.
Point taken, but is it going to improve my gameplay, or materially change my gaming experience? On the first it's a firm "no", and on the second I think it's "not within the bounds of materiality".
Obviously for those who can see and value the difference it can be a worthwhile investment, but it isn't for me.
"every single leaf in the background to be properly rendered"
Pfft. n00b. I want the cellular mitochondria of the leaves to be accurately rendered. It's the mark of a true gamer.
Plus, it gives me something pretty to look at when my corpse is lying on the ground staring sightlessly, awaiting respawn. Which is my normal state in most games.*
*even Freecell. Does that strike anyone else as odd?
Have a computer with 750ti + i7 2600 (1.7 tflops), it still plays most games just fine. Thats about as good as a PS4.
But for the super high end stuff I have a PS5 (10 tflops). I also now use a Macbook Air M3 (3.6 tflops) which is a little more powerful and with Crossover and VMWare Fusion Windows 11, again most stuff runs fine.
To give some perspective Xbox Series S 4 tflops, Nintendo Switch 2 is 3.1 tflops.
A 5090 is 104 tflops so no wonder its so riduclously large. It's also completely overkill for even the most high end AAA games despite what social media influencers will tell you.
Get something modest like 4060 that has say 15 tflops or an updated sku eventually but for now I'm happy, my setup works fine. The average RTS, or FPS like Age of Empires or Counterstrike 2 doesn't need anything more than 1-2 tflops.
There are actually things that matter other than flops...Such as API and ISA support, VRAM, bandwidth, other types of computer performance...
Yes, if you only play CS then there is no problem since Valve takes pains to make sure that runs on a toaster. OTOH, the sole multiplayer game that I play (Hunt Showdown) will not run on that computer. Not that it will perform badly, it won't launch because it requires AVX2 support. There are many many many many many games which will not be playable on such a machine, even at lower resolutions and framerates.
AVX2 is now supported in the latest versions of Rosetta and Prism and I do have 24 gb ram so vram isn’t really an issue for me. Though most YouTube reviewers only review 8/16gb versions cause they are not build to order hence I suspect easy to refund.
Yes there are still some incompatibilities with Mac but my point is really more broader. If you already have a high end console anyway then for a lot of titles that are pc focussed you don’t really need a high end graphics card.
Not just MacBook Air but you can also choose x86 options like Steam Deck, Lenovo legion go, asus rog ally handhelds or beelink / geekom mini pcs. Or just a normal pc with a low end GPU. All you really need is something with ps4 or switch 2 performance and you can play most pc focussed games.
But it brings other advantages. You can instead have a computer that’s much more lightweight and is near/entirely fanless.
OG said in their first post "I have a computer with 750ti + i7 2600 (1.7 tflops), it still plays most games just fine", which is clearly untrue if "most games" is supposed to mean "most new games of reputable make".
Then in their next post they defended the position "you don't need a high end GPU" which is much more reasonable as you CAN play most games just fine with something mid-range if you are willing to compromise on some settings. I was observing that they had gone from defending the first position to defending the second.
I would like to know whether your would measure the performance of 720p Alan Wake 2 on such a computer in FPS or SPF.
I have no idea what you mean by that.
If "most games" is supposed to mean "at least 51% of all games that have ever existed" then yes it's true, because I would guess that more than 51% of games had already come out when that machine was current (and emulation is magical). However, I don't think that such a definition is relevant to most people fitting out a gaming computer.
I usually narrow down the definition to "games old enough to be playable without emulation". Deltaforce Force 1, from the original CD, still works in Windows 11 (with minor fixable issues). Same for many other games.
But we can limit it to "game, Windows, with 3D acceleration". So it is the range from Quake 1 Windows Version up to "AAA" games which work well on a 2014 released 750ti, FullHD. Which is roughly 1997 to 2019 even for BIG games. After 2019 the picture starts to change more drastically since the video RAM strongly limits which games work well, or what texture resolution your can run.
Result: ~22 years of Win-3D-games, and five years where the number of games unplayable on that card got drastically more, but still a lot new 3D games work quite well. Minecraft should run fine on that machine, for example, if he has at least 8 GB, better 16 GB RAM.
