|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| About a Video Card... [message #6925] |
Sun, 16 March 2003 13:49   |
 |
JiggakoZz
Messages: 63
Registered: March 2003
Location: Eastern US
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| kawolsky |
HEY JIGG, IF YOU SPEAK LIKE YOU SPELL ON YOUR DESKTOP... WELL YOU MUST BE TOTALLY "THICK."
|
Kaw I dont know wtf you're talking about...
Anyway, I think I'm going to go with the Radeon 7500 but, what's the difference between PCI and AGP?
Thanks
"Sex is like math,
Add the bed,
Subtract the clothes,
Divide the legs,
And pray you don't
Multiply."
http://www.ebaumsworld.com
^--go there
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| About a Video Card... [message #6963] |
Sun, 16 March 2003 16:20 |
 |
General Havoc
Messages: 1564
Registered: February 2003
Location: Birmingham, England, Unit...
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
I would highly reccommend the Albatron Geforce 4 Ti 4200 P Turbo, it is an excellent card for it's price and it uses the full Ti4600 PCB. I currently have one and it outperformed a Geforce 4 ti 4600 when it was overclocked. This card comes with 128 MB of DDR BGA memory clocked in at 550Mhz and a access time of 3.3 nano seconds. The GPU is default at a frequency of 250Mhz. Although this card was a slightly higher price than a standard ti 4200 it does make up for the extra cost with its custom all copper heatsink and ramsinks. I was able to get the memory overclocked to a staggering 701Mhz! As for the GPU i got that up to 302Mhz which is well above it's default settings. Taking results in 3Dmark 2001 SE there was over a 1100 difference from before and after overclocking. This card remains stable after oiverclocking and it runs new games such as C&C Generals perfectly at a high framerate. Also it came with some great software bundled in. I would reccomment this card to anyone looking for a Ti 4600 but doesn't hvae the cash to spend.
Check the review at http://www.guru3d.com/review/albatron/ti4200p-turbo/
_General Havoc
Visit my website at http://renhelp.laeubi-soft.de powered by laeubi.de
"SHUT UP AND MOD" - Dante
"ACK is the Simon Cowell of modding" - Ultron10
Scripts.dll Debugger, Map Scripter and Tutorial writer
Computer Science Bsc
Aston University in Birmingham, UK
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: About a Video Card... [message #7039] |
Sun, 16 March 2003 20:12 |
 |
Yano
Messages: 640
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Thats what I use and I would highly suggest that u get it, btw I got it at Fry's Electronics for $40, if you don't have a store near you try their website at outpost.com
|
|
|
|
| About a Video Card... [message #7063] |
Sun, 16 March 2003 23:08 |
Mono1TM6
Messages: 19
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
PCI slots process data at 33MHz AGP processes at 66MHz at 1x APG and there is a 2x 4x and 8x APG slot.
PCI slots work on 5volts
APG x2 works on 3.3 Volts
APG x4 works on 1.5 volts
APG x8 works on 0.8 volts
If you use an APG card find out what slot you have, you place an *x card in a 2x slot, you burn out the cartd, put a 2x card in an 8x slot, you kill your mother board or just your APG slot (if your lucky).
You want to pick a univercal card or have a univercal slot on your mother board.
Renegade Elite
|
|
|
|
|
|
| About a Video Card... [message #7380] |
Tue, 18 March 2003 08:03 |
Bearxor
Messages: 137
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
OMG, do not buy a Radeon 7500. That is like buying a bad GF2.
If you want to spend 80-100 dollars, your only real choice right now are a Radeon 9000 Pro, or a GF4MX:
Radeon 9000 Pro - Basically a Radeon 8500. You can find the 64MB version retail for 99.99,and the 128MB version for 129.99. Awesome Image quality, DirectX 8.1 compliant. This would probably last you a good couple of years.
Geforce 4MX - Basically a Geforce 2. An enhanced memory controller and higher clock speeds make it faster than the GF2. Not as fast as the 9000 Pro, however. Image quality is sub-par and it is only a DirectX 7 compliant card. The good thing about these is that they have been out for over a year and a half now, and are fairly cheap, in the 80-100 dollar retail range. I belive the majority are 64MB.
If you want to spend up to 200 dollars, your two choices are the GF4 ti4400 and the Radeon 9500 Pro:
Geforce 4 TI 4400 - Slightly slower than the 4600, but cheaper and falls into the 200 range. Most 4600's in retail stores are in the ups of 250-300. Good image quality, good frame rate, good overclocking ability. You could easily turn one of these into a 4600. Only available in 128MB, DirectX 8.1 compliant. Takes a HUGE hit when FSAA/AF are enabled.
Radeon 9500 Pro - On par speed-wise with a 4600, but simply blows it away when you enable FSAA/AF. Runs 220 retail for a 128MB version with a 20 mail in rebate, so 200 bucks. DirectX 9 compliant. AWESOME image quality.
