Topic: New Video Card - Opinions Welcome (Read 5266 times)

Dracho · « **on:** May 27, 2005, 09:05:49 am »

Well, I've decided my GEForce 5600FX is a little old and I'm thinking about upgrading, but I can't afford a top-of-the-line card. I can maybe afford $200, so I'm looking at cards a generation back (but still 2 generations newer than the one I have). The system I own is a 2.8 ghz Pentium IV with 512K of system cache and 1GB of DDR Ram. The video slot is an AGP 8x.

I'm thinking about leaving Nvidia and going to a Radeon for a change. My last 5 cards have been Nvidia. Maybe something like a Radeon X700 Pro Video Card, 8x AGP, 256MB GDDR3 for $199, or a All-In-Wonder X600Pro Video Card, PCI Express, 256MB DDR for $229.

Anyone more current on thechnology able to give me a little guidance?

toasty0 · « **Reply #1 on:** May 27, 2005, 09:53:40 am »

My New Video Set Up

Jerry

Dracho · « **Reply #2 on:** May 27, 2005, 09:56:46 am »

Javora · « **Reply #3 on:** May 27, 2005, 02:57:33 pm »

LOL That's funny Toasty.

As for video cards if you are going to go with ATI then here are a couple of choses:

ATI 9800 with a 2X/4X AGP and 128MB of Ram

ATI 9800 with a 4X/8X AGP and 128MB of Ram

ATI 9800 with a 4X/8X AGP and 256MB of Ram

IMHO I would get the 9800 with 256MB of Ram, it will go over your budget by about $40USD (not including shipping) but I think the extra 128MB of Ram is worth it. I have this video card now and love it. The card is not the greatest but then I don't have the $500USD for a top of the line X850 either. Hope this helps.

Dracho · « **Reply #4 on:** May 27, 2005, 05:45:16 pm »

Why would you go with the 9600, rather than an X700 or X800?

Quote from: Javora on May 27, 2005, 02:57:33 pm

LOL That's funny Toasty.

As for video cards if you are going to go with ATI then here are a couple of choses:

ATI 9800 with a 2X/4X AGP and 128MB of Ram

ATI 9800 with a 4X/8X AGP and 128MB of Ram

ATI 9800 with a 4X/8X AGP and 256MB of Ram

IMHO I would get the 9800 with 256MB of Ram, it will go over your budget by about $40USD (not including shipping) but I think the extra 128MB of Ram is worth it. I have this video card now and love it. The card is not the greatest but then I don't have the $500USD for a top of the line X850 either. Hope this helps.

Javora · « **Reply #5 on:** May 27, 2005, 06:41:44 pm »

Quote from: Dracho on May 27, 2005, 05:45:16 pm

Why would you go with the 9600, rather than an X700 or X800?

It was the 9800 not the 9600. The first time I looked I didn't see any X700 or X800 with a AGP connector it was all PCIe. This time around I did come across this X800 that is about in your price range. It is not the Pro version but it does have the AGP that you are looking for. I don't know why I missed it the first time but there it is. I wouldn't bother with an X700 if you can find a X800. Although if you are going to go with the current generation video card I think I would go with nVidia. Overall they seem to be making better cards this time around. Even though the ATI X850 is the fastest right now, it is around $500USD and it was only released to recapture the crown from nVidia.

E_Look · « **Reply #6 on:** May 29, 2005, 01:10:35 am »

I don't know if this applies, but according to some (people I read on the Internet), at least with a Radeon 9600 XT card (yes, "6", not "8"), the extra 128 Mb RAM doesn't really do much to make the card faster in practice, and maybe this is dated now, and that there aren't too many games around yet that could take advantage of the extra RAM. Of course, this may not apply to the 9800 series at all.

Sirgod · « **Reply #7 on:** June 01, 2005, 12:38:45 pm »

Quote from: Javora on May 27, 2005, 06:41:44 pm

Quote from: Dracho on May 27, 2005, 05:45:16 pm
Why would you go with the 9600, rather than an X700 or X800?