Ok, but as I said, I don't think "literally 51% of games for the platform" is a useful definition of "most games" when you are discussing gaming computers. If somebody comes to you and says "I want to build a gaming computer, will a 750Ti be good enough", and you say "yes, that will play most games just fine" then you should not be surprised that they do not come seeking your advice in the future. In the world of gaming PCs, "plays most games" means something like "will play all but the most demanding games that are coming out this year".
If you want a computer that can play most PC games ever made, then you will be happy with an iGPU and GPU sag is not an issue for you.
So then let's go back to the original statement I had a problem with:
"Have a computer with 750ti + i7 2600 (1.7 tflops), it still plays most games just fine."
Either this statement is meaningless because it uses a definition of "plays most games just fine" that is not relevant to people affected by GPU sag, or it is demonstrably false because such a computer will be unable to play a great many popular titles from the past 5 years, even with very limited settings.
So I'm really not clear on why so many people seem to keen disagree with my fairly obvious thesis "you need a computer that isn't obsolete if you want to be able to pchoose what new (or actually pretty old now) releases you want to play".
I've had a remarkable number of conversations with people who seem to believe the computer they bought 10-15 years ago somehow still owes them something. If you only want to play AoE, then great carry on doing that. No problem, I can absolutely respect that. I like keeping old computers in service; my file server is still a bloody Lynnfield!
But what I often see from people doing this is twofold:
1. Moral superiority, as in this case, implying that everybody else is a fool for wanting to...you know...play modern games and/or with reasonable graphics settings.
2. Actually complaining that modern game developers don't support your toaster. I've encountered a remarkable amount of this, and it's very irritating when somebody comes in and says "o y gaem no wurk!?" and then get angry with the response "because your computer is so old that I regularly pass up similar machines at thrift stores".
And hence, having experienced this same conversation many many times over the past decade (often from people asking for my help), I cease to have any tolerance for it. If somebody wants to play old or very lightweight games on an old computer, that's awesome, I think it's great that they can do that. However, if you want to participate in public conversation about gaming computers, their habits do not excuse them from having perspective about how their use-case compares to the way the market moves in general.
/rant
Chill my friend. I’m just saying 750ti and M3 Mac suits my gaming interests when it comes to pc focussed titles. Hint pc focussed titles, Alan Wake 2 is designed for consoles. As I have a PS5, I don’t see a pressing need to buy expensive high end GPUs at this time and large bully graphics card that this article talks about make the proposition much less appealing. I like slim and small and ideally silent.
Furthermore there is still a wide variety of games designed to support Xbox Series S, Nintendo Switch 2 and yes PS4 that dampen graphical demands of many games.
Along with this PC game developers also are targeting gamers in emerging markets who don’t have the means to purchase high end gaming pcs or those who simply see it as a big expense they don’t want.
That also is a big dampener on pc system requirements in many games. So I can still eek life out of older hardware or portable options for some time.
Again if a high end gaming rig works for you. Then power to you! You can either go one of two ways with newer hardware. Either more power efficiency or better performance. Each has pros and cons. At the moment I have invested more in power efficiency over better performance on the PC side with some older x86 hardware as backup for Mac incompatibilities. Part of that is because it suits my use cases that extend beyond gaming.
Not saying my setup is best for everyone, but for me it is working fine so I'm okay with it.
Big Black Boxes, gloriously opaque, with just one *dim* power LED (NOT searing blue) for the win.
Ok, for "Big" substitute whatever size fits the need (I've a couple that are literally just able to hold a mini-itx with RAM fitted) but the best is anything that has you automatically humming "Thus Spake Zarathustra" as you switch on the office light.
Doesn't help that there seems to be no card length standard to stick to, even for cards within the same class. Length varies by brand, even for the same models.
Plus then the depth differs as well, depending on the cooling, so you can go from low end cards being a single slot card, to the mid at 2 or 2.5 slot, and top end being 3 or more slot cards, so even the position of the bottom of the card, isn't at a consistent height above the bottom of the case!
NIce idea. Anyone remembering those VESA local bus monsters in those "mini tower" casings remembers the second stabilizing groove on the front side of the casing. Lets go a bit further back in time and remember "filecards", RLL or MFM controllers with the full size 3,5" HDD directly mounted on the card. Those were often designed long enough to reach the casings front end, for the same mechanical stability reasons the VESA monsters later on also needed.
