My FX5900XT appears to be dying. I'll be getting a new computer in January when Vista comes out, so I don't want to sink too much money into my current system.
But I've got a 19" monitor and I want to be able to continue playing WoW at 1280x1024. I've got 1GB of PC3200 RAM and an Athlon 64 3000.
The two cards I'm considering right now are the following:
Considering my situation, does the 6600LE justify being 2.4x more expensive? Especially considering I'll only be using it for about six more months. (And that I make $9.78/hour. )
Thanks.
EDIT: BTW, if you vote "something else," please specify!
The LE has a lower core clock, so it'll perform little worse than a plain 6200.
I thought GHz ≠ speed? I figured there had to be more to the 6600LE than merely memory size.
OTOH, the only differences I see between the 6200 and the 6600LE are: memory size (128MB vs. 256MB), core clock (350 MHz vs. 300 MHz), memory interface (64-bit vs. 128-bit), and cooling method (heatsink vs. heatsink & fan).
Might, then, a 256MB 6200 out-perform a 6600LE? Or does the memory interface make that much of a difference?
Would this SAPPHIRE Radeon 9600PRO Advantage be, perhaps, a better choice than either eVGA card? I dunno how Sapphire compares to eVGA (nor have I ever owned an ATI card before). By the specs (Core clock 400MHz, Memory Clock 466MHz, Memory Size 256MB, Memory Interface 128-bit) it seems like a great card for $60. It appears to have quite a bit better bang-for-the-buck than the 6600LE.
Would this SAPPHIRE Radeon 9600PRO Advantage be, perhaps, a better choice than either eVGA card? I dunno how Sapphire compares to eVGA (nor have I ever owned an ATI card before). By the specs (Core clock 400MHz, Memory Clock 466MHz, Memory Size 256MB, Memory Interface 128-bit) it seems like a great card for $60. It appears to have quite a bit better bang-for-the-buck than the 6600LE.
Hell yes; the 9600Pro will beat the crap out of the 6600 and 6200.
I don't think a 9600 PRO would be much better than a 5900FX, in fact it'd probably be slower in alot of instances.
Upgrading to anything less than a Geforce 6600 (not LE) or X1300 PRO would be a waste for you if you have an FX 5900.
Even then the difference might not be as huge as you're hoping. You can get an X1600 PRO for under $150, that'd make a big difference.
Yeah, but I don't want a "big difference." It's not an upgrade, it's just a replacement until I can get a new computer next year. If I could get the same performance I'm getting now in WoW (which is the only game I'm playing at the moment) for under $100, I'd be ecstatic. I just don't want to sink much money in this computer if I'm going to replace it in six months.
OTOH, I want to get a dual-core, DirectX 10 video card, Vista system, and at the beginning of next year, those will probably be really expensive, so maybe I shouldn't plan on getting a new system right when Vista comes out...
Well, if you want a simple replacement... get a used 9700 PRO off ebay for $40. Better performance than your 5900 for next to nothing.
If you want new, get a 9600 PRO, X1300, X700, 6600... whichever you can find the cheapest. Just make sure it has a 128-bit memory interface, not a 64-bit one.
In addition to Cleeve's eBay recommendation (IMO your best route), there's a Sapphire R9600XT on NewEgg for $55, which would likely perform the same or better than the FX5900XT in modern games.
There's also an R9800SE (128bit) there which would be another consideration.
Then you get into the $85 GF6600 and $98 X1600P range.
there's a Sapphire R9600XT on NewEgg for $55, which would likely perform the same or better than the FX5900XT in modern games.
After mail in rebates? Here is all the "9600XT" video cards by Sapphire on Newegg. The top of that list is a $70 one that's $55 after rebates. I assume that's the one you're referring to.
)
)