Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: Zaphod on February 16, 2005, 12:16:10 PM
-
What is the next "step up" from an ATI Radeon 9600XT 128mg?
I have currently:
AMD64 socket 754 3400
Asus K8V SE Deluxe MB
1024 MB Ram
80MB Seagate SATA HD
Actually a series of steps from this vid card up to the hottest or close to hottest card would be really cool. I would like to get the vid card to match the system maybe a little closer.
Zaphod
-
9800pro
9800XT
X800Pro
X800XT
Would be the pecking order for ATI card's in performance and price. Consider the next motherboard you will buy, will probably not have an AGP slot, so weigh that carefully.
-
What Skuzzy says about AGP. Not a good time for making intermediate upgrades!
If you MUST upgrade right now (and your processor prolly could use some beef in the video dept) I'd be tempted to push the boat out and get a top card.
Thats a pretty current CPU.
Nvidia 6800 GT would be excellent.. I wouldn't be tempted by another midrange card, you would be dissapointed with the performance increase, especially for games other than AH .
Nice rigg;)
-
As a related note, are the nvidia cards better on the 2D image quality than they used to be?
I would be extremely cautious while shopping for nvidia because I've had extremely bad experiences with thier rf filtering. It causes your desktop to go blurred with high resolutions.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
As a related note, are the nvidia cards better on the 2D image quality than they used to be?
I would be extremely cautious while shopping for nvidia because I've had extremely bad experiences with thier rf filtering. It causes your desktop to go blurred with high resolutions.
Than they used to be........when? I've owned a MX 440, MX 4000, and my current FX 5900XT. All of them gave perfectly clear images at up to 1280x1024 resolution. I assume they would be fine beyond that, as they are rated for higher resolutions, but I never use anything higher than that.
-
I've been very very happy with the X800 pro I bought. Well worth the $'s....
-
There is always the X850 :D But i'd stick with an X800...Go with the X800 if you can, its worth the money, don't settle for a 9800 for only a little less...
-
Can't get an X850 in an AGP bus form factor.
-
a friend of mine has close to your setup (well,cpu anyway) on a dfi lanparty mobo....his x800 pro pulls avg. of 120fps all the time in AHII.1600x1200 res. high detail i'd go with that
-
i have almost the exact same setup , and i am very pleased with the x800 pro
38
-
Originally posted by buzkill
a friend of mine has close to your setup (well,cpu anyway) on a dfi lanparty mobo....his x800 pro pulls avg. of 120fps all the time in AHII.1600x1200 res. high detail i'd go with that
Moving from the 9600xt, it would be a real waste of money unless you went to at least a geforce 6800 (nice sweet spot in the price per performance as long as you dont run over 1280x1024 res). 6800gt if you like higher resolutions or just want the better fsaa performance.
Either way though, if AH is your only real game to worry about, its quite a chunk O change considering the marginal FR increase you'd be likely to get
-
Thanks Guys :).
Zaphod
-
Than they used to be........when?
The last nvidia I've owned was Geforce2. When I bought my first ATI I couldn't believe the difference in 2D image quality.
I still have a Nforce1 board with integrated graphics which is blurry at anything over 800x600.
I've had a TNT2 ultra, Geforce256 and Geforce2 too. They all had really bad IQ which was completely unacceptable at anything over 1024x768.
-
the last 2 nvidia card i had ,a ti 4600 and a 6800 plain version, i still see a difference in 2d quality between them and a x800pro or 9800 pro
38
-
Ok,..some explanation in order here.
NVidia has never built thier own video cards, unlike ATI. So what happened was vendors would build NVidia cards, and use cheap RAMDACS which caused poor 2D quality. It also caused poor 3D quality, but most of the games of the day hid it well.
ATI never really suffered this as they always controlled what went into thier video cards. They have always used better quality RAMDAC's than any NVidia card. That is just a simple fact.
Now comes in the NVidia NV30 family (FX5xxx). For all its problems, this chip did one thing for NVidia. They finally built the RAMDAC into the chip. From this point forward NVidia's 2D quality has almost been as good as ATI's. I say almost, as the FX5xxx family did/does still have some noise issues, but nothing like the previous cards.
The FX6xxx family finally got it right and I would say thier 2D quality is about as good as ATI's.
-
best thing to do is not spend any more money and just tweak that 9600 up to 9800 speed. I did it to my old comp and worked great. got the firmware and knowski from tweak.com or someplace,
-
ive had both a 9600 pro and a 9800 pro, there isnt any way to clock a 9600 pro to 9800 speeds , they are two different animals, the 9600 only has a 128 bit memory bus VS the 9800's 256 bit. if i remember right the 9600 has a higher clock speed, on the core ,than the 9800 right out of the box. My 9600 clocked like a banshee able to get 570 on the core and 350 on the memory from stock 400/300, 9800 pro speed are 380/340. Now compare the rendering pipes the 9600 pro has only 4 pipes VS the 9800pro's 8pipes....huge difference. It would have to be one hell of a tweak to get a 9600 to 9800 speeds . fwiw
38
EDIT maybe you were thinking 9500 to 9700?? that was possible with some of the 9500's but ati learned their lesson after that ..........
