Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: Denholm on June 12, 2007, 12:09:41 PM
-
I'm going to be buying a new video card within the next 2 weeks. I wanted an NVidia, yet I don't know what's good for my money. I wanted something within the $100 price range. Preferably around $50 or $60, yet still within the $100 price range.
Any ideas?
-
AGP or PCIe?
-
PCI, forgot to mention it, Nemeth suggested this one, and I'm planning on getting it.
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1010678&CatId=697
It may seem "Low End", and it probably is, yet it's the best I can get right now for the price and my motherboard specs.
-
Are you sure it's PCI and not PCIe? Older motherboards often have AGP, which gives you a lot more options.
If you're sure it's regular old PCI then you pretty much have the best you can get. There's also a Ge6200 in PCI if you can find it. Not sure how much more it might cost (can't imagine too much more than the FX5600)
-
Not too sure about ATI cards but isnt the x1600 the best ATI card right now? If so the x1550 is for sale at $100 at tigerdirect. There is also a Nvidia 6200 card under $100 at newegg.com.
-
The off-number ATI cards are budget cards.
The x1600 is a very small step forward from the x800 (some x800s are better than some x1600s) anything between 800 and 1600 skip. [EDIT: not counting the x850, that may or may not be an improvement on the x800] The next best one (best ATI card today) is the x1950, I believe. That does not come in PCI, but I heard they were going to make it in AGP.
-
This article comes out every month and is updates.
Best Video cards for the money. Breaks cards down in price ranges and offers which ones perform the best.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/06/11/the_best_gaming_video_cards_for_the_money/
-
Best PCIe Card For Under $100:
GeForce 7300 GT DDR2
Codename: G73
Process: 90nm
Pixel Shaders: 8
Vertex Shaders: 4
Texture Units: 8
ROPs: 8
Memory Bus: 128-bit
Core Speed MHz: 400
Memory Speed MHz: 400 (800 effective)
With the price of the X1650 XT and 7600 GT touching the $100 price point, the 7600 GS is too expensive to be recommended anymore. Instead, the 7300 GT is a low-price alternative for those who want to do as much gaming as they can for as little money as possible. Priced as low as $60, the 7300 GT is a good fit for that job.
-
I'm sorry, I changed my mind from PCI to AGP, so here's what I'm planning on getting. Thank you all for the input.
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/searchtools/item-Details.asp?EdpNo=588461&sku=P450-8503
-
I would HIGHLY NOT RECOMMEND that video card. The low end 5xxx series Nvidia cards were horrible. Worse than the 4xxx series in a lot of respects.
Best AGP Card For Under $100
Radeon X1650 PRO (GDDR2)
Codename: R530
Process: 80 and 90nm
Pixel Shaders: 12
Vertex Shaders: 5
Texture Units: 4
ROPs: 4
Memory Bus: 128-bit
Core Speed MHz: 500
Memory Speed MHz: 400 (800 effective)
The X1650PRO with GDDR2 is actually more of an X1600 PRO. Having said that, it's a fast card for the sub-$100 price point in AGP; I've seen them go for $85 on Newegg. This bottom end card will even do a decent job in tough games like Oblivion.
-
When I asked you didn't say you had AGP!
You REALLY don't want that card. Trust me. If it's so cheap-arse it doesn't have a FAN, you're going to suffer in any game you try to run off of it. It's so stripped down and underpowered that it doesn't produce enough heat to require a fan unit, just a passive heatsink.
That's a no-no for choosing a card!
Further, while in PCI it's one of the highest available numbers of GeForce available, that doesn't negate the fact that the Ge5000 series is widely regarded as one of the worst decisions ever. Terrible cards.
[EDIT: ***I only looked for NVIDIA cards because that's what you've listed so far, made me think you were only looking for them!***]
Okay, in your original post you said under $100. Lower if you can but under $100.
Well, for $96 you can get this AGP Ge7600GS (about 1 million times better than a FX5600)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127219
For about $77 you can get this Ge6800XT (still miles ahead of the FX5600)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814136008
Or if you really don't have that money to spend, here's a Ge6800XE (budget card I'm guessing, still better than a 5000-series card) for about $60
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814141060
Here's the link to the search I pulled on newegg.com (http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010380048+1069609639+1305520548+1295318922&Subcategory=48&description=&Ntk=&srchInDesc=)
The Ge7300s are stripped down budget cards for the 7000 series, but they have 7000 series cores, which are better at everything (even stripped down) than the 5000 series cards. However, if a 7600GS is available for the same price as a 7300, ignore the 7300.
