Author Topic: New Video Cards - suggestions (Read 3253 times)

38ruk · « **Reply #30 on:** June 05, 2006, 12:09:50 AM »

Enduro , that looks like a standard size power supply . As brooke mentioned you will have to cut the back of the dell box to accept a rocker type power switch so you can run basically any type of power supply , or search for a psu with out the switch . I have a known good antec 430w true power in the closet (its pretty heavy Roo) hehe . It's a good PSU that was about 100 bucks when i bought it (2 years ago) . IT does have a switch on the back thou , and has a 20amp 12+v rail so it will run all the new cards without issue . I dont mind donating it to the "cause " if you get in a bind . 38

Roscoroo · « **Reply #31 on:** June 05, 2006, 12:36:27 AM »

ive seen the overclocks on bolth cards ..

x800gto smokes the others in the pci/sli set up ..
in the agp set up the 1600 512, vs 800 gto is very close less then 1000 apart in the mark03

x800 has more reviews and has been out longer . i'll let Ruk win this time ... tee hee

(actually we're not compeating ...we're just tossing up what we know and have read /seen )

remember not all tests can be a true judge because of the hardware differences . Some cards can provide better performance because they match your paticular hardware better .now on a lighter note ....

Roscoroo · « **Reply #32 on:** June 05, 2006, 12:48:04 AM »

oopsi i was gonna add the Ram used on a card can make or brake it in the tests

thats one thing if you pay close attention too you can see a huge diff between the same card and diff manufacturers .. (you agree Rukie ???)

38ruk · « **Reply #33 on:** June 05, 2006, 10:46:28 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Roscoroo
oopsi i was gonna add the Ram used on a card can make or brake it in the tests

thats one thing if you pay close attention too you can see a huge diff between the same card and diff manufacturers .. (you agree Rukie ???)

Definitely , i agree with u always Roo 8) . That review i linked to is really all i could find on the X1600 . Who knows how it compares to others or if its drivers were mature enought to see the benefits of the new card . The price of the gto2 is what i really like , @ 139 after rebate it a great bang for the buck card . hehe I win I win yaaayyy. lol 38

Roscoroo · « **Reply #34 on:** June 05, 2006, 05:50:07 PM »

here Rukie

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2717&p=3

i saw another review somewere hereeee but kinda spaced were it is ..
its a very capable card (x1600) with a little ocing w/ omega's i bet it will rock as a bang per buck card also .

38ruk · « **Reply #35 on:** June 05, 2006, 09:07:38 PM »

Good review Roo , i see that the X1600 tested is an XT . That would explain the performance difference between the two different write ups , the one i show was a plain jane 1600 . I do agree about the bang for the buck , the gto2 and 1600 have a nice spot it the sub 200 dollar range . ~~Roo , 38~~

Enduro · « **Reply #36 on:** June 05, 2006, 09:52:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by 38ruk
Enduro , that looks like a standard size power supply . As brooke mentioned you will have to cut the back of the dell box to accept a rocker type power switch so you can run basically any type of power supply , or search for a psu with out the switch . I have a known good antec 430w true power in the closet (its pretty heavy Roo) hehe . It's a good PSU that was about 100 bucks when i bought it (2 years ago) . IT does have a switch on the back thou , and has a 20amp 12+v rail so it will run all the new cards without issue . I dont mind donating it to the "cause " if you get in a bind . 38

thanks for the offer, ruk. I appreciate that.

I don't mind cutting the metal if needed. it won't look pretty, though.

considering it's possible that my current power supply is pushing more juice than I thought it was, I think I'll just buy a video card and install it. if I experience any computer freezes or total loss of power, I'll shop for power supplies.

now, I just need to decide on the card...

38ruk's suggestion: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102609
(only $169, but am I getting what I pay for?)

silat's suggestion: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102492
(I think that's it--350W power supply recommended)

eagl's suggestion: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814130275
(definitely requires a minimum of 350W power supply)

68DevilM's suggestion: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102017
(300W power supply required)

I'm stuck at this point. hehehe

38ruk · « **Reply #37 on:** June 05, 2006, 10:40:06 PM »

Ok out of those 4 , the 7800 is too much of a card for your machine , you wont be able to take it with you to your next box , so it will be kinda wasted on the 2.4ghz cpu .

The X800XT (16 pipes) is a good choice , but the one you found is way too expensive because its an all in wonder. If you could find one cheaper , i would do it .