It was the 9800 not the 9600. The first time I looked I didn't see any X700 or X800 with a AGP connector it was all PCIe. This time around I did come across this X800 that is about in your price range. It is not the Pro version but it does have the AGP that you are looking for. I don't know why I missed it the first time but there it is. I wouldn't bother with an X700 if you can find a X800. Although if you are going to go with the current generation video card I think I would go with nVidia. Overall they seem to be making better cards this time around. Even though the ATI X850 is the fastest right now, it is around $500USD and it was only released to recapture the crown from nVidia.

I'm using the X800 Pro, and I love the card. It runs my Dual monitor system Better then ever. However, when I bought mine It was about $450.00 last year.

Stephen

E_Look · « **Reply #8 on:** June 01, 2005, 12:40:21 pm »

$450?? Yeeeowtch!

Sirgod · « **Reply #9 on:** June 01, 2005, 12:53:40 pm »

Yeah I spent around 5 Grand on my system back last August.

From Belarc...

Windows XP Home Edition Service Pack 1 (build 2600)         MSI MS-6702 1.0
Processor a         Main Circuit Board b
2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64
128 kilobyte primary memory cache
512 kilobyte secondary memory cache         Board: MSI MS-6702 1.0
Bus Clock: 200 megahertz
BIOS: American Megatrends Inc. Version 07.00T 04/02/01
Drives         Memory Modules c,d
160.03 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity
44.12 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space

AOPEN COM5232/AAH [CD-ROM drive]
LITE-ON DVDRW SOHW-1213S [CD-ROM drive]

WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) -- drive 0         1536 Megabytes Installed Memory

Slot '0' has 512 MB
Slot '1' has 512 MB
Slot '2' has 512 MB
   Local Drive Volumes


c: (NTFS on drive 0)    160.03 GB    44.12 GB free
   Network DrivesRADEON X800 PRO [Display adapter]
RADEON X800 PRO Secondary [Display adapter]
Proview AY965C [Monitor] (19.1"vis, s/n 308006195, September 2003)
Proview AY965C [Monitor] (19.1"vis, s/n 308006198, September 2003)
Creative Game Port
Creative SB Audigy 2 ZS (WDM)
Realtek AC'97 Audio for VIA (R) Audio Controller

Stephen

Khalee1 · « **Reply #10 on:** June 01, 2005, 12:58:48 pm »

Quote from: Stephen, AKA Sirgodhand Jr. on June 01, 2005, 12:53:40 pm

Yeah I spent around 5 Grand on my system back last August.

From Belarc...

Windows XP Home Edition Service Pack 1 (build 2600)         MSI MS-6702 1.0
Processor a         Main Circuit Board b
2.20 gigahertz AMD Athlon 64
128 kilobyte primary memory cache
512 kilobyte secondary memory cache         Board: MSI MS-6702 1.0
Bus Clock: 200 megahertz
BIOS: American Megatrends Inc. Version 07.00T 04/02/01
Drives         Memory Modules c,d
160.03 Gigabytes Usable Hard Drive Capacity
44.12 Gigabytes Hard Drive Free Space

AOPEN COM5232/AAH [CD-ROM drive]
LITE-ON DVDRW SOHW-1213S [CD-ROM drive]

WDC WD1600JB-00EVA0 [Hard drive] (160.04 GB) -- drive 0         1536 Megabytes Installed Memory

Slot '0' has 512 MB
Slot '1' has 512 MB
Slot '2' has 512 MB
   Local Drive Volumes


c: (NTFS on drive 0)    160.03 GB    44.12 GB free
   Network DrivesRADEON X800 PRO [Display adapter]
RADEON X800 PRO Secondary [Display adapter]
Proview AY965C [Monitor] (19.1"vis, s/n 308006195, September 2003)
Proview AY965C [Monitor] (19.1"vis, s/n 308006198, September 2003)
Creative Game Port
Creative SB Audigy 2 ZS (WDM)
Realtek AC'97 Audio for VIA (R) Audio Controller

Stephen

All that power and all you do is use it to surf for porn.