Basically, 5000 series is for when you have no other options. You have other options so don't consider it.
EDIT: P.S. Fulmar beat me to it, posted while I was typing :aok
-
I've always been an nvidia fan, and I remember my friend getting that 5200 when it first came out. An upgrade from a Radeon 7500. It was better than his POS 7500, but that card was such a poor performer to what ATI had in that price range.
-
Newegg has a selection of 7600GS cards for < $100. There is little to compare to this, and frankly, spending less on most of the low-end cards recommended will get you wildly lower performance, while the 7600GS will rip through anything you throw at it with whatever features you desire.
The Radeon X1650 is in the same league, I think, but at slightly higher cost for a similar unit. However, the last scenario hinted that the Radeons may have somewhat longer visibility through haze.
I would not recommend spending less. I'm not kidding that performance drops off radically below these models, and the length of time that the cards will satisfactorilly play new games shrinks to months instead of years. Basically, never touch a truly low-end card if you play games - last years midrange are typically faster.
-
I would highly advise of saving up a little bit and get a Nvidia 7600. I myself have a PNY 7600GS AGP 512MB for $150. I got it at compusa but believe its cheaper now at tigerdirect.com and newegg.com.
-
You also have to consider, if u want to save up for a more $$$ card. you have to check if your PSU can handle the card.
No sense dropping $150 on a new card and then having your computer shut down when you're playing games because it does not have enough power for the card.
-
Yep -- check the power requirements if it's listed. Newegg.com usually lists it.
I run nVidia cards (6800 GS and 7950 GT) with 350 W power supplies in my Dell just fine. However, when I was shopping for a new card and checked the Radeon x1950 pro, it said it needed a much larger power supply, and the user comments talked about it needed something more than a skimpy power supply. I ended up picking the 7950 GT as much for that reason as performance reasons.
I've been very happy with my current nVidia 7950 GT and my previous nVidia 6800 GS. However, I have also previously been happy with Radeon's as well (had a Radeon 9600 Pro before that and several other 7xxx and 9xxx Radeons).
Basically, I go with best performance/price unless there is a mitigating factor (like power-supply requirements).
As for range of nVidia cards in the game, I'm running an nVidia card, and I seemed to see dots at the usual range, so whatever weirdness people were having, I'm not sure I'd attribute it to nVidia.
For nVidia cards, I've had very good luck with BFG and XFX brands, and bad luck with eVGA brand. For Radeon cards, I've had good luck with Sapphire and some other brands I don't remember.
-
Fulmar, even my 7600GTS doesn't require more than a 350W PSU. The 7600 line doesn't even require an extra power plug. They draw juice from the AGP/PCIe slot. He should be set on power for this particular card.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Fulmar, even my 7600GTS doesn't require more than a 350W PSU. The 7600 line doesn't even require an extra power plug. They draw juice from the AGP/PCIe slot. He should be set on power for this particular card.
I assumed that if he's in the market for a FX5200, it has to be a pretty low end computer, like 250W PSU
My old card before I built my new rig was a 5900XT (AGP). This required an extra molex connector. However, I doubt the 5200, the base base base model of the 5xxx series requires one.
-
Okay, I understand the majority of what you guys are saying, what is preventing me from trying to buy one of these cards is what my friend told me about my system. I have a low-end motherboard along with a small amount of memory, perhaps you guys can tell me if my system can support one of these cards that you are telling me is better than my decision:
66 MHZ Motherboard
1.33 GHZ AMD Athlon XP Processor
128 kilobyte primary memory cache
256 kilobyte secondary memory cache
1024 MB Installed DDR Memory
EDIT: Forgot voltage, It says it's got a capacity of 350W max.
-
You should be able to run this. The thing is: If you upgrade in the future you can take the card with to the upgrade.
Do you know the brand and model # of the motherboard?
For example: "ASUS P5P800," or "ASrock Dual775-Vista," or whatever?
-
Here it is:
Board: ECS K7S5A 1.0
Bus Clock: 66 megahertz
BIOS: American Megatrends Inc. 07.00T 04/02/01
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Fulmar, even my 7600GTS doesn't require more than a 350W PSU. The 7600 line doesn't even require an extra power plug. They draw juice from the AGP/PCIe slot. He should be set on power for this particular card.
Incorrect. The 7600GS does need an additional power connection. The 5200 and 6200 do not.
That being said, I highly recommend the 7600, after using both a 5200, and 6200. I picked up my 7600GS 256MB from Newegg for $109 (not including the $15 rebate), and am very pleased with it.
