New vidcard advice Bloom and otheres

[TheflyingElk]

Greetings, Iam currnetly shopping for a replacement for this *&^%^& TNT2 m64 card This is my current Hardware line up
Tyan MB S2507S Trinity 450- PIII intel CPU
512 of 133 Ram, Direct X 8.1, 13 Gig, 5400 speed HD, maxtor
SB live sound card, Monitor 17 inch, AOC up to 100mhz refreah rate, running cable modem, ......... Well I have been looking at Nvidia chip sets  Geforce 2 Ti 200 and Geforce 3 Ti 200 ,  with this current cpu setup is it worth going to GF3 ? or will performance max out with GF2? Just would like your thought before I dent the credit card LOL!

[2Late4U]

In short, NO, its not worth it considering your current set up.  Your CPU will max out a good Geforce2/Radeon 7200/7500.

There would be a difference in some instances....but not enough to notice or justify an extra $100-$200.  Keep in mind also, that even if you upgrade in 6-12 months, by that time the curren $300 cards will be close to $100-$150, and so  you still save $$$

[bloom25]

It would be a complete waste of money to put a GF 3 in that system.  You would be much better off with a GF 2 Titanium.  With that card you should have very playable framerates.

I personally run AH on two systems, one is an Athlon Thunderbird 1300 Mhz @ 1339 Mhz with a GF 2 GTS video card.  It generally gives me 60 - 85 fps.  (85 fps is my monitor refresh, so it cannot exceed that.)

System 2 is a Pentium 3 450 Mhz with a TNT 2 Ultra video card, it is playable, with framerates around 30 - 35 fps.  

I'd expect that with your system and a GF 2 Titanium you should see around 40 - 50 fps on average.  (Note:  I run both systems at 1024x768 32 bit.)

[TheflyingElk]

Thanks guys due to a complete oversite on my part( DOH ) I forgot to mention the MB is trinity 450 but cpu is intel 800 does this change things ? sorry for the confusion in the post

[Camel]

Well with a p3 800

Id say yes, even an $50-80 Gf2 mx will be an improvement over that M64 tnt card. If you looking to get something at a reasonable price that you could carry over to your next machine, then look at gf3 ti 200 line up.

[bloom25]

With a P3 800 a GF 3 would be slightly faster than a Gf 2 Ti.  It wouldn't be a lot though.  I suppose if you planned on upgrading the rest of the system right away a GF 3 wouldn't be a bad buy.  One thing to be aware of is that nVidia is supposed to be releasing their GeForce 4 in February.

[Sox62]

The Geforce III TI200 may be only slightly faster than the Geforce II at lower  resolutions,but it will keep the framerates high at higher resolutions.
 Which would you rather have,45-50 fps at 800 x 600,or the same framerate at 1024 x 768...or maybe even higher?

[Nifty]

I posted a link to a TomsHardware review where they tested some titanium cards.  In the review, they checked out CPU scaling for the reference cards of the GF2 Ti, GF3 Ti200 and GF3 Ti500 varieties.  Unfortunately, they only did this on Quake 3 and Max Payne (as opposed to the battery of tests they did on the high end system) for the PIII-800.  In Quake 3, there was hardly any difference in GF2 Ti and the GF3 Ti 200, yet in Max Payne there was a significant difference.

All this means is your mileage WILL vary between the GF2 Ti and the GF3 cards on your system.  Some apps won't notice a difference, some apps will.

In any event, wait like Bloom suggests.  

[Sox62]

That's because Quake III uses opengl.Max Payne uses direct 3d,as does (I believe) Aces High.
 You will see better framerates at higher resolutions with the Geforce III TI200 vs the Geforce II TI.
 However,if you are only going to play the game at 800 x 600,then the Geforce II TI may be the way to go.