Ati or nVidia

DDC wrote:
> On 13 Dec 2005 04:28:18 -0800, mattb95.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>Hey guys - simple question )I hope!) for you here:
>>
>>I've got about £40 to spend on a replacement graphics card as my
>>GeForce 2 has finally kicked the bucket. Pixel shading and Direct X 9
>>support seem pretty important so I want my new card ot have them.
>>
>>Basically, which is the fastest out of the box card (I'm not interested
>>in any overclocking) at this price range by either nVidia or ATI
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> run at futureshop and get your self a ati radeon x850xt for 300$
> canadian. And have a good time.
>
> 40 dollar won't get you new decent frame rate. i hope you like choppy
> game...

Why would you need such a fast card when replacing an ancient GeForce 2?
I highly doubt any of the other hardware would even match such a new
card. A card of that speed could even warrant the purchase of a new PSU.
It's pointless if you ask me.
 >> Stay informed about: Ati or nVidia 

"Conor" <conor.turton.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> schrieb

> In article <1134476898.574757.69400.TakeThisOut@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> says...
>> Hey guys - simple question )I hope!) for you here:
>>
>> I've got about £40 to spend on a replacement graphics card as my
>> GeForce 2 has finally kicked the bucket. Pixel shading and Direct X 9
>> support seem pretty important so I want my new card ot have them.
>>
>> Basically, which is the fastest out of the box card (I'm not interested
>> in any overclocking) at this price range by either nVidia or ATI
>>
> 9600/9700 Pro off E-Bay. Either that or forget the DX9 and get a
> Geforce 4 Ti. You'll be disappointed with the performance of a "new"
> ATi/Nvidia card at that budget.

I agree that you will be disappointed with the performance of a "new" card
at this price.
But you can get full DX9 support with a Geforce 5900 xt or 5700 Ultra for
this price at ebay.
For a few bucks more you maybe can get a Geforce 5900 or 5950.

Cu, Michael
 >> Stay informed about: Ati or nVidia 

If you have a Geforce 2 in your system, it begs the question, how old is
your system? If it's circa when the Geforce 2 was a new card, then you
would need to upgrade your whole system in order to make proper use of any
of the new cards out there. Personally for the money you have to spend, I
would recommend a used Geforce 4 4600 for your old system. That way you
could play games from a few years ago very nicely, and some of the newer
games at low settings.

JK

"Acid8000" <jeandre.RemoveThis@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:439ffbf1$0$3697$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> DDC wrote:
>> On 13 Dec 2005 04:28:18 -0800, mattb95.RemoveThis@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hey guys - simple question )I hope!) for you here:
>>>
>>>I've got about £40 to spend on a replacement graphics card as my
>>>GeForce 2 has finally kicked the bucket. Pixel shading and Direct X 9
>>>support seem pretty important so I want my new card ot have them.
>>>
>>>Basically, which is the fastest out of the box card (I'm not interested
>>>in any overclocking) at this price range by either nVidia or ATI
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>
>>>Matt
>>
>>
>> run at futureshop and get your self a ati radeon x850xt for 300$
>> canadian. And have a good time.
>>
>> 40 dollar won't get you new decent frame rate. i hope you like choppy
>> game...
>
> Why would you need such a fast card when replacing an ancient GeForce 2? I
> highly doubt any of the other hardware would even match such a new card. A
> card of that speed could even warrant the purchase of a new PSU. It's
> pointless if you ask me.
 >> Stay informed about: Ati or nVidia 

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 11:16:47 -0000, Conor <conor.turton.DeleteThis@gmail.com>
wrote:

>In article <1134476898.574757.69400.DeleteThis@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>says...
>> Hey guys - simple question )I hope!) for you here:
>>
>> I've got about £40 to spend on a replacement graphics card as my
>> GeForce 2 has finally kicked the bucket. Pixel shading and Direct X 9
>> support seem pretty important so I want my new card ot have them.
>>
>> Basically, which is the fastest out of the box card (I'm not interested
>> in any overclocking) at this price range by either nVidia or ATI
>>
>9600/9700 Pro off E-Bay. Either that or forget the DX9 and get a
>Geforce 4 Ti. You'll be disappointed with the performance of a "new"
>ATi/Nvidia card at that budget.

a 9600/9700 pro will crawl under call of duty in directx 9. even a
9800pro will suffer from the intense detail at 1024x764x32bit.

ok a x850xt is a bit over reacting but a x800 agp would be cool for
he's system. in general it take a psu of 300watt to get it to work
properly. i just hope it a good psu like an enermax or a other good
brand name...

Does he's system take an agp 8x card?