-
Originally posted by hubsonfire
Incorrect. The 7600GS does need an additional power connection. The 5200 and 6200 do not.
I know mine doesn't, so I did a quick check on the pictures on newegg... We're both right!
AGP requires a 4-pin molex plug. PCIe draws directly from the PCI-Express slot.
-
Originally posted by Denholm
Okay, I understand the majority of what you guys are saying, what is preventing me from trying to buy one of these cards is what my friend told me about my system. I have a low-end motherboard along with a small amount of memory, perhaps you guys can tell me if my system can support one of these cards that you are telling me is better than my decision:
Board: ECS K7S5A 1.0
66 MHZ Motherboard
1.33 GHZ AMD Athlon XP Processor
128 kilobyte primary memory cache
256 kilobyte secondary memory cache
1024 MB Installed DDR Memory
EDIT: Forgot voltage, It says it's got a capacity of 350W max.
put a ati/powercolour 9550 256 card or 9600 /9800 with it .... thats about the best bang for buck your gonna get off that system .
I wouldnt waste $$$ on a higher card then that unless you planning to upgrade to a better agp mainboard . the reason is because thats a 4x agp mainboard . and going with a newer faster card will be bottlenecked by the MB/cpu combo.
you'll see a decient improvement w/ the 9550 card ... (80 bucks)
what ever you do "dont" put a 5200/9200/6200 in it as for its a waste of money and those cards are junk IMRO.
I have that some board /cpu with a 9550 that i passed down to my son ... it plays ah2 nicely ... not totally maxed out .. but distance is maxed and performance slider is above 1/2 ... avg 30 fps in the hugh furballs , 80fps in clear skys on a 85hz refresh rate .
Note: your powersupply may be too weak for a 9600 pro or better card ... unless its a really good one ...
Your really over due for a whole new system as for that Ecs board should be getting close to the end of its life .
-
K7S5A
Processor Support Socket A
currently 550 MHz - 1.4+ GHz
Compatible with AMD Duron/Thunderbird series
200 - 266 MHz Processor Bus Compatible
Chipset SIS 735S DDR Single Chip Controller
Bus Speeds 100 - 166 MHz in 33 MHz Increments
(200 - 333 MHz effective rate)
112 / 124 MHz Non-Spec Supported
System Memory 2x 184-pin DDR SDRAM PC-1600/2100
2x 168-pin SDRAM PC-100/133
1.0 GB Maximum Memory
Expansion Slots 1x AGP v2.0 4x
5x PCI v2.2
1x AMR
IDE Support Ultra DMA/100 SIS Dedicated EIDE Controller
Maximum 2 Channels, 4 Drives Supported
Sound Support AC '97 Compliant 3D Audio Codec
Microsoft Windows WHQL Compliant
Integrated I/O 2x USB v1.1 Standard, Support for 2 More Via Header
1x Parallel, ECP and EPP supported
2x Serial, max 115,200bps FIFO
2x PS/2 Keyboard + Mouse
Game/Midi/Audio Riser Connectors
10/100 Mbps LAN Controller (Optional)
BIOS 2 MB AMI BIOS (Full ACPI, DMI, PnP, Virus Protect)
PC Monitoring CPU / Motherboard Temperatures
CPU / System Fan Speeds
Multiple Voltage Levels
I recognize this board as a couple of my friends used it a few years back. They all went dead within a year. ECS has always made crap boards and they've pretty much stuck with building OEM boards for companies like eMachines etc.
The computer you're looking to upgrade is pretty old. As in 5 years, give or take. Sticking $100+ in a new video card isn't going to make a big fart of a difference.
SAVE YOU MONEY - BUY A NEW COMPUTER
-
Thanks guys for the replies. Yes, I know it's an old system, and I am looking at buying a new Motherboard and Processor. Just right now I'm not ready to do that and sitting here playing games such as FS2004 at 4 FPS, even 3 frames higher would be a leap of joy for me. That's why I sit here marveling at some of you players thinking it stinks to be playing at 60 FPS when you used to play at 340 FPS. That's something I can't do right now and I am trying to change it.
However at the time being I have to do with what I have and am planning on doing that as you see. Roscoroo, I am going to look into that video card you mentioned, yet if too pricey I might just go with what I mentioned. I know it's "junk" to you guys, yet coming from a player who uses an NVidia GeFore MX 400, it's an improvement.
Thank you all for the replies.