I don't know how many time I have to say this, but you can not buy a video card based on frame rate alone. If you have never used FSAA/AF at runable speeds (and those of you that have GF2/GF4MX have not), then you have no idea. I reccomend to anyone that has a GF4MX to go out and buy a 9000 Pro, just to try it out... you can always return it. When I upraded my video card form a GF2 GTS to a ti4200, I was excited. Then someone convinced me to take my 4200 back and try out a 9000 Pro. While the 9000 Pro was slower than the 4200, the image quality knocked me back in my seat and prompted me to spend the extra 70 dollars to buy a 9500 Pro. Most of you have no idea how good renegade looks with 4X Anti-aliasing and 16X ansiotropic filtering at 40 frames per second. If i turn all that crap off, i get in the ups of over 100, but then it looks like shit.
Before you make a descision, just buy one and try it out for a couple of weeks. take it back and get something else. Find the compromise of image quality/speed that works for you.
EDIT: If 3DM2k1 scores work for you, here is a good breakdown on my machine.
My original GF2 GTS got around 3500. Remeber, a GF4MX is basically a GF2.
Then I got a ti4200. It scored around 7500-8000 points.
Then the Radeon 9000 Pro. It scored around 6500-7000
Then the Radeon 9500 pro. It scores 9000-9500.
I also get around 3500 in 3DM2K3.
This is on a Athlon T-bird 1.2 with 384MB of ram.
signatures suck
|
|
|
|
| About a Video Card... [message #7522] |
Tue, 18 March 2003 18:57 |
Imortal
Messages: 20
Registered: March 2003
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
bear, your computer has a CPU bottle neck if your only getting 9000 from 3dbench (im assuming your using madonions benchmark)...i have a 9700 and i get 18000 on the benchmark...i also have 64tap aa, and all that crap on, with curved terrain in renegade and at a 1280 x 1024 resolution and i get a 100fps constant. i get about 70fps in 50 player servers. i used to get crap benchmarks similar to yours, then i got a p4 2ghz CPU and it effectivly doubled my mark. try it. as for the best graphic card, go for the radeon 9700, 400 bucks but its faster than the upcoming Nvidea card (geforce fx).
-edit i saw that you have a 9500 not a 9700...my mistake
|
|
|
|
|
|
| About a Video Card... [message #7541] |
Tue, 18 March 2003 20:08 |
|
JiggakoZz
Messages: 63
Registered: March 2003
Location: Eastern US
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
And one last thing... I just bought a RAM chip from one of my friends. I opened up my computer and saw the 2 chip thingies already had other little chip thingies in them... So I was wondering, which one is better the one I have, or the new one?
His: 256MB, SDR, DIMM, H
32ZHS stk 4763487
Mine: 256MB, Synch, 133Mhz, CL3
Sorry I'm such a computer n00b but I'm learning... THanks
-KoZz
"Sex is like math,
Add the bed,
Subtract the clothes,
Divide the legs,
And pray you don't
Multiply."
http://www.ebaumsworld.com
^--go there
|
|
|
|
|
|
| About a Video Card... [message #7555] |
Tue, 18 March 2003 20:49 |
Bearxor
Messages: 137
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| Imortal |
bear, your computer has a CPU bottle neck if your only getting 9000 from 3dbench (im assuming your using madonions benchmark)...i have a 9700 and i get 18000 on the benchmark...i also have 64tap aa, and all that crap on, with curved terrain in renegade and at a 1280 x 1024 resolution and i get a 100fps constant. i get about 70fps in 50 player servers. i used to get crap benchmarks similar to yours, then i got a p4 2ghz CPU and it effectivly doubled my mark. try it. as for the best graphic card, go for the radeon 9700, 400 bucks but its faster than the upcoming Nvidea card (geforce fx).
-edit i saw that you have a 9500 not a 9700...my mistake
|
Regardless of having a 9500, my cpu is a SEVERE bottleneck and I realize that. I'm just the type of guy who buys a video once every 3 years or so, and so the 9500 Pro was the first upgrade for my Athlon 64 system  . The second being the new case and 420W PS I purcahsed today
As for image quality, I'll boot up renegade and take a snap in around the same place that one is to give you an idea.
signatures suck
|
|
|
|
| About a Video Card... [message #7561] |
Tue, 18 March 2003 21:31 |
Bearxor
Messages: 137
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
I have to apologize. I am not running in 2X/16X like I always say I am... I am running in 2X/8X. Not a big deal though... on to the screen shot comparisons.
Here is your reference image:
http://www.n00bstories.com/image.view.php?id=1552879194
Here is an image on my 9500 Pro with 2X AA and 8X AF @ 800x600:
http://www.n00bstories.com/image.view.php?id=1606257431
This is what I normally play in. I have circled areas that are of intrest.
Here is the same general area with 4X AA and 8X AF:
http://www.n00bstories.com/image.view.php?id=2127526661
And i didn't say you can find 9500 Pro's for 120 bucks. I said they were 200 retail. since you were considering a 4600, i threw it in. You can however buy a 9500 non-pro 128MB online for around 140. The difference between the Pro and non-pro is 4 pixel pipelines (4 on non-pro, 8 on pro). There is a speed hit, and the non-pro is more inline with a 4200 speed-wise.
Food for thought for everyone
signatures suck
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