The X850 pro (12pipes) isnt much different from the GTO2 that i linked to, between 5-8% faster . The difference is in the core and memory clocks , the x850 is alittle higher . The power requirements are the same , newegg has 300w for the x850 which is 350w everywhere else .

performance wise , the 7800 is the fastest followed by the x800XT , 850pro , x800gto2 . Good luck deciding . 38

Roscoroo · « **Reply #38 on:** June 05, 2006, 10:57:35 PM »

http://www.activewin.com/reviews/hardware/graphicscards/crucial_ati_x800_pro/index.shtml

theres some nice spec's ...

eagl · « **Reply #39 on:** June 06, 2006, 05:13:26 AM »

I will disagree with the "too fast for your machine" statement regarding the 7800 card. Even when cpu limited, a faster vid card will let you turn on antialiasing because that takes almost no cpu work but dramatically improves graphics quality.

Even with an AMD 3700 and an nvidia 6800 GT, my computer is "cpu limited" in AH. Dropping screen resolution gives me ZERO framerate increase. By your logic, that means my video card is "too fast" for my cpu! Utter garbage. Instead of wishing I'd bought a cheaper vid card, I just enabled FSAA. On my computer, the sweet spot is 2xQ FSAA although I can live with 4X FSAA if I turn down the sliders a bit. In any case, running AH with FSAA enabled is a much better gaming experience than running without FSAA, and that's why I strongly say that there is no such thing as too fast of a vid card.

Yes if he was running a P3 800 with 128 meg ram, I'd suggest spending that money elsewhere. But otherwise the system specs suggest that he'll be able to run the game just fine at 1024x768 or 1280x1024, with 256 or 512 textures, and 4x FSAA, and as long as he keeps the detail sliders down to a reasonable level, he'll get great framerates with very nice image quality.

It's always seemed to me that how far you can move the detail sliders is more dependent on cpu power than vid card power, as long as you have a reasonably modern vid card. So drop the sliders a bit (who really cares what's on the ground anyhow?), pump up the screen resolution, and run 4x or better FSAA. That gives you great framerates and a beautifully smooth image. The better the vid card, the more FSAA you can use.

Enduro · « **Reply #40 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:39:33 AM »

I'm enjoying watching you guys discuss this topic as I'm learning a lot.

I should say WHY I want to upgrade something.

My FR is in the 70's when there is no air traffic--although, my sliders are set so that I never see the shell casings that apprarenly fall from the wings now-a-days. If there are only 2 or 3 a/c around, my frames are playable in the high 20's-50's. But, as soon as I approach an area that is inundated with a/c (4 or more, in my case), my FR drops into the slide-show range.

Maybe I should be considering more RAMBUS to fix this, instead? Or, will a beefier video card do the trick? What do you guys think?

38ruk · « **Reply #41 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:46:16 AM »

He will be able to run 2X or 4X AA with any of these cards , i ran 4X with my x800pro with out issue . So why spent the extra money on the 7800 when these other cards will do AA just fine? My utter garbage opinion is just that, an opinion , but ill stand by it .

eagl · « **Reply #42 on:** June 06, 2006, 10:57:20 AM »

Fair enuf 38ruk

Enduro,

You may want to try messing with the sliders and texture size settings some more to see if that helps. The same goes with the screen resolution, if you have the option. My LCD is 1280x1024 so I'm stuck with that resolution, but if you have CRT then you have choices. Maybe try a higher resolution and FSAA along with trying out other settings. You might find one setting that evens out your framerates without having to buy expensive hardware for an old system.

Roscoroo · « **Reply #43 on:** June 11, 2006, 02:53:18 AM »

" without having to buy expensive hardware for an old system."

Thats kinda were we were going here .....ere ere ere ....

A great card without spending mega $$$$ that will increase game performance with Tbolts hardware...

Otherwise he just may as well step up and get a 64bit pc and get it over with .

my slow 2500+ barton w/9600 pro runs 85fps and never ever dipped below 30fps in the hugest nastiest... planes trains and auto's flying everywere type furballs .

my secret is to keep the used memory in the game at 20% below max amount in the huge furballs, or at 66% in normal open sky type flight ... adjust sliders down til its about that and the game plays nice on any pc.

hell Tbolt could just do some driver/game setting tweeking and get some improvement ... but some of the 9500/9700's were on the weak side
like what is it running at .. 250 300 350 x ram speed ... ect ect

Enduro · « **Reply #44 on:** June 11, 2006, 10:50:48 AM »

Yea, Roo.

Silat and 38ruk took the time to speak with eachother over the phone & came to an agreement that this Radeon X800GTO card would provide improvement in performance w/out wasting $ on a box that is somewhat substandard. Agreed?

Will make the purchase later this afternoon.