EDIT: I found the video card for a cheaper price at other stores (ATI Radeon 9550), yet I will use this link as the main source to this conversation:
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1723243&CatId=935#detailspecs
I could however not find details mentioning the "Fill Rate Per Second" or "Vertices per second". I would like to comapare them alongside the GeForece FX 5200. I already performed a Google search on the ATI card yet I found nothing mentioning any of the things I spoke of.
Roscoroo, you seem to have bought the Video Card, do you perhaps have the specifications I am looking for?
-
If you bought that FX5200, you wouldn't see much of a performance boost, at all. That card is the MX400 of the 5xxx series.
The difference between 60fps and 340fps is so small its not even funny. The human eye cannot possibly catch all 340fps. If I turned Vsync off I can get 250fps+ at my max res of 1600x1050 with 4x AA and AF. I do not notice a difference in performance (visually) when I turn vsync on and limit my fps to 60fps. I leave vsync on because of 'tearing' that occurs when it is off.
-
Yes, I knew that, since regular life passes you by at about 20 - 30 FPS, yet I was just mentioning my situation that I would greatly appreciate a slight increase in video performance and how it bothers me that others complain about a slight drop in performance when their frame rate is still sky high.
-
Much to the myth that the human eye can only detect 30 fps is pretty false. Its higher than this. Most people believe its 30fps because thats what your television runs at roughly (I believe this is how the myth got started). Howeverm you'll see a difference in 30 fps watching a tv program and 30 fps on your computer game. Why? TV video and movies have motion blur built it to each fame to allow a smoother playback. Your video game does not (well most do not, I think games like Need for speed and other may). So 30 FPS on your computer game will look choppier than 30 fps on your TV.
-
True, yet I heard the 30 FPS motion, not guessed it. (Blames the person sitting next to him)
I'll go with the ATI Radeon 9550 AGP. Thanks A LOT for the help!:D
-
I think its a good choice for your budget and system. Tell us how it turns out.
-
Diamond S120 Radeon 9550 / 256MB DDR / AGP 8x / DVI / VGA / TV Out / Video Card
looks the same as my powercolour.
now the secret of this card ... its really a 9600pro thats declocked .
at its stock preset clocking it works fine though .. (thats were mine is set )
i have used the omega rad clocker in the 4.12 drivers and clocked it to the 333ram by 400 gpu speeds and didnt notice enough difference to warrent leaving it clocked at those settings . it slowed alittle in farcry and generals zero hour at the stock clocking ..but there wasnt any noticiable gain in Aces high at the 9600 clocking . so i returned it to stock for longer life.
now i doubt you will be able to max out Aces high ... but this should give you decient fps and graphics until you step up into a faster machine . the whole reason why i suggested that card ... if you go up to say a 7600 7800 your gonna end up adding a power supply and not gaining what you should due to the 4x MB /cpu speed .
note: use the 4.12 drivers with it or you get black dar dots in AH .
-
Thanks for the tips, I'll let you guys know how it turns out. Not really aiming for maxing out the graphics in AH, just want something that runs faster and can possibly allow me to play with some higher frame rates in FS2004. I know it's still a low-end card, yet I might get back into LO-MAC, I did it with my other card, yet after 30 minutes of game-play, I got the blue screen of death.
Obviously because the game spilled off of the video RAM onto the system RAM. It was crazy, but fun.:D
-
Man after reading all of the techno stuff all day today that you guys put out :confused: and I've been a systems admin guy since 1980. I've bought the following today (since my crt went down in flames last night).
Samsung 931C and a XFX GF7600GT 256MB DDR3 card. It's going into a DELL( be nice now!) Demension 8200(P4 2Ghz 1GB mem. I'd like (and HOPE) that it's better than my HP 6400 laptop that I've been using for the last month. Went with the monitor instead of wide screen based on a couple of opinions that I've read in here.
Thanks ahead of time to those that take your valuable time to post and help others.:aok
-
I am 100% sure it's better than your laptop. Most laptop cards are barely able to run Aces High. Even the "high end" are stripped down because you need to 1) conserve power and 2) limit heat in laptops, and most power vid cards require the opposite.
7600GT is a good card. It will treat you well.
-
In addition to Krusty's post, laptop processors are not as fast as their desktop counterparts. They may clock the same GHz but are again under the conserve power prinicipal and benchmark with lower marks. Hard drives as well, generally are slower RPMs (conserve power) and slower access times.
-
Well, now I have some bad news. I could not buy what I wanted to (Was intended to go onto my Birthday wish list) because my family decided to buy me a $50 gift card to Best Buy. So, my question would be at this point. What type of a graphics card could I buy at Best Buy that would still offer extremely good graphics for my system specs. At this point I don't mind spending $100.