-
Originally posted by buzkill
a friend of mine has close to your setup (well,cpu anyway) on a dfi lanparty mobo....his x800 pro pulls avg. of 120fps all the time in AHII.1600x1200 res. high detail i'd go with that
Hmmm.....
I'm running a X800pro with a athlon 64 3200+ on a lanparty board. It'll cap at 75 (monitor limit) but will dip well below that under load. No way a X800 will pull 100+ frame rates with detail settings maxed out.....
-
Humble he really might be pulling those numbers if he has his antivirus disabled, a low cpu firewall and a low cpu soundcard.
It's amazing how much resources sound takes for example.
-
well 1600X1200 @ 120 fps is hard to believe with vsync on , he may get it with vsync off at altittude when it doesnt have to render much action. As skuzzy has said before there isnt anything out the that can run AH2 at max settings and have a very high frame rate
38
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Humble he really might be pulling those numbers if he has his antivirus disabled, a low cpu firewall and a low cpu soundcard.
It's amazing how much resources sound takes for example.
Possibly up high and alone....but not in a furball or down on the deck.
-
Originally posted by humble
Hmmm.....
I'm running a X800pro with a athlon 64 3200+ on a lanparty board. It'll cap at 75 (monitor limit) but will dip well below that under load. No way a X800 will pull 100+ frame rates with detail settings maxed out.....
he's running a 3400+......twice the cache of yours or mine...with detail high not maxed..vertical sync off to see what it'll do
-
Originally posted by buzkill
he's running a 3400+......twice the cache of yours or mine...with detail high not maxed..vertical sync off to see what it'll do
Why bother? Theres no benefit to gain from disabling vsync. All it will gain is occasional stutters.
-
The benefit is that the user can see how much overhead he has over the vsync. There wouldn't be any point to benchmark anything if apps would just regularly cap on the refresh.
-
he's running a 3400+......twice the cache of yours or mine...with detail high not max
well im running a 3400+ @2.8 ghz, up from 2.4 ghz , with a x800 pro clocked from 475/445 to 540/525 , fresh install of XP with 11 proccess (BareBones ) with CL2 ram , I avg nowhere near 120 @1600X1200, if im at alt without anything to render thats a different story , but not average.
well i tested further..... ndiles OFFLINE A1 p 51 on NE runway
512 textures, vsync off all AH settings maxed
60fps on runway through rollout
137fps at auto climb by the time i hit the water
54fps @5k flyover at A1
FWIW 38
-
I have a 3500+ with an X850XT and I only get a bit more than you 38ruk. My monitor refresh is capping me at 85 most of the time but I get down into the 40's at points when in serious action near the ground. Something over 100 is likely when it's quiet or up high but I can't really tell.
I should really try and overclock this rig a bit to see what it can pull off.... could up the CPU and GPU.
-Soda
-
Hey soda nice rig sir ! Wish i had an X850 8( my monitor is always capped at 75hrz , i see some image tearing with vsync off , so i always have it on . It would be nice to see how that rig clocks, bet itsa beast as it is thou <
> 38
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
The benefit is that the user can see how much overhead he has over the vsync.
Good enough reason, didnt think of that. I certainly wouldnt want to leave it like that for regular play though.
-
Originally posted by 38ruk
well im running a 3400+ @2.8 ghz, up from 2.4 ghz , with a x800 pro clocked from 475/445 to 540/525 , fresh install of XP with 11 proccess (BareBones ) with CL2 ram , I avg nowhere near 120 @1600X1200, if im at alt without anything to render thats a different story , but not average.
well i tested further..... ndiles OFFLINE A1 p 51 on NE runway
512 textures, vsync off all AH settings maxed
60fps on runway through rollout
137fps at auto climb by the time i hit the water
54fps @5k flyover at A1
FWIW 38
sounds about right....he doesn't o.c. it but thats pretty close to same
-
I've had a XFX 6600 GT for a month now and for the $ its the best for AH FS of 35 to 50 in GV and 70"s in the air
cost around $200
-
Originally posted by buzkill
he's running a 3400+......twice the cache of yours or mine...with detail high not maxed..vertical sync off to see what it'll do
Do you know any system benchmarks...
my aquamark was 68,000 or so (know I posted it here)...curious what that system benchmarks....
posted 61000+ stock...think OC'd I had it up to 68,3?? before it went unstable...
-
I hit 70,215 with Aquamark on my system. Not sure how much further I can push it. The system is so stable now, I really do not want to mess with it.
Here is my spread right now:
3DMark2001SE: 23,250
3DMark2003: 11,419
3DMark2005: 5,733
AquaMark: 70,215
-
3dmark 03 11,989 its the only one ive loaded since a reformat , ill DL aquamark and give it a go
<> 38
had a few artifacts so i turned it down alittle to run artifact free
64 3400+ @ 2640mhz
x800 pro 525/ 510
-
Wow. I feel so ............... depressed. My poor little system only got like 900 on 3dMark05 :(
-
Originally posted by humble
Do you know any system benchmarks...
my aquamark was 68,000 or so (know I posted it here)...curious what that system benchmarks....
posted 61000+ stock...think OC'd I had it up to 68,3?? before it went unstable...
the only one i saw him run was 3dmark 2003.....it just broke 12000...like 12050 or something.... o ya he got a x800xt now i forgot to mention
-
I would go for a 6600GT, 6800GT or a X800.
