Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: Swoop on May 20, 2000, 06:20:00 PM
-
Ok, here's where my knowledge falls down.....I'm building a new system (why? Why not?)......
AMD Athalon 750mhz
128Mb SD-RAM
13Gb HDD
48x CD-ROM
SB Platinum
blah, blah, blah.
Now my question is.......what do I put in there for a graphics card?
I keep hearing all about TNT and Voodoo and Christ knows what else.....what's the difference? What's the best?
Someone name a card for me.....
Swoop
-
It depends on how much you want to spend. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) If you want performance at all costs, wait a couple weeks (they just came out) and get a card based on the new GeForce 2 chip. There are a couple of them out now, but the cost will start at $350 US. Since the GeForce 2 chip just came out, look for prices on the GeForce (1) cards to drop in the next couple weeks. If you get one of these, try to get one with DDR Ram. With your system SDR ram will really cause a performance hit at higher resolutions. Another very good card (I use one myself) is the TNT2 Ultra based Viper 770 ultra. Creative also makes cards based on this chip. It performs very well and only costs around $140 US. I personally wouldn't recommend a Voodoo card at this time, because you can't do 32 bit color. Trust me, this game looks much better at 32 bit. (I should mention that I know nothing about the new Voodoo 5 cards, so I can't give you any advice about them. I do know they can do 32bit however.)
Another factor in choosing a video card is do you plan on playing other graphics intensive games like Quake? If so, the GeForce will perform better than the TNT2 Ultra cards by a noticable difference. If you only plan on playing AH, I don't think you will notice hardly any difference at all until you get into really high resolutions. From reading posts in the hardware and software forum for quite some time now, I can tell you my computer with a V770 Ultra performs at least as well as computers using GeForce cards for AH. My 466 Celeron system with 128 MB ram easily maxes out at my monitors refresh rate of 72Hz in all but the biggest furballs. I've never seen a frame rate of less than 35 fps, and this was with 12 b17s escorted by 5 p38s and p51s while being attacked by 109s and 190s. (If you are interested in the technical details, the clock speed of the TNT2 Ultra is 150 Mhz, and can be overclocked to 175 MHz. The GeForce card runs at only 120 Mhz. This means that until you push the resolution way up to a level that puts a little stress on the chip, the TNT2 may actually outperform the GeForce! If you are like me and play at 800x600 32bit, this puts little strain at all on your video card, so consequently I get better FPS than many people who use GeForce cards.) GeForce 2 runs at speeds starting at 150 Mhz, so obviously it will outperform the TNT2 Ultra even at the lower resolutions.
One other thing I should tell you. Certain Athlon MBs have big problems using GeForce cards. If your motherboard has a chipset made by VIA, you will likely be OK. If the chipset is made by AMD you will be limited to AGP 1x, and performance will be worse than even the TNT2 cards. Another thing, the GeForce chip uses 18W of power, so you better have a 300W power supply in your computer if you plan on using this card. (GeForce 2 has corrected this issue, but it's still not a bad idea to have a 300W supply.)
Please post back if you have any questions. I hope I helped you a little. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS
-
Hold off awhile. While you can't really go wrong with anything from a V3 3000 or better, the big fight ahead is between the GeForce 2 and the V5 5500. Both are currently suffering from immature drivers - in particular, the V5 drivers have made big improvements lately. Currently the G2 benchmarks better.
That said, I expect the V5 to show a marked improvement when they release fully multithreaded W2000 drivers when used with a SMP machine.
If you must buy now, buy a cheap card with the intention of buying a G2 or V5 in 3-6 months.
-
I agree completely, wait a little while and prices on cards will drop like a rock now that GeForce finally has a somewhat competitive card to go against it. If you really need that computer now, I wouldn't buy a voodoo (can't do 32 bit). I'd probably go for a TNT2 Ultra card. Those are actually very fast still, and I seriously doubt you'd be unhappy with it. The drivers are also very mature and have many versions available in the case that you have problems. GeForce2 drivers are still very new, and perform no better for DX than the GeForce 1.
------------------
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS
-
Someone told me the Soundblaster annialator makes the TNT2 look silly......
that true?
Swoop
-
Ok, I just found out that SB Annihilator 2 used Geforce 2 chipset so disregard previous question.
Another question: AMD Athalon chips use 3D-now and all that toejame.......Athalon chips will be trying to take over some of the functions of the Geforce card.
Will that cause crashes?
Swoop
-
Swoop, from what I've heard the problems with Athlon systems don't directly involve the processor at all. The problem lies with the chipset on the motherboard. AMD's Irongate 750 chipset has a problem with GeForce cards. GeForce has a feature called "FastWrites" which involves reading and writing data to RAM on the same clock pulse. The AMD chipset will not allow this. AMD has yet to correct this problem. (It's been nearly a year now.) The only way to get a GeForce card to work on a MB using the 750 chipset is to run the card at AGP 1x. This really limits the performance of the card.
