I figure I can stick the GTO on ebay and get $100 for it. So really it would be alittle over a $100 dollar upgrade.
Would it be worth it. I play CS, Battlefield 1942, BF2, Call of Duty. Basically all the war FPS games. Would there be a big difference on my 1440x900 Widescreen?
Totally disagree with the other responses. Check the THG VGA Charts!
An x1900xt (not even the x1950xt) gets around double or more (in most games) the FPS of the x1800gto at 1280x1024, which is just about the same amount of pixels as your 1440x900 rez. Granted, these tests are done using AA and AS, but I'm guessing like most gamers you want the games you play to look their best, yes?
Personally, I'd say that's well worth the ~ $100 (net) you'll have to spend.
Totally disagree with the other responses. Check the THG VGA Charts!
An x1900xt (not even the x1950xt) gets around double or more (in most games) the FPS of the x1800gto at 1280x1024, which is just about the same amount of pixels as your 1440x900 rez. Granted, these tests are done using AA and AS, but I'm guessing like most gamers you want the games you play to look their best, yes?
Personally, I'd say that's well worth the ~ $100 (net) you'll have to spend.
Yeah, thats what I'm thinking. 100 bucks, double the frame rates. But I was concerned about the 256memory. I just had a chance to get a x1900xt 512 for 200 bucks and decided to go after the x1950xt because there is no advantage of having 512. I was hoping someone would say other wise, but guess most are thinking what I am thinking then.
As long as the x1900xt holds up until winter again. I would be happy.
Totally disagree with the other responses. Check the THG VGA Charts!
An x1900xt (not even the x1950xt) gets around double or more (in most games) the FPS of the x1800gto at 1280x1024, which is just about the same amount of pixels as your 1440x900 rez. Granted, these tests are done using AA and AS, but I'm guessing like most gamers you want the games you play to look their best, yes?
Personally, I'd say that's well worth the ~ $100 (net) you'll have to spend.
Yes, but if the X1800GTO gets playable framerates, then his eyes won't notice the extra framerates.
If I were you, I might hold out until the 8600 series arrives from nVidia. The flagship card (8600 Ultra), is set to debut around $180. Based on its specs and some educated speculation, it's rumored to be about as fast as an X1950Pro - slower than the X1950XT you're looking at, but with DX10 support.
So, if you're planning on getting Vista anytime soon, hold out a bit and go for the 8600 Ultra. Heck, save up in the meantime and try to go for a 320MB 8800GTS if it drops in price.
I figure I can stick the GTO on ebay and get $100 for it. So really it would be alittle over a $100 dollar upgrade.
Would it be worth it. I play CS, Battlefield 1942, BF2, Call of Duty. Basically all the war FPS games. Would there be a big difference on my 1440x900 Widescreen?
My 2 cents worth is that for the games you are playing and your current card, an upgrade doesn't really seem necessary.
I mean for Battlefield 1942, I used to run 1600x1200 on a 9800Pro. When it comes to CS:S, I am finding that my memory bandwidth on my AGP system is limiting me more than the processor or the X800XL I have. I just lowered the CPU overclock by 280MHz so I could run 1:1 on the memory and I gained significant performance.
Since your current card is more than capable of playing those games with high detail settings, the only reason I can see for upgrading is braging rights.
If I were you, I might hold out until the 8600 series arrives from nVidia. The flagship card (8600 Ultra), is set to debut around $180. Based on its specs and some educated speculation, it's rumored to be about as fast as an X1950Pro - slower than the X1950XT you're looking at, but with DX10 support.
So, if you're planning on getting Vista anytime soon, hold out a bit and go for the 8600 Ultra. Heck, save up in the meantime and try to go for a 320MB 8800GTS if it drops in price.
Totally agree. Figured Prozac would beat you to that one. Of course, the 8600 was/is due out in March, but it's still MIA.
Thanks guys. I think I will hold out till next month or so then. Quake 4 and Fear played really well when I played them. But right now, I only pay CS online because it's the only game really that supports widescreen LCD's. Plus it's fun to play online.
Save your money if your current card is doing fine on your games right now. Spend it on a DX10 card after ATI puts out competing cards to drop price and after there are DX10 games that you want to play.
I think that Company of Heroes is a bit more CPU-bound than other games, seeing as that it's an RTS. The problem of it slowing down in intense battles might be due to a CPU bottleneck.
I think that Company of Heroes is a bit more CPU-bound than other games, seeing as that it's an RTS. The problem of it slowing down in intense battles might be due to a CPU bottleneck.
Quote :
Does it to me too on Company of Heroes. And Im using 2 7900GTX's too. Just the game itself is a huge graphics hog.
If 2 GTX's can't handle it, it sounds like something else is slowing it down to me. I think it is very reasonable to assume that the CPU or memory or something like that is limiting the performance. Lots of objects result in high CPU and memory usage.
I bought this card today. It's open box for 209 shipped. So I couldn't pass it up.
A couple of things make me end up going to the newer card. First is this one has an aftermarket fan already. Which is nice and quiet from what the reviews say.
Plus this card is about twice the card then an x1800gto. Beside I like all the eye candy being on. The gto I can't do that even on CS:S.
Hey man, your money and your decision. There is always something a little faster or a little better. The tough part is deciding if it is improvement is worth the cost. Good luck, and I'm sure you will enjoy your new card.
I'm coming from the perspective of being a senior in college and not having a lot of spare cash. I also grew up with pretty thrifty parents, and I have kind of followed in their footsteps.
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.