Sirgod · « **Reply #11 on:** June 01, 2005, 01:25:03 pm »

Priorities Tim, Priorities.

Stephen

Elvis · « **Reply #12 on:** June 01, 2005, 02:38:24 pm »

its the wrong time to switch to ATI, the Nvidia cards in this generation are better than the ATIs for the most part. Meaning the 6800 and 6600 series cards are better than ATIs offering in the same category.

Not to belabor a simple point if you do buy a PCI express card your also going to have change your M/B. I would look for a vanilla 6800 or a 6600GT AGP card.

E_Look · « **Reply #13 on:** June 02, 2005, 12:16:22 am »

Yeah, Elvis, but in my scoutings 'round (midnight) the 'Net, it seems that while spec-wise you're right, ATIs currently still give a bit more bang for the buck... and in my house, the buck is stretched.

Iceman · « **Reply #14 on:** June 03, 2005, 03:14:25 pm »

Quote from: E_Look on May 29, 2005, 01:10:35 am

I don't know if this applies, but according to some (people I read on the Internet), at least with a Radeon 9600 XT card (yes, "6", not "8"), the extra 128 Mb RAM doesn't really do much to make the card faster in practice, and maybe this is dated now, and that there aren't too many games around yet that could take advantage of the extra RAM. Of course, this may not apply to the 9800 series at all.

LIES! My roommate and I had the same card (9600XT) and I had the 256, he had the 128. I can run Doom3 and Half-Life 2 a good deal better than he can. It does help, it's just not necessary. The systems were also comprable (until he got a watercooler and decided overclocking was a fun hobby).

E_Look · « **Reply #15 on:** June 04, 2005, 10:48:31 pm »

Really!

I guess the graphics must be INTENSE in those games. I've only seen Doom 3 on my brother in law's comp and he has an older nVidia card (I forget which one) and the game runs okay. I don't know what Half Life runs like.

Iceman · « **Reply #16 on:** June 04, 2005, 11:16:11 pm »

Probably just a hair slower, if not an unnoticeable difference.

E_Look · « **Reply #17 on:** June 05, 2005, 04:35:15 pm »

But you say the extra 128 Mb makes a real difference, right?

Iceman · « **Reply #18 on:** June 05, 2005, 09:39:21 pm »

I would say that it's a balance. It works for me cause my processor is a bit slower. So the game runs smoother but loads a bit slower ya know?

If you're got a topnotch processor, you probably won't notice a difference.

Otherwise (and most likely) spend the extra $30-50 and get the 256 model.

E_Look · « **Reply #19 on:** June 05, 2005, 10:55:38 pm »

Aw, I already bought and installed the 128 Mb version in my kid's PC, but the CPU is the AMD Athlon XP 2500+ with the Barton core, the one running at 1.833 GHz withe 333 MHz FSB. That, I think is a pretty good chip, so the load will probably shared better between CPU, GPU, and any RAM anywhere.

Iceman · « **Reply #20 on:** June 05, 2005, 11:03:31 pm »

Indeed, that's pretty much the setup I used for a long time before I built this machine to bring to school. Still very solid, I use it all the time actually.

Dracho · « **Reply #21 on:** June 06, 2005, 09:02:03 am »

I traded that chip in for a PIV. Had nothing but trouble with that particular AMD (my TBird was the best chip I've ever owned) as it was VERY particular about the brand of memory modules I put on my motherboard. That board and chip corrupted more data than anything I've seen since a Banyan Vines server.

Quote from: E_Look on June 05, 2005, 10:55:38 pm

Aw, I already bought and installed the 128 Mb version in my kid's PC, but the CPU is the AMD Athlon XP 2500+ with the Barton core, the one running at 1.833 GHz withe 333 MHz FSB. That, I think is a pretty good chip, so the load will probably shared better between CPU, GPU, and any RAM anywhere.

Just plain old Punisher · « **Reply #22 on:** June 06, 2005, 09:05:59 pm »

It will be obsolete in 6 mo no matter which card you buy!!

MUAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

E_Look · « **Reply #23 on:** June 06, 2005, 09:18:19 pm »

Really?!

All I stuck in the first system based on that chip were two sticks of 512 Mb regular vanilla PC-2700 Kingston RAM, no fancy schmancy latencies. In the second system, which really hasn't been truly used yet, I used one such stick of Kingston and one Kingmax. We'll see how that does.

How could a mobo and/or CPU corrupt data?? It must mangle the calculations, in which case, the core design and architecture is truly faulty or the pointyheads got dulled when they programmed in the instruction set... both scenarios which are more unlikely than one in SFC where a Fed frigate beats three Klink D7Ds.

Could it be possible you got either one faulty processor and/or one motherboard with some bad chips on it?

I'm not challenging you, Drac, just totally confused... and nosy.

EDIT: In both systems, the motherboard is a DFI nForce 2 based one.

Quote from: Dracho on June 06, 2005, 09:02:03 am

I traded that chip in for a PIV. Had nothing but trouble with that particular AMD (my TBird was the best chip I've ever owned) as it was VERY particular about the brand of memory modules I put on my motherboard. That board and chip corrupted more data than anything I've seen since a Banyan Vines server.

Quote from: E_Look on June 05, 2005, 10:55:38 pm
Aw, I already bought and installed the 128 Mb version in my kid's PC, but the CPU is the AMD Athlon XP 2500+ with the Barton core, the one running at 1.833 GHz withe 333 MHz FSB. That, I think is a pretty good chip, so the load will probably shared better between CPU, GPU, and any RAM anywhere.

Dracho · « **Reply #24 on:** June 06, 2005, 10:37:40 pm »

It was a Soyo board with is rather infamous for being picky about using less than premium memory sticks. I think it was an AN7QVN

E_Look · « **Reply #25 on:** June 07, 2005, 12:33:13 am »

Yeah, but I've heard about as much, but do know at least one fellow who says good things about them, though some of my Internet readings would disagree. There is a MicroCenter near me; once in a while they do have killer deals on CPUs, mobos, etc (I can't forget that I got a super vid card there, the ATI Radeon 9700 Pro 128 Mb for less than $170, over two years ago!). But I kind of avoided the Soyo ones. I am also leery of Biostar, and Abit, now that they were snagged using inferior or defective components on what was sold as one of their leading boards. I think I pay a slight premium for the MSI or DFI brands, but they have a fairly sterling rep backed in my eyes by my own experiences. I don't like extra trouble down the line once it's built, kinda like not wanting to get up once my shoes are off and my heiney is on the couch (all right, to tell the truth, once my heiney is on my chair in front of my PC).

But if this rig for my younger one goes crosseyed because of RAM sticks from different manufacturers, I may have no choice but to make a matched set; i.e., get rid of one (boo hoo) and match the remaining one. But I've heard that these days, most of the "name brand" makers make RAM technically so good that there *should* be no mismatch problem.

In case any of these outfits have reps here, this is, of course, my "private" opinion.

Dracho · « **Reply #26 on:** June 07, 2005, 11:10:24 am »

This last time, when I went back to Intel's PIV, I went with an Intel MB and have not been disappointed.

Iceman · « **Reply #27 on:** June 07, 2005, 01:52:33 pm »

I'm using a Soyo with no trouble right now.

I will however point out that when I was putting this rig together, everything worked for about 20 minutes and then the northbridge fan died, toasting the Mobo. Newegg replaced it, and not a problem since.

E_Look · « **Reply #28 on:** June 07, 2005, 09:34:45 pm »

Well, you guys did hear that Abit was caught using bad parts their products. I'm sure they're not alone, even some other "big name" manufacturers, too, I'll bet.

I'm sure THEY've stopped the practice, but the ones still under the radar may still be doing such. I'm not pointing fingers, but we all hear the occasional horror story with a well known brand... and there's always the occasional bad one item or bad lot. I guess it happens.