-
If you're set on a new vid card, instead of saving for a new PC, go Ge 7600GS or ATI X1650. Both in the mid-upper $90s in AGP form.
Don't go Ge 7300 or X1550, those "in between" numbers, even if close numerically, are total crap compared to the full blown cards.
-
Alright, I'll go for the GE 7600GS. I'm partial to NVidia.:D
-
Here is the cheapest GE 7600GS I found at Best Buy (Since I'm going to use my gift card)
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8355978&type=product&productCategoryId=pcmcat107700050041&id=1177112455542
Price is fine, however, I was looking at the Requirements for the video card and it mentioned I needed:
Microsoft Windows XP (Have a Windows 2000); 256MB RAM (No Issue Here); 35MB hard drive space (No Issue Here); AGP-compliant motherboard (Have it) with available AGP 2.0 slot (Don't know if it's an AGP 2.0 slot); 350W AGP-compliant power supply (Have a MAX 350 W Power Supply, yet I do not know if it is AGP-compliant.)
Any idea of how I can find out if I do in fact have an AGP 2.0 slot and if my 350 W max power supply is AGP compliant?
-
Look at your AGP slot. Does it have 2 breaks in the plug, or just 1?
AGP 2.0 = AGP 4x.
3.0 = AGP 8x.
Briefly skim this short page:
http://www.directron.com/15agpguide.html
If the slot has room for 2 teeth on the card, it is only AGP 2x. If it has room for 3 teetch on the card, you're set!
-
I'd say one break, yet I'm not too sure, here's a picture of my Motherboard:
(http://www.aardvarkltd.co.uk/graphic/k7s5a-labelled.jpg)
Found that image online, digit 9 leads to the AGP slot.
-
Well, IF you have a K7S5A ECS board (name pulled from the image you linked) then this page (http://www.ocworkbench.com/hardware/elite/k7s5a/k7s5ap2.htm) says you have a 4x AGP port (which is AGP 2.0). You should be good, I think.
-
Yes, that is my motherboard. Just my concern is that it mentioned nothing about being compatible with Windows 2000.
-
I don't see why it wouldn't. If it runs XP it'll run 2000.
-
Sorry, but you need a more up to date compter, VC want help much, waste of $100. 4x will run a 8X card but at 4x speed, you gain nothing.
-
Originally posted by Denholm
Yes, that is my motherboard. Just my concern is that it mentioned nothing about being compatible with Windows 2000.
I have the same board ecs k7s5a ,1.3 morgan cpu , 512 ram , a power colour 9550 265 card , and win 2000 on it .
it plays AH just fine at medium settings 1024x768 @ 85 hz ,512 textures .
My Son has been using it for over 3 yrs now . and I played in the MA with it last about a year ago ... we play lan AH all the time though .
-
Roscoroo, I play AH fine, my concern is about the video card working with my computer, not AH working on it. And jtdragon, I'm considering you didn't read the entirety of this post. It's a step up from an NVidia MX GE-Force 400.
EDIT: Krusty, I'd take your word, yet a previous Saitek Joystick I had was compatible with Windows 95, 98, and XP. However it did NOT work on my 2000 leading me to believe that there is something different in the roots of this operating system which means if a device is compatible with 95, 98, XP, or Vista, It won't work with 2000 unless specified so.
-
that card may work fine with your pc ... I never tryed a 7600 in that combo so I cant comment yea or naa .
now about w2k ... some of the older hardware needs different drivers for it such as my printer , i didnt have any problem finding after market drivers though .
which saitek are you trying to run in w2k ??? I know the st290's and the x45 works in it . also the logijunks , ch's , TM's,MS, madcatz all work .
I havent tryed the x52 or the other new saitek .
you could have a dead usb port too ... that happened to bolth of my ecs boards and i had to add the remote usb to get a working usb port.
-
It was an OLD Saitek, perhaps 4 years old. My new X52 which mentioned on the box that it is compatible with Win 2K works fine with my comp though.
Also, the other Saitek I was mentioning had a "game port" and a "USB" connection option. Neither worked.
-
I'll go ahead and buy it in person at a BestBuy. If it doesn't work, I at least know I can take it back for a 100% refund.
-
News Update. I just installed the 7600 GS from NVidia. Running smooth, no problems. Yes, it's the AGP.
Thanks Krusty for the suggestion. I'll let you guys know if I run into any bumps in the next few weeks.