What video Cards do You guys have???

Video Cards (Main Chips):

  • Nvidia: 8 Series

    Votes: 97 30.6%
  • Nvidia: 7 Series

    Votes: 78 24.6%
  • Nvidia: 6 Series

    Votes: 21 6.6%
  • Nvidia: Other Series

    Votes: 12 3.8%
  • Ati: X2000 HD Series

    Votes: 12 3.8%
  • Ati: X1900 Series

    Votes: 41 12.9%
  • Ati: X1800 Series

    Votes: 7 2.2%
  • Ati: Other Series

    Votes: 42 13.2%
  • Intergrated: Amd/Intel

    Votes: 7 2.2%
  • Other

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    317

badge

Illustrious
7900GT0
1900GT
1800XT
7800GT 2
x800GTO 2
7600GT 2
6600GT 2
5950Ultra
ATI 9200
MX400

I run every one of these currently in my machines. I am debating on the 2900Pro and the 8800GTS. I'll probably wait for the next round and look for price drops coming up this fall. I paid almost $400 for the 5950 Ultra new. Terrible buy! Never again will I drop four Franklins on a video card.
 

L1qu1d

Splendid
Sep 29, 2007
4,615
0
22,790
4
if its the choice between 8800 gts and 2900 pro I'd go gts because u have the option for sli (which is more stable and less hassel than crossfire) and also its about the same price or cheaper.
Plus the 8800 gts 320 beats the 2900 XT at most benchmarks for 19" native resolutions:)

 

L1qu1d

Splendid
Sep 29, 2007
4,615
0
22,790
4
The 2900 Pro is energy hungry compared to the 8800 gts and 100$ more exp. It out performs it at higher resolutions, but nvidia handles stress alot more and has higher benchmarks. Plus crossfire still is a little buggy. PLus the evga 8800 gts there is no competition it's the highest oc of the 8800 gts series. Ati lost the video card wars so far. They use to be better they have no competition in the high end gaming series.

 

badge

Illustrious


The 2900 Pro is energy hungry compared to the 8800 gts and 100$ more exp

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102706

With the proper drivers the 2900(XT) compares well with 8800(GTX). The 2900PRO beats the 8800GTS 320 hands down. I'm looking forward to see what the 2950 will do. Then you have the 9800's coming soon. I'll wait for now, but the 2900's are tempting. $269 is in my price range for a top notch card. Still over $300 for the 8800GTS 640.
 

L1qu1d

Splendid
Sep 29, 2007
4,615
0
22,790
4
I had a voodoo 3 king of 97 LMAO

Btw the 2900 has bettwe drivers but if you see the PC bible, by pc gamer they clearly state that the 2900 is flawed for Ati's top line. I was an ATI fan but I'm out:p The 2900 Pro costs 349.99$ CAD while the 8800 gts costs 279.99 CAD and 319.99 CAD for the 640 RAM. Whether you compare them single or dual. If they win in single (doubt it) they loose in dual :p sorry to say it !
 

pous

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2007
498
0
18,780
0
I've got the 8800GTS 640MB in my rig, and my old one (now passed on to my brother) has an old ATI 9200 AGP card.
 

badge

Illustrious


Question. What psu do you have and do you use both the 6pin and 8pin 12v lead to supply power to the card. Or two 6pin leads. How do you like it and compared to what you have used.
 

aevm

Illustrious
BFG 8800 GTX OC2

By the way, here's something interesting I discovered: I replaced my official nVidia drivers (from July) with beta versions (from September), and now my screen started tearing in Titan Quest (at 1680x1050, all settings maxed in the game and in nVidia Control Panel). I enabled v-sync and that fixed it. The only explanation I could come up with is that before I was getting less than 60fps and after I was getting more than 60fps, and the monitor can only display 60fps. Am I guessing right here, did recent drivers make the 8800 cards faster???

I've also got an eVGA GeForce MX 4000 in my old computer. Pretty good card for $40 :lol:
 

crabdog

Distinguished
Sep 16, 2006
107
0
18,690
1
I'm still using my NV 7900GT which I bought about a year ago. I came very close to getting an 8800GTS 320 until I played Bioshock flawlessly at max settings 1280x1024. Since then I have no problem whatsoever waiting a bit longer for one of the new offerings since this old card can still run all my games maxed at my monitors' native resolution.
 

UTNemesis

Distinguished
Sep 20, 2007
17
0
18,510
0
Sapphire Radeon HD 2600XT. For $100, this card was an excellent buy. I run the Team Fortress 2 beta at full settings (minus AA and AF anyway) at 1680x1050 without any problems. The game runs between 40-60fps in heated battle.
 

firetatoo

Distinguished
Jan 18, 2007
187
0
18,680
0
my very first rig had a matrox 2mb card in SLI (via external cable) with a 3dfx voodoo2 12mb card. that on a PIIpro with 96mb or ram totaly kicked ass.
now i have a 7950.
aevm said:
I enabled v-sync and that fixed it. The only explanation I could come up with is that before I was getting less than 60fps and after I was getting more than 60fps, and the monitor can only display 60fps

what vsync does is make the frame draw at the same time the monitor refreshes. if your average is faster, it would limit the fps from whatever it would be without vsync to 60fps. smooth video doesn't need to be faster than 30fps ( i think disney used to make thier movies at 24fps).
 

firetatoo

Distinguished
Jan 18, 2007
187
0
18,680
0

thank you for not making fun of my genitalia
 

Similar threads


TRENDING THREADS