Javora · « **Reply #29 on:** June 08, 2005, 01:07:58 am »

My friends and I have always had good luck with Asus motherboards, but as always your milage may very.

Elvis · « **Reply #30 on:** June 08, 2005, 09:11:22 am »

Are the "bad parts" descibed here in reference to leaky capacitors? Just curious because I think nearly every Tawainese motherboard manufacturer had problems with leaky capacitors. Abit has a pretty good reputation among the enthusiast/overclocking crowd. Everybody has there favorite or most used and then everybody has a horror story.

My first build I used an Iwill socket A board, I will probably not use an Iwill board again; poor documentation, drivers and bios updates. My second build I used a Chaintech board and I could never get it stable. I switched that board with an MSI and havn't had any problems.

E_Look · « **Reply #31 on:** June 08, 2005, 09:44:12 pm »

You may be right, as I forget because I read the article some time ago. I do think it had to do with the caps, though I can't be sure.

Pfaghh! I have THREE Taiwanese mobos running in my house right now. Should I invest in a mop yet?

Elvis · « **Reply #32 on:** June 10, 2005, 11:04:46 pm »

You know its two weeks late but here goes at Newegg, an eVGA 6800 for $189.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814130202

Jack Morris · « **Reply #33 on:** June 13, 2005, 11:11:50 pm »

GeoForce 6800 looks to be the best out there so far.

http://hardocp.com/article.html?art=NzgwLDM=

E_Look · « **Reply #34 on:** June 13, 2005, 11:43:59 pm »

Yeah, technically, I agree with you, Jack, but in my opinion of the bang for buck ratio, I think a slightly less capable card but much cheaper is of the best value to most PC owners/users, something like maybe the nVidia 6600 series or ATI Radeon 9600 series, especially if you need a new, decent system, but must watch your pennies.

Kenjar · « **Reply #35 on:** June 13, 2005, 11:53:33 pm »

I personally don't see any real reason to go about a FX 5700 card (don't get the Light version it's just a revamped 5200) at the moment, there's nothing it won't run, and it's dirt cheap in compairsion to the 6xxx series cards. The 5500 is a waste of space though, you might as well install a 5200 because there's very little benefit from it. The graphics card has got to be the easiest device to install in a PC so make a point of upgrading to a mid range card once every couple of years, or an entery level card every year, these are usually about £20 - £40 and still run any game that comes out. The only real difference I can see at the moment is weather or not OpenGL 1.4 or 1.5 is supported.

E_Look · « **Reply #36 on:** June 14, 2005, 12:40:37 am »

You're right! The price of the GeForce 5700 is reasonable and it is a good card... only, it seems to be getting somewhat harder and harder to find.

Jack Morris · « **Reply #37 on:** June 14, 2005, 12:42:05 am »

I agree E_Look, is part of the reason why I bought an AMD chip this time instead of P4, with 2 cooling fans on the case (one is a monster located on the side near the CPU) plus the one directly on the CPU, it is a perfect candidate for a darn good tech to overclock for me!

Prices on CPUs have come way down in the last few years, as have graphics cards. Thank the Lord above for little things like that as I'm no millionaire either.

Javora · « **Reply #38 on:** June 14, 2005, 06:51:45 am »

Quote from: E_Look on June 14, 2005, 12:40:37 am

You're right! The price of the GeForce 5700 is reasonable and it is a good card... only, it seems to be getting somewhat harder and harder to find.

IMHO you would be better off with the ATI 9600/XT.

E_Look · « **Reply #39 on:** June 14, 2005, 11:08:05 am »

Well, that's what I decided for my kids; one got a Radeon 9500 (very good card at the time; still works well) and the other is getting the 9600 XT. Why? Solely on their specs with respect to their prices at the time of purchase. In case anyone is interested as far as I remember, both Newegg and Monarch should have a Radeon 9600XT for about $100 (actually $98!) still on their sites.

I must say, and Monarch had the low price first, it blew me away!!

News:

Topic: New Video Card - Opinions Welcome (Read 5266 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Topic: New Video Card - Opinions Welcome (Read 5266 times)