Author Topic: vid card ? (Read 475 times)

killnu · « **on:** January 31, 2005, 02:41:07 PM »

i think my current card, Ti4200 64MB is now outdated.

im looking at getting a nvidia FX 5700 LE 256 MB DDR.
so, is that a good choice or not? seems best to stay away from ATI for some reason( looking on bbs).

oh, rest of my setup, 1.8 ghz pent 4 processor, 512 ram, 80 gig harddrive.

StarOfAfrica2 · « **Reply #1 on:** January 31, 2005, 03:15:38 PM »

There is no reason to limit your choices to GeForce cards. ATI's cards work perfectly fine. Although I admit I do have a preference for Nvidia's GeForce stuff, its a personal preference and not based on better or worse for AH.

If you do go with the Nvidia setup though, I'd at least step up to the FX5900, unless the cost is prohibitive. If you want the 5700 because its a good deal, then go for it.

Just remember the processor is going to be a bottleneck for you on your system. Dont expect miracles just from a video card upgrade.

killnu · « **Reply #2 on:** January 31, 2005, 03:18:37 PM »

im just expecting playable FRs, current map, im getting 11-15, was getting 25-30 before. so, not a miracle, just playable.

StarOfAfrica2 · « **Reply #3 on:** January 31, 2005, 04:08:06 PM »

Depends how much money you are wanting to put into your older system. If the 256MB FX5700 was close to your limit moneywise, I'd spend a little less and get a 128MB card and spend the difference upgrading your RAM to 1GB. A newer card that supports Dx9 and the extra RAM (as long as you have no issues with your system like spyware, etc) should easily get you reliably better fps.

Just my suggestion. Your system with these improvements still wont be a screamer that will run it all, maxxed out. But it should be playable, and get you by until you can do something better. If I can get by on my system for another year (slightly faster than yours with the suggested upgrades) I'll be happy.

Ohio43 · « **Reply #4 on:** February 02, 2005, 07:56:20 AM »

I am running AH2 on a Athlon 1800XP (1.53Ghz), ATI 9600 Pro 128MB(think they go for $149.00 now) and am getting between 20-100 FPS on the small maps. 20 being the lowest in the ground-view mode, and 100 being the highest in short-view mode. I believe it never drops below 30 in short-view mode when the skies get crowded.. which is acceptable game play for me. No reason to stay away from ATI if your concern is only for AH2.
My son's comp is an Athlon 1600XP (1.4Ghz) using an ATI 9600SE 128MB and his frame rates are just slightly lower than mine. People will tell you to stay away from the SE model of ATI for some reason, but it's definitely "do-able" for AH2 if this system can handle the game. If you budget is very weak, try going for that card..its very cheap (I think under $75.00).
After last patch i checkmarked "preload textures" and frame rates took a HUGE dive (30FPS max), but I didn't realize until I read this site that you don't want to checkmark that unless you have 256MB video card.. you may want to uncheck this if you have it enabled. Im going to disable this on my system when I get home

AKDogg · « **Reply #5 on:** February 02, 2005, 08:10:11 AM »

I running a Geforce 5700LE 128meg. I getting about 35-130fps with 4x antialias at 1024x768 res. Now keep in mind my processor is more then twice yours so I wouldn't expect same results. I am running a AMD Athlon 64 3200+ with 1 gig ram.

FOGOLD · « **Reply #6 on:** February 02, 2005, 09:21:56 AM »

Be aware that AH is a processor heavy game so don't expect miracles. A 9600 Pro or XT is very good value right now and would be plenty to spend on that processor. Put the saving to your new system when the time comes. Seriously, 9600 or Nvidia 5700 cards are ample for you riight now.

IronDog · « **Reply #7 on:** February 02, 2005, 06:25:12 PM »

I was reading an article at Anand.com,and it was explaining how DX9 versus DX8 bogged down certain video cards,Nvidia,and the 5900XT,in particular.Beings I have a 5900XT,I read on,and was astonished to see that by going to DX9,my card lost 68% of it's fps!These test were used with several vid cards,while playing the mother of all test beds Doom 3.I'm in the process of building a AMD puter,so I can try and get some better AH performance,and I figured I could probably salvage my vid card to go with new unit.I now have second thoughts,and I might try a ATI card for the first time.If anyone can shed some light on my findings,I would appreciate some comments.
IronDog
P.S. Killnu,I used the Ti 4200,and with the new, better,5900XT my fps sucked.I believe Radeon might be the way to go.

killnu · « **Reply #8 on:** February 02, 2005, 06:32:31 PM »

um Irondog, the 475th is back, talk to me, Von, Kama or Vne for more info. hehe

and thank you for the info. much appreciated.

Roscoroo · « **Reply #9 on:** February 03, 2005, 11:44:29 AM »

9600 pro 128mb here ($100.00 us) fps 85 furball heavy action never drops below 30 .... a huge buff formation will temp it into the high 20's though .but that ussually when there 10 or more sets and there all trying to put lead in me or vise versa

StarOfAfrica2 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 03, 2005, 12:22:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by IronDog
I was reading an article at Anand.com,and it was explaining how DX9 versus DX8 bogged down certain video cards,Nvidia,and the 5900XT,in particular.Beings I have a 5900XT,I read on,and was astonished to see that by going to DX9,my card lost 68% of it's fps!These test were used with several vid cards,while playing the mother of all test beds Doom 3.I'm in the process of building a AMD puter,so I can try and get some better AH performance,and I figured I could probably salvage my vid card to go with new unit.I now have second thoughts,and I might try a ATI card for the first time.If anyone can shed some light on my findings,I would appreciate some comments.
IronDog
P.S. Killnu,I used the Ti 4200,and with the new, better,5900XT my fps sucked.I believe Radeon might be the way to go.

I have a 5900XT. With 2xQ AA, Trilinear mode, Vsync enabled and using 1024 max textures in AH I'm maxxing out the fps at 85 over water, 75-78 in a furball over water. 35-38 fps at takeoff from a field or in a furball low over a field it might drop to 31-33. I have my detail sliders in AH 80% of the way to max, and range is all the way up to 3 miles.

If you look at the DX versions that most video cards were built to work with, The Ti series cards were built for Dx8.1. The entire line of Five x series cards were built for Dx 9.0.

That said, the ATI cards comparable to the Nvidia ones are just as good.

You cant compare Dx8 performance with Dx9 performance. Dx9 added so many things for the video card to handle, of course things are going to slow down a bit. Thats where the drivers are important, making the best use of what is available. I'm assuming the article you read was an older one.

The benchmarks at Toms Hardware in Doom3 show the 5900XT getting almost 3 times the fps of a Ti 4200, no matter what the quality settings. The XT IS a lower end card than some of the other 5900 series cards, but its far above the old Ti series cards, no matter how good they were. Those Ti's can only execute Dx 8 shader codes, and are getting left further and further behind.

214thCavalier · « **Reply #11 on:** February 03, 2005, 12:48:09 PM »

Besides which DX8 vs DX9 should make no difference whatsoever when benchmarking Doom 3 as its an Open GL game which has absolutely nothing to do with Direct X of any version..