What Graphic Card Should I Buy? | Forums

[XyZspineZyX]

The whole idea of my reply is to let the person asking the question realize, hes not going to get a even idea if people just post stuff like, wait until new drivers come out, and garbage like that.

Its like AMD/INTEL. He should just wait and see how his card preforms and what kind of money he has when that time comes. I myself like AMD and ATI, soley for the fact of being a computer Tech, I've seen better preformance from them, but that doesnt make it what I think better.

It depends on the person and thier budget. Next week there will be a better card, it just depends on what works for you.

[XyZspineZyX]

no man its just a fact that if you do more than games your better of whit a Nvidia than whit ATI its just so hard to explain but let me say this. when ''Finding Nemo'' whase made there where NO ATI carts in the works stations

thats cause Nvidia is one of the best whit PRO cards iam not saying this cause i whana be a PRO cause iam not but let me get to this site of workstations of BOXX thats a company

http://www.boxxtech.com/swf/index.asp

this whase one of the suplyers of that movie

its just better in aps than in games and i dont mind playing whit 22FPS but than if i whase getting a game machine i would defintly buy a ATI.

iam not a Nvidia fan iam a just some one who wants to get a MULTI perpase cart and not a Game cart

sure ATI will do good but from what i get from school(3D art school) they have P4HT systems whit ATI9800Pro carts i just dont get the same render qualety.

the shadows are not as good as from a Nvidia cart and the Raytrace and lightings are also not so good as whit Nvidia cart i hope you under stand me now

i did not got my system to do games i bought it cause i use it for 3D modelling and 2D PhotoShop and Primiere and other Multi Media Aps


keep it real for now

[XyZspineZyX]

I just got a Radeon All-in-Wonder 9800 pro 128 for $379 at www.gameve.com This card does everything as far as gaming goes as well as functions as a tivo. Its a no brainer what card to buy. its the best graphics card out there.
TFR_Filth wrote:
- The least you should get is a 9600 Pro.
-
-


TFR_Filth wrote:
- The least you should get is a 9600 Pro.
-
-

[XyZspineZyX]

Anyway, it is true that the driver used on that benchmark is not official yet. 51.x drivers are horribly buggy; they do give you a boost in performance, but the image quality is as low as it can get. While on the other hand, 52.14 BETA shines. With this driver, on some DX9 benchmarks and games, GFFX 5900 maintains the really good frame rates without compromising the graphical quality.

The image quality problems on Tomb Raider, Halo and Aquamark 3 have already been solved (though in Tomb Raider, they stil struggle a lot, but its output is actually slightly better than that of ATI [which still has some graphical bugs with this game]). They even become the faster card in Halo (without any compromise or shortcut or cheating). Not to say that it beats R350 already, but at least, it's headed to the right direction as they are right now.

http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1896

And oh, for those saying that Far Cry is a DX9 game, care to elaborate in what form that DX9 compliant features be implemented in this game? As far as I've been concerned, Far Cry does not use any version 2.0 shading at all. But yeah, even in its highest settings, I would still say that HL2's technical aspect is still below that of Far Cry's,



Message Edited on 10/11/0310:20PM by embargiel

[XyZspineZyX]

TFR_Filth wrote:
- The 9600 Pro isn't too expensive here. I thought the
- prices would be universal.



I had to answer this, to clear some numbers up.

No, the prices are not universal.

Each country has its own marketing rules, and what may seem as moderatly priced in one country, may very well be extremely and absrurdly expensive in another.

For all it matters, there realy is no such thing as a universal price tag, for whatever the product.


I'l give you a short example:

For what i understand, you live in the US, so i'l use that as a base.


A Geforce FX 5900, should cost somewhere around 500$US (I'm not using accurate numbers, i'm only using this as an example)

By the time it reaches Portugal (my country and the one i'l use as the example), it will cost 20% more because of taxes applied in this country.


So, for the Geforce you paid 500$US for, i would have to spend 600$US to buy exactly the same card.


Therefore, all in all, whatever you buy around here, will have to realy be worth the money, otherwise you'l just be spending too much, for subpar quality if the hardware ins't worth it!



If you think about the overall price for a fairly good PC, in the US should be around 2000$US, but here it will cost 2400$US.


See why you have to be carefull in what you buy? [img]/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif[/img]

<center>


<font size=2>Highly condecorated member of the Eurotrolls Politburo
First Secretary of the EuroTrolls Peoples Democratic Website
Ministry of foreign affairs</font></center>

[XyZspineZyX]

embargiel wrote:
- And oh, for those saying that Far Cry is a DX9 game,
- care to elaborate in what form that DX9 compliant
- features be implemented in this game? As far as I've
- been concerned, Far Cry does not use any version 2.0
- shading at all. But yeah, even in its highest
- settings, I would still say that HL2's technical
- aspect is still below that of Far Cry's,






Using one new feature, or using them all, ends up in a moot point.

If out of 10 new DX9 features (figurative number), Far Cry used a single one, it would still be considered a DX9 game, since without that same feature, the game would no longer be the same.



As far as saying HL2 is below Far Cry on technical aspect, that's going way out of your league. (no flame intended, only a remark).

By all means, the CryEngine is impressive, and i have a particular interest in its development since someone's career i'm following, is working on the D3D9 render engine structure for this game. But going as far and comparing it with the lush achievements on HL2 is defenetly going too far.

Nevertheless it will certainly figure high, among the top 5 FPS games of the 03/04 season.


Regards.

<center>


<font size=2>Highly condecorated member of the Eurotrolls Politburo
First Secretary of the EuroTrolls Peoples Democratic Website
Ministry of foreign affairs</font></center>

[XyZspineZyX]

Thanks for clearing that up.

[XyZspineZyX]

resev wrote:
- As far as saying HL2 is below Far Cry on technical
- aspect, that's going way out of your league. (no
- flame intended, only a remark).

LOL, it's not a flame, but it's also an unnecesary remark. It is also way out beyond your league to say that HL2 is technically more impressive than Far Cry. As far as I'm concerned, Far Cry does have its edge over Half LIfe 2, as far as technical aspect goes. It's got bigger draw distance, far better lighting effect (based on what I've seen so far), and the more intensive use of bump-mapping (again, based on what I've seen so far). Anyway, don't you think that DX9 games list is somehow misleading. IIRC, they said that Call of Duty, Final Fantasy XI, Tron 2 and Colin McRae 3 are DX9 based games. I've yet to see any DX9 features to be utilized on those games.