------------------
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS
-
Ta very much Bloom, very informative.
Swoop
-
I'll describe my system:
Athlon 700
MB Soltek SL77Kv (Kx133)
128 PC133 running at 133
GeForce DDR (Creative Anihilator Pro) Detonator 5.16 drivers.
1 - 1024 16bpp Fw190 frontal view: 63 fps once in flight.
2 - 32 bpp, no visual difference at all with 16bpp, but performance drops a lot.
Conclusion: Creative GeForce DDR is actually slower than V2 SLI (75 fps), a product of a good marketing but technically is a poor and terribly buggy card, as any card using nvidia chipsets (except some TNT2 models). If I were you, I probably would go for 3Dfx products.
-
Mandoble, some people have been posting that they got a huge increase in performance using the new 5.22 drivers. Give it a try. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
(Your MB uses a VIA chipset, that particular one hasn't been performing well for AGP cards. You might check for AGP driver updates for it as well.)
------------------
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS
-
Im no techno guy but, my c466 with the v770(non-ultra)TNT2 (for 100 bucks) works very well while I wait for these new cards. I get around 50fps most of the time. Only time it drops is squad night, or some event when 15 or so B17's are parked on the tarmac. Once airborn it pretty much jumps back up.
[This message has been edited by Camel (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
I have a system just about like yours Camel. 466 Celeron with V770 Ultra card. I'll get 60 - 70 fps unless, like you say, there are 15 b17s with escort all together.
Unless AH suddenly dramatically increases the system requirements, I can't see how anyone would need anything better if you only play AH.
------------------
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS
-
Hiya Bloom!
Yeah from everything I read back when I bought the card, nothing really compared. Voodoo didnt do the 32 bit thing, and from what I understood at the time the picture quality wasnt as good.
Hey, you thinking of Overclocking that 466? Ive been wanting to try for awhile now but... never having done anything like that, I guess im just scared (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) 525 would be nice, 581 would be even better (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Hey any good reasons you think I shouldnt, let me know!
Maybe I should add my system specs
Win 98se
Abit Bm6
c466
64 pc100
v770
mx300
[This message has been edited by Camel (edited 05-23-2000).]
-
Originally posted by bloom25:
... 5.22 drivers. Give it a try.
Simply impressive...
1600x1200 16bpp 60 fps all the time (vsync ON).
Thanks Bloom!
-
I been building a new system also, infact I have the same concerns so every day after work I sit down and read through all the bench tests and actual game scenarios.
Heres what I have found right up to the last second of ordering my new card.
The GTS is a little faster at low res in Quake, however at 800x600 and above it runs side by side with the VooDoo 5500 and the VooDoo looks better especialy in games where you can actualy notice what is happening around you.
Don't take my word for it here is a link with the newest review of booth cards with their newest drivers and they sum it up without bias.
from www.gamefan.com (http://www.gamefan.com) on 5/24/00
Which card is for you? Well, I think it's pretty clear that those hard-core Quakers who want the ultimate in frame-rate will find their destiny in a GeForce 2 GTS; people who spend all day deathmatching competitively usually aren't the types to stop and say, "Wow, this map is pretty." In fact, many of them turn textures off completely, focusing on the pure, uninterrupted fury of Quake-style deathmatches for their stimuli. These people--if you can equate them as people--will settle for nothing other than the pure speed king of Quake, and that title belongs to the GTS.
The rest of us gamers don't have such a clear choice, however. Those looking for the ultimate in image quality will probably want a Voodoo 5 5500; its 4x FSAA has no competition. NVIDIA's FSAA comes close to the Voodoo 5's 2x FSAA, but in my opinion, the Voodoo 5 still wins. The GTS is limited in that regard, as well; it has some problems in performance and with D3D FSAA, and the Voodoo 5 does not. I have no doubt that NVIDIA will improve performance and compatibility with future drivers; it's never been content to be second best. Right now, however, the Voodoo 5 wins the FSAA war. The addition of T & L and per-pixel shading in future games may totter quality comparisons in the months to come, but for right now, 3dfx edges ahead.
There's no real fight here for me anyway, 3dfx has T-Buffer effects that are not used YET at all due to their infancy but Nvidia has T&L that even after a year and change hasn't been swamped with titles either infact Nvidia will show you the 6 titles total being worked on due out whenever and none that need my attention.
I realized awhile ago I don't buy box games but once or twice a year if that and it boils down to this
Nvidia is a few frames faster with the current driver release (you know 110fps to 107 fps is pointless), this has been cut from initial bench tests a great deal and the cards run neck in neck at medium to high res.