Take care that you order the card where it is delvierable or buy in a shop, dont take any "soon to be shipped" "withing a week" or anything like that since the price tag you have to pay is from now and when it is deliverd in 2 weeks or a month the now so cheap price might be relative expensive.
On the radeon side im not sure which X800 is a good buy... but i know that there are several with some performance diffrences, when you compare prices take care not to compare diffrent variants with "similar" performance or fall for any labeling tricks of the manufacturer, some name their product like the faster chip but have a diffrent chip on board. ASUS did that and others too.
-
used both x800 pro and xt.....the xt is better performer...but not so much better to justify the cost
-
In my case I have got to upgrade the video now. I have a 2.4 gig intel, with 1 gig of "cheap" ram and a Geforce 2 TI 64 meg card. I got a good 30 FPS in normal running at 800x600 at default settings on the video sliders. However with the bigger numbers and nicer terrains I'm running into stutters here and there, and there isn't much more I can turn down!
Unfortunately, I can't afford a "full" upgrade and go with the new PCI express stuff. I've been looking at Geforce 5800's and 5900's, and have a few questions.
Is it ...5800XT the cheap version,.... 5800 main stream...., and 5800 Ultra top end, as the designations go?
Tom's Hardware shows the Nvidia card 5800, 5900 running chip clock speeds from 400-500, and memory clock speed from 700-1000, ATI's 9800's run chip clock speed from 325-380, and memory clock speed from 580-700. Why are the ATI card suppose to be so good with their numbers so much lower? (One of the reasons I still lean towards Nvida cards)
Does anyone of yas have a comparable system to mine with one of the newer cards, and how does it perform?
I hate shopping for a new video card, there are just too many variables !! I can't really spend more than $150 so I need all the help I can get finding the best I can afford!
Thanks !
-
the 6600GT is an awsome deal right now it about 40dollars over your buget thou at around 190- 200, the difference between the clock speeds in the ati and nvidia cards is the architecture of the chips themself. Kinda like intel and amd ,amd has, on the most part a lower mhz rating , but are even in most cases, or close in performance at a lower clock speed.
if i remember correctly the 5800U are pretty hard to find ??? just looked at newegg, pricewatch and tigerdirect didnt see any at all . a 9600 pro XT can be had for 150 ish , 9800pro are 199ish , but the 6600gts are the same price as the 9800's and are somewhat faster GL <> 38
-
well finnaly ran aquamark 3 best score is 71878
64 3400+@ 222fsb
x800pro 540/506
-
Originally posted by MaddogJoe
In my case I have got to upgrade the video now. I have a 2.4 gig intel, with 1 gig of "cheap" ram and a Geforce 2 TI 64 meg card. I got a good 30 FPS in normal running at 800x600 at default settings on the video sliders. However with the bigger numbers and nicer terrains I'm running into stutters here and there, and there isn't much more I can turn down!
Unfortunately, I can't afford a "full" upgrade and go with the new PCI express stuff. I've been looking at Geforce 5800's and 5900's, and have a few questions.
Is it ...5800XT the cheap version,.... 5800 main stream...., and 5800 Ultra top end, as the designations go?
Tom's Hardware shows the Nvidia card 5800, 5900 running chip clock speeds from 400-500, and memory clock speed from 700-1000, ATI's 9800's run chip clock speed from 325-380, and memory clock speed from 580-700. Why are the ATI card suppose to be so good with their numbers so much lower? (One of the reasons I still lean towards Nvida cards)
Does anyone of yas have a comparable system to mine with one of the newer cards, and how does it perform?
I hate shopping for a new video card, there are just too many variables !! I can't really spend more than $150 so I need all the help I can get finding the best I can afford!
Thanks !
I have a 2.3 Ghz AthlonXP with 1GB of RAM and a FX 5900XT. It really depends on the map as to frame rates. The Ozkansas map really drops my fps but I'm doing pretty good on the other ones. When I say it drops my fps, I mean down in the mid 20s on the ground at a base or in a really heavy furball. But its always playable. I like having eyecandy too. If I turned some of that down, I'd get much better frame rates in the extreme conditions. But since thats the only time I really get low fps I dont worry about it much.
The FX 5900 Ultra is the hottest card of the 5xxx series, but for what it costs you might as well buy a 6800. I bought my 5900XT for right around 150 bucks when the 6800s first came out. Prices have gone back up a bit since but you can still find deals if you look hard enough. If you really want a good midrange card that wont break the bank, you can try that one or the ATI 9600 series cards. I prefer Nvidia myself, but dont close yourself off if money is your biggest factor.
-
Do you have the FX that has the hoover-like hairdryer stuck to its side?
How can you live with the noise?
Uhh.. I ran aquamark3 on my laptop.. 28900 points.