How about a sturdy enough metal support beam that can be clipped into the casing after installing the card, that goes over the card and connects from back to front end of the casing, effectively supporting the full upper length of the card ?
Sorry thats not "high tech", thats just mechanics.
But if you want, you can glue some RGD LED stuff on it, so it might not be too bad...
There are all sorts of mounting kits available.
My latest (as in, 2020 vintage) Big Black Case came with bits of iron and screws to mount the GPU vertically, away from the mainboard. With all the necessary blanking plates and next to places to mount yet more fans to the outside.
I don't recall if it came with a PCIe riser and cable as well (probably, to be sure the holes match up) as the "spare bits" are all in the loft (my GPU is - smaller & fanless). But anyone spending on huge cards would be buying their own PCIe extender cable anyway, to get it bling matched to the water tubing :-)
Look for a 4U rackmount PC case. This size will provide enough room for even the largest graphics card. The horizontal motherboard and vertical GPU card removes the bending strain on the GPU PCIE slot. A quick search showed several available at SCAN
One that caught my eye - Inter-Tech IPC Server IPC 4U-40255 Server Case - £109.99
See https://www.scan.co.uk/products/inter-tech-case-ipc-server-4u-40255-55cm
The disadvantages of this type of case is that it is WIDE - designed to fit a 19 inch rack and usually with no sound dampening of any sort and not compatible with liquid cooling.
Alternatively get a full tower case and replace (or cover) the side window with a metal sheet and put multiple stick on feet on the motherboard side of the case then put the case on its side.
Go for AcornRiscPC original casings. Those are not only screwless (locking bolts) but can be stacked.
If you need a decent amount of cool looking sillyness, put so many RsicPC casings over the others that you have a tower with a pizza oven.
https://www.houseofmabel.com/personal/computers/riscpc/
Apparently my CoolerMaster Q500L case can be operated in a desktop form factor. But honestly, I can't use that feature due to water cooling. Was told that the radiator has to be hanging off the top or the pump will prematurely fail. If I use the desktop form factor mode the radiator would be on it's side and I was told that isn't good for the pump.
You can get risers to do this, basically a mounting frame with a PCIe slot that holds the card vertically instead, then a cable with a plug on the end that goes into the mother board. Some cases come with these as standard, or as an optional extra, and have their card slots orientated for vertical cards, rather than horizontal.
The issue here is that the vast majority of GFX cards use fans for cooling, and expect to be pulling in air from bellow, and blowing the heated air out above. In a vertical position the air intake is pointing towards the side of the case, and the exhaust is pointing directly into the motherboard. There are mitigation, such as side intakes on the case etc. Although the better option here is going water cooled for the GFX card.
The risers themselves can also cause other issues, as it's effectively an extension cable, so they can cause stability issues in some use cases.
> The risers themselves can also cause other issues, as it's effectively an extension cable, so they can cause stability issues in some use cases.
Mount the GPU vertically but "upside down": very short run for the extension cable, giving better chance at stability, and the fans are now below the mainboard entirely - you can add whatever vents are appropriate if the case walls don't have them (hand-drilling a vent pattern not recommended - if you can afford the GPU, you can afford a B&D!).
Of course, this needs a tall enough case with the mainboard mounted at the top, but they seem to usually be up there anyway (access to i/o and keep CPU fan near a vent).
Water-cooling? Watch some Linus Tech Tips and just find someone with a CNC in their garage to cut out new blocks for you ;-)
... as anything other than shared incompetence.
Ostensible designers and engineers, wearing consensual blindfolds of ignorance, half-assed-ly tacking shiny-shiny bits together to sell to similarly inept end-users who can't tell sh...tuff from Shinola.
It's a match made in tech heaven, really, and a boon for the "won't last but can't be meaningfully recycled" contra-environmentalists.
If only disposable culture was as disposable.