The VooDoo does look better not only in realistic smoothed out textures but the image color looks more vibrant and everything has more depth, the T&L games due out for GTS look like the same old jagged cut out looking games only with gell lights shinning on them.
You die hard fans of Nvidia can say I told you so when the first T&L supported online war sim comes out however my new VooDoo5 5500 renders ALL games with FSAA and the fact that it plugs into the power source dirrectly helps free up my system right outa the box, the smaller NV15 has less power demands but none is still better than less.
I keep hearing FSAA don't matter fron GTS supporters because theirs isn't as good but I think its just the ticket for Aces High and unlike GTS it will work with all games right now, oh and its a fifty dollar price margin at its closest point some of the GTS cards are over four hundred bucks.
just my opinions if you disagree oh well.
-
Pappy, from what I hear both cards are performing very well. Drivers for both are still too new to get a really good idea as to which is really faster though IMO.
As for FSAA, it is an awesome feature that creates stunning 3-D images. The problem that I can see is the associated performance hit when using it. A 2x FSAA pass at 800 x 600 would require the video card rendering a 1600 x 1200 image. At 4x you would need to do 3200 x 2400. I doubt any video card currently available can do 4x FSAA at 800 x 600 and still have a playable framerate for graphics intensive games.
If I had to choose between the GeForce 2 and Voodoo 5 I think my decision would be largely based on price and quality. It's also good too see some competition for Nvidia again, as this should lower video card prices.
------------------
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS
-
Camel, I have an AL440LX motherboard. It can't go faster than 66 Mhz FSB, so I can't overclock my 466 the conventional way. (There is a program called SoftFSB which works via software, but I have yet to try it.)
Since you have 100 MHz RAM I don't see any reason why you couldn't. I guess the question I have for you is do you need to risk burning out your Celeron to get a couple FPS more. Your system may also become less stable if you go too high. I suppose if you have a good cooling setup and recent backups in case anything goes wrong, you could try going to 72 Mhz FSB. If that is stable, maybe try one more notch faster. I personally am pretty happy with my computer right now, so I'm not going to risk messing it up. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Mandoble - Glad to hear it helped! Try 32bit color, I doubt you will lose many fps (if any). Trust me, this game looks a lot better at 32 bit.
------------------
bloom25
THUNDERBIRDS
-
If I had to choose between the GeForce 2 and Voodoo 5 I think my decision would be largely based on price and quality. It's also good too see some competition for Nvidia again, as this should lower video card prices.
Hold that thought I just cancled my order for the 5500 as I just became aware of the press release that 3dfx has delayed shipping 2 weeks due to some bug issue.
Although they did credit my account and cancel my order even though their policy says they don't, I am compelled to now end my relationship with 3dfx and move on to other graphics card makers.
To me service is important but so is longevity and performance and with this new delay and a now june 6th release, unless its delayed further of course, I just can't justify taking up for them any longer nor will I ever buy another card from 3dfx.
This delay will cripple their status enough for them to falter with further developement, or remain a company that will be there for the long haul to back up their cards, drivers are everything nowadays.
I may not jump right on the GTS but I will string my old card out a bit longer as of now until I see what pops up this summer or I may grab one of the many low buck cards out there to tide me over.
Good bye 3dfx and your slow moving competition because if this doesn't kill you then I guess the NV20 will and I for one ain't getting stuck with a 300 dollar no support havin card.
-
hi,
both the geForce 2 and V5 should be great. Thresh at FiringSquad just completed
H2H benches with the latest drivers.
In OpenGL, which WB3 apparently uses,
the nod goes to the geF. But it is only a small advantage.
In D3D, the V5 has a commanding lead in image quality. My order for the V5 stands,
guess i have a bit more patience than Pappy.
There are some screenshots at simhq.com, especially GPL at 1024x768 4xFSAA which will give you an idea of what the V5 should be like. The V5 is sophisticated enough that it treats each frame differently, making screenshots a bit unrepresentative. Btw, Pappy's criticism that complained about a shortened product life applies to both cards.
The thing that makes me wonder is this: both are slow in games that make massive use of 32 bit color; but flight sims tend to be quite limited in color. Since this reflects RL experience, i am not sure how much this limitation will affect flight sim guys.
Anyway, i have been to way too many 3d websites; both are fine cards. The geF2
screenshots are sweet. But my dime is on the V5. I am more than a bit tempted to wait and get the V5 6000. It, and the 64 meg geF2, should show up in July, my guess is that the geF2 will be under 500 somewhere, while 600
will be a hundred more at about $550.
-
Bloom25, the G2 and V5 use two different ways of doing FSAA: one is by creating a higher resolution image and scaling down, which is what the G2 does; the other is to create multiple images and average out, which is what the V5 does.