Best Graphics card to buy RIGHT NOW! for 3D Gaming

hatimh

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2001
407
0
18,780
0
What is the best graphics card to buy RIHT NOW, with the best performance in 3D games for example COunter Strike ;>

Cheers.
 
G

Guest

Guest
it depends on how much u have tp spend, and when u want to upgrade next...

if u want to boost performance now cheaply, get either a g2 MX, or a kyroII

If u have a little more, get a radeon 64mb, or a GTS2

IF u have the extra, get a g2 pro, or an ULTRA

G3 could take a little while to get to you
 

nicewar

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
89
0
18,630
0
I would wait on the G3, unless you got 600 bucks to drop.

The G2 Ultra is a sweet card but I have been looking at the G2 GTS w/64meg as a realitively "low" priced card. I can't believe I say low to refer to a $200+ card.

Troubles a-brewing and I'm left holding the spoon.
 

mpjesse

Splendid
Dec 31, 2007
7,214
0
25,810
6
First off, counter strike isn't a revolutionary game in terms of graphics- it's using an old 3D Engine. A GeForce 2 MX will run Counter Strike at 60fps (1024x768) at LEAST. But, the VERY BEST graphics card available RIGHT NOW (as you put it) is the GeForce 2 Ultra. The GeForce 3 will be available in the second week of April.

-MP Jesse

"Signatures Suck"
 

hatimh

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2001
407
0
18,780
0
Thanks to all of your useful advice, I think that my conclusion for now is, and maybe anyone else with a similar question would be to wait for GF 3 to come out and then buy the GeForce2 Ultra when the price drops, if the price does not drop soon afterwards and graphics card needs to be bought then possible go for the GF2 GTS OR next.. Radeon OR next.. GF2MX

What do you experienced lot say to that? Good conclusion?? Maybe not...
 

machow

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
855
0
18,980
0
heh i'll be loyal to matrox. g800 rulz!
(did i mention i have a friend with ati radeon ddr and athlon 1ghz runs slower than my g400 + amd750 in a game called javanoid? funny...)

------------------
This site is cool.
 

ajmcgarry

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
379
0
18,780
0
Sounds right to me. That's what I would do

<font color=red>Why don't you ever see the headline "Psychic Wins Lottery"?</font color=red>
 
G

Guest

Guest
i've seen some benchmark figures and they didn't impress me mostly around and sometimes lower then the gf 2 ultra 64ddr values
this is because the core runs at a lower frequency than the gf2 ultra and the dx8 goodies don't work in games right now only the memory interface could increase the framerate but even about this theoretically good looking part i've red some negative opinions in some reviews
and the prices are way to high the same as the ultra in the begining
 

hatimh

Distinguished
Mar 23, 2001
407
0
18,780
0
That's the thing which bugs me too, if benchmark results are not going to much higher than a previous version of a card, it's not much use bringing a new version out. I know that probably the new version will have lots of new features which programmers can use to make the graphics look better or faster, but how bloody long does it take the programmers to learn the new technique and then implement it in a game. If each graphics card introduces new special effects for which programmers have to specifically write code for, it's almost guaranteed that a newer version of a card or another manufacturer will bring out a new card, IT'S BLOODY ANNOYING!!!

Am I right in saying that directX is a way of standardising things? E.g al cards should fully support all the features of directX and then game programmers should write directX code?

*SIGH* I don't know!

Hatim.
 

Similar threads


TRENDING THREADS