What he's average use of he's computer. reading e-mail or doing some
2d application? i think that gf2 is 4x only but for the motherboard he
own i can't tell.

finally everything under a x800 is throwing money by the window.
a x800 is mostly the double in every game vs a 9800 video car.

now it he's choice.
 >> Stay informed about: Ati or nVidia 

DDC wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 11:16:47 -0000, Conor <conor.turton.DeleteThis@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>In article <1134476898.574757.69400.DeleteThis@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>>says...
>>
>>>Hey guys - simple question )I hope!) for you here:
>>>
>>>I've got about £40 to spend on a replacement graphics card as my
>>>GeForce 2 has finally kicked the bucket. Pixel shading and Direct X 9
>>>support seem pretty important so I want my new card ot have them.
>>>
>>>Basically, which is the fastest out of the box card (I'm not interested
>>>in any overclocking) at this price range by either nVidia or ATI
>>>
>>
>>9600/9700 Pro off E-Bay. Either that or forget the DX9 and get a
>>Geforce 4 Ti. You'll be disappointed with the performance of a "new"
>>ATi/Nvidia card at that budget.
>
>
> a 9600/9700 pro will crawl under call of duty in directx 9. even a
> 9800pro will suffer from the intense detail at 1024x764x32bit.
>
> ok a x850xt is a bit over reacting but a x800 agp would be cool for
> he's system. in general it take a psu of 300watt to get it to work
> properly. i just hope it a good psu like an enermax or a other good
> brand name...
>
> Does he's system take an agp 8x card?
>
> What he's average use of he's computer. reading e-mail or doing some
> 2d application? i think that gf2 is 4x only but for the motherboard he
> own i can't tell.
>
> finally everything under a x800 is throwing money by the window.
> a x800 is mostly the double in every game vs a 9800 video car.
>
> now it he's choice.
But such a fast card would be pointless if somewhere else in the system
is a bottleneck.
 >> Stay informed about: Ati or nVidia 

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 16:36:35 +1100, Acid8000 <jeandre.TakeThisOut@ozemail.com.au>
wrote:

>DDC wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 11:16:47 -0000, Conor <conor.turton.TakeThisOut@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article <1134476898.574757.69400.TakeThisOut@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
>>>says...
>>>
>>>>Hey guys - simple question )I hope!) for you here:
>>>>
>>>>I've got about £40 to spend on a replacement graphics card as my
>>>>GeForce 2 has finally kicked the bucket. Pixel shading and Direct X 9
>>>>support seem pretty important so I want my new card ot have them.
>>>>
>>>>Basically, which is the fastest out of the box card (I'm not interested
>>>>in any overclocking) at this price range by either nVidia or ATI
>>>>
>>>
>>>9600/9700 Pro off E-Bay. Either that or forget the DX9 and get a
>>>Geforce 4 Ti. You'll be disappointed with the performance of a "new"
>>>ATi/Nvidia card at that budget.
>>
>>
>> a 9600/9700 pro will crawl under call of duty in directx 9. even a
>> 9800pro will suffer from the intense detail at 1024x764x32bit.
>>
>> ok a x850xt is a bit over reacting but a x800 agp would be cool for
>> he's system. in general it take a psu of 300watt to get it to work
>> properly. i just hope it a good psu like an enermax or a other good
>> brand name...
>>
>> Does he's system take an agp 8x card?
>>
>> What he's average use of he's computer. reading e-mail or doing some
>> 2d application? i think that gf2 is 4x only but for the motherboard he
>> own i can't tell.
>>
>> finally everything under a x800 is throwing money by the window.
>> a x800 is mostly the double in every game vs a 9800 video car.
>>
>> now it he's choice.
>But such a fast card would be pointless if somewhere else in the system
>is a bottleneck.

true but they are so cheap now that by default you would tend to get
that card only for present game and then for a future system. Like
you"ve said if hes system is the bottle neck of it's game play then it
wouldn't be to much a problem. the power of the video card would not
suffer much form he's system.

I still think that it is a good choice. BTW if he gets a new card now
then it's mean that he would get a future 939 board or intel with an
agp slot so why not do the rigth thing...

If he don't plan to play game then get a 9000pro or else lol. anyway
low average card aren't much an upgrade. maybe he should get the exact
same card again and then in a few mounts get a new system.


That's it that all
 >> Stay informed about: Ati or nVidia 

Sorry to drag up an old thread - but just to clarify.

I have updated the PC since I got it (in April 2003). Currently I'm
running an XP2000+ so it's not exactly blisteringly fast - but as a
student I can't really justify spending money on upgrading it!

Anyway I went with a 256MB Radeon 9550 (not the SE) and there's been a
decent improvement in some games. The main plus point is being able to
actually play pixel shader games like Splinter Cell at last!

Thanks for all the replies anyway guys.

Matt
 >> Stay informed about: Ati or nVidia