Weirdly phrased though it was, it mostly made sense to me in that this problem happens because a large number of people, any of which could have done something about it and several of which should have been trying to, failed to fix the problem. Designers of the cards should think about how they're mounted in cases and whether this would work, then they should have tested this to see what happens. Designers of cases should have done the same and either redesigned the cases to handle it or at least provide the parts necessary for the user to manage it. The problem is such that the average buyer would wonder why nobody saw this happening before this was released and why the best solution is a sensor that, as the article notes, tells you when the problem is already bad enough that something is likely damaged now. We can blame users for a lot of this too, because when the graphics card is that heavy, you have to use some common sense about the physics it's going to have on whatever it's connected to, but that is supposed to be the job of engineers at several companies before users should mentally double-check their work.
Fortunately for me, my graphics needs are very simple, so I don't have to worry about multi-kilogram graphics cards.
Ended up 'fixing' it using cable ties, Found a convenient mounting point, attached a tie and simply adjusted the card until it didn't sag.
So far so good. Incidentally cooling especially on older cards can be badly affected by even a slight displacement, as the heatsink separates from the board a small amount which can affect the VRMs and memory so watch out for that one.
Someone had my old cards and I'd been nice enough to tell them that the capacitors on the broken one had been changed so they would need to take a Dremel to a heatsink prior to use.
Should have done this for them but at the time it wasn't working and besides they got an essentially working card along with it for free.
As a reference point, have a K80 here which is going to require vertical mounting because it really is a heavy boi. Did the math, this beast weighs as much as my 850W Seasonic.
Dual core, 24GB VRAM *AND* 4992 CUDA cores so about as powerful as a 1080 in real terms though it is the VRAM I require.
Might try getting another broken unit and fixing that, running two (600W!) in SLI with recycled blower fans and a low power CPU would be an interesting project.
I still don't unterstand why they switched the AT orientation of the expansion card when creating the ATX norm. They should have sticked with the "mounting bracket right, card to the left" orientation, making the cooling "sit" on the GPU instead "hanging". The support structure for long ISA cards on the other end went away too (can you remember them?). Would have kept the support structure easier to make, since it would push against the PCB instead of whatever is hangin' there.
This is a real problem. I think PC design needs to change to cope with High end GPUs. I have what was a significant GPU to run decent size LLMs locally and it does a great job but I'm scared everytime I move or knock the PC as it has glass sides and I can see the card wobble. The kids accuse me of having it for games and covet it on account of the led lights inside but getting a games machine was the cheapest way to get the performance. I could do with quieter fans too. It's water cooled so I thought that would help, seems not. It's ok until the GPU fans ramp up to full speed; my wife enquired if it was going to take off!
I have a vintage machine with a Gravis Ultrasound in it. That card is very long, and I have it supported by a piece of wire to stop it from flexing. Other high-end sound cards from the time have similar issues. I think the fact that most caes where horizontally oriented at the time is part of why they felt ok with that.
So same day, different component. One could argue that sound cards were the GPUs of their day.
This is ASUS who throughout 2023/24/25 have repeatedly said they are ignoring warranty laws WORLDWIDE and if you don't like it "well sue us". They sold used motherboards/GPUs as new. Even stuff their OWN employees had used and upgraded from......and refused refunds/warranties/repairs etc etc.
Same company who's making bloated overweight saggy 5xxx Series gpus that lag immensely behind the competition so much they need a droop-sensor.
This is NOT the ASUS people used to trust. Bought out & sold down the river of enshittification long ago.
Is go 'Podule' on it.
GPU in a podule that fits into a 5 1/4" drive bay complete with heatsink and one extremely large fan, screwed directly to the case with air flow from the front to the back via filters.
Also would make linking cards to PSUs that much easier, as the cables would be shorter thus reducing lossage and keeping interconnects cool.
Data link to motherboard could then be via a relatively short but high quality cable with x8 /x16 PCIe 5.0 built in thus avoiding the entire problem of saggy cards.
Caveat: Nvidia wouldn't like that one bit though it would be great for LLMs, as you could then put four of these in one machine while leaving the x1/x4 bays free for NVMe PCIe or older legacy units.
Check out Thermaltake's V21 cube case. ATX motherboard is mounted horizontally.
Silverstone have a range of desktop cases that can take full height graphics cards.
There are also several bracket solutions available to support heavy cards for those that want to keep their existing tower cases.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
