CONFUSED????

[parlee]

ive been considering a video card upgrade for a LONG time now, i just bought an amd64 3700+ socket 754, the prob was 229 and came with a chaintech value mobo with nf3... i went to newegg to see if they even made pci-e mobo's for socket 754, and to my suprise they do?!?! should i dump this agp board in order to upgrade my card to a better 1/futureproof (sorta) my comp? or should i just keep the board, buy a cheaper agp card and upgrade to pci-e in a year or so?

 

[endyen]

More info please.
What gfx card do you have now?
What do you use/want to use it for?
What's your budget?
How important is eye candy?

 

[riksta]

The current crop of top end AGP graphics cards should be good for at least another 12 - 18 months. I'm running a 12 pipeline X800 (256MB), 1 gig RAM, A64-3200+ on an NF3 MB. I have no problem playing Quake IV, FEAR etc with 3/4 of the eye candy maxed out.

A cheap AGP (low end) would definately be a waste of money, for graphics intensive games such as FEAR. If you like RTS, then go for it, but make sure it has at least 8 pixel pipes, and 256 meg.

 

[parlee]

AMD64 3700+
connect3d 9600pro 256 mb
1 gb cosrair xms 2-3-3-6
160gb md hd

thats pretty much all the important stuff... i wanna use it for gaming in games like FEAR COD2 WoW Doom3 HL2 and BF2 at 1024 cause im not about to go to lcd just yet, id like to play most or all of the games at max settings, but i know games like fear and bf2 are huge graphics hogs so those wont be able to be maxxed, prob medium... at the moment im very close to choosing an x700pro by HIS, the iceQ one, so that i can overclock it, people have good luck with those and benchmarks show its as fast as a stock 6600gt...

 

[riksta]

The X700 is a good choice for a mid-range AGP card. It has 8 pixel pipes, and if you get the 256MB version, you will get reasonable performance on medium settings. Here's a guideline of game settings for a midrange card :



Resolution : up to 1280 x 1024

Filtering : generally up to 8x to 16x, higher filtering doesn't generally cause much of a performance hit in my experience.

Anti-aliasing : generally none, but occasionally up to 2x depending on the
game. AA is a performance hog on any card, but a game like FEAR will most likely be unplayable on an X700 unless it is switched off.

v-sync : not needed unless you go LCD. Again this is a performance hog and should only be used on high end cards and LCD monitors.

Texture detail : medium to high, will require some experimentation.

Shadow detail : medium

Soft shadows (FEAR) : off, huge performance hog

Particles : medium



These settings will give you a very solid gaming experience in most games on a mid-range card. Settings obviously vary from game to game, and we're all used to experimenting with them. I generally leave some of the more nonsense features like soft shadowing off because you can barely notice their effect, and they can be a huge performance hog. Don't be afraid to crank up the resolution up to 1280x1024, just don't go to 1600x1200. The Doom3 engine does not benefit from AA at all, and generally any aliasing effects are greatly reduced simply by opting for a higher resolution. That said, aliasing effects in all games are reduced naturally at a higher resolution, but with Doom3 its much more pronounced.

 

[the_guru]

A X700 is a poor choice. The 256MB is only a way to fool consumers.

A 6600GT is a much better choice.

Some FEAR benchmarks:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/02/vga_charts_viii/page16.html


Pick a 6600GT or a 6800GS (performs as the 6800GT in the benchmarks).

 

[parlee]

ty riksta that helped a bit, im pretty sure im gonan get another crt so the max res will be 1024, so im hoping that all but fear will be able to be maxed out (high settings 0 aa 0 af) but if not ill be pleased with medium because the card is only 130 bux at newegg >.<!

 

[endyen]

It might be a good idea to check with the graphics forum. There are some newer cards for mid range that might be of interest to you.
You might want to consider a few extra $ for something like an x800gto

 

[riksta]

I wouldn't say it's a poor choice, I've seen prices as low as a US$100. It is true that the 6600GT is a faster card, but the X700 pro is apparantly great for overclocking and can come quite close to the performance of the 6600GT in doing so. The 6600GT hasn't got great overclocking ability in the reviews I've seen. Here's a more positive outlook on the X700 pro than yours :

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=460

On the memory side of things, it depends on the game in question :

http://www.megagames.com/news/html/pc/doom3supports512mbcards.shtml

Of course the more you pay, the better the card, so you are correct in saying the 6600GT is a better card, but unless you can find one for US$100, then it's not in the same category.

 

[the_guru]

Your first post said X700 not X700 Pro

 

[riksta]

Sorry, I'll admit I should have included 'PRO', but it was a direct response to Parlee's previous statement, part of which read :

'at the moment im very close to choosing an x700pro by HIS, the iceQ one, so that i can overclock it, people have good luck with those and benchmarks show its as fast as a stock 6600gt...'

When read in conjunction with my statement immediately after, you may have realised that I was referring to '...x700pro by HIS...'

Sheesh, It's easy to get nailed on this forum !!

 

[DuxSyagrius]

It seems like a terrible waste to buy a card that will perform poorly in as little as 12 months. PCI-e is a wise decision. Some AGP cards are really good, like the X800 series, the X800GTO series, and the 6800 series. All that matters is that you get a card with a 256bit bus. That is the determining factor. For instance, you card the 9600 Pro has a 128bit bus. It replaced the 9500 Pro which had a 256 bit bus. The 9500 Pro owned the 9600 series until ATI came out with the X600XT line. If you have to buy now, then I reccomend any of the three series of cards listed above. Hell, even a 9500 Pro would be an improvement....