Tom's Hardware > Forum > Graphic & Displays > Graphics Cards > new graphics card?
Ask the community Add a reply
Word :    Username :           
 
merwan   06-17-2007 at 12:22:02 AM

thinking to upgrade my graphics card hmmmmmmmm. i have ATI RADEON RX1600PRO.

three questions:


1. is it worth upgrading?
2. if so, what is the best graphics card to get for my computer?
3. and finally for interest, which is better GeForce 8800 Ultra or ATI Radeon™ HD 2900 Series?

thank you

my specs

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=208552

Add a reply
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.
jordanwise   06-17-2007 at 01:06:06 AM
- 0 +

1) what size monitor have you got and what games do you play? if you're one of these WOW nutjobs running at 17'' you should be fine. Running stalker is a completely different matter.

2) what else is in your computer? no point slapping in a 8800gtx if you're running a single core cpu with 512mb of ram

3) ultra by miles. but huge price difference too. but both won't be that good at dx10, they're just dx9 monsters, thats all. If you want future proof, either wait for next line from nvidea or go sli with gtx's/ultras

sorry to answer questions with questions but it's necessary

Reply to jordanwise
kpo6969   06-17-2007 at 01:24:43 AM
- 0 +

PSU specs and upgrading it?

Reply to kpo6969
uberman   06-17-2007 at 01:54:17 AM
- 0 +

I would say get the 8800gts320 but if moneys no object gtx.The ultra is just too expensive for what it is.

Reply to uberman
merwan   06-17-2007 at 02:12:11 AM
- 0 +

1)monitor size 17 and lol my main current game is stalker. others current game is fifa 07. i have have many other games but really i dont play them. my bro plays C&C3 (its ok nothing special, prefer C&C zero hour).

2) my specs again as in first message:
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=208552

3) cool nvidia rocks

so is it worth upgrading and which card please?

Reply to merwan
aevm   06-17-2007 at 02:12:25 AM
- 0 +

1. yes
2. 8800 GTX. 8800 GTS 320 MB if you have a 20" monitor or smaller.
3. Ultra is better but overpriced. 8800 GTX is the best choice.

Reply to aevm
merwan   06-17-2007 at 02:22:05 AM
- 0 +

thanks aevm and uberman, now its down to 8800gts320 or GTX hmmm. i say ummmm GTX baby. :D :D

waiting for bigboy jordanwise

Reply to merwan
The_Abyss   06-17-2007 at 02:24:59 AM
- 0 +

You're wasting your money on the GTX if you only have a 17" monitor.

Reply to The_Abyss
goldragon_70   06-17-2007 at 02:53:08 AM
- 0 +

Up to what res can your monitor display?

Reply to goldragon_70
merwan   06-17-2007 at 03:17:42 AM
- 0 +

goldragon_70; max resolution: 1600x1200

The_Abyss; um ok then, sticking with a 8800GTS320 so far


cheers guys for your support

Reply to merwan
merwan   06-17-2007 at 03:24:36 AM
- 0 +

8800GTS320

can you please tell me more about this product specification as there are many different types and so i dont get the wrong one?

what is 320?? mb or bit (see what i mean)

thank you

Reply to merwan
merwan   06-17-2007 at 04:52:03 AM
- 0 +

you guys are great. im all sorted but ill wait for other responses
thank youuuuuuuuuuuu :D :D :D


ignore other dum thread lol.

Reply to merwan
pauldh   06-17-2007 at 04:52:41 AM
- 0 +

Would you actually game at 1600x1200 on that monitor? I'd think in game text would be terribly small and you'd be running a 60Hz refresh rate. I assume 1280x1024 or 1024x768 are more what you would use. In that case, the 320MB GTS is a nice card for such a nice rig. The X1600 pro is lame in comparison. If you are thinking of getting a new monitor anytime soon and gaming at higher res, then grab the GTX. I am pleased with the 320MB GTS but I'd like more power at 1680x1050 even.

Reply to pauldh
merwan   06-17-2007 at 05:17:40 AM
- 0 +

thanks Pauldh. you are right about the resolutions and i was only stating the maximum resolution supported by my monitor.

i think that getting a bigger screen is a wicked idea but is really another headache in terms of money i feel, though sounds very tempting.

well i guess that just confirms things more for the 8800GTS320.

Reply to merwan
merwan   06-18-2007 at 02:06:26 AM
- 0 +

hang on here. i heard 8800gts320 is not good. the '320' is not good enough and higher amount is needed huh. explain this please?

Reply to merwan
Yoosty   06-18-2007 at 02:48:00 AM
- 0 +

I am mainly a Nvidia card user these past 4 yrs, but this card looks wicked.SAPPHIRE 100202SR Dual X1950PRO 1GB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express x16 VIVO HDCP for only $429.99.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814102096

This is something to think about, that you can use until you are ready for a complete upgrade. Unless you are running MS Vista, then the choice goes to Nvidia 8800 series cards.

Reply to Yoosty
uberman   06-18-2007 at 03:58:24 AM
- 0 +

8800 will eat the 1950 in DX9.Nothing out for DX10 yet so who knows.But 8800 gts is cheaper than 429$ also.GTS will handle it at a decent price until it doesn't fit your needs anymore.

Reply to uberman
EXT64   06-18-2007 at 04:54:23 AM
- 0 +

320 refers to the amount of video ram in MB. At lower res, 320 is plenty of memory. It may be a little short for a high memory game like Oblivion, but for most current games it is plenty. The GTS320 has the same GPU as the GTS640, which is plenty for almost all current games (at 1600 res or lower). The 320 is probably good for you (especially for the price, they were obnoxiously cheap a month ago, don't know if they still are though.) The low ram will only have major negative effects at high resolutions.

Reply to EXT64
motorhead12   06-18-2007 at 09:52:44 PM
- 0 +

Now this is getting boring, a 320MB card will be shit when the new dx10 games release, they wont cope with decent resolutions.

I see you discounted the 2900xt early on, dont listen to the hype, you will find most the people who slate it do so because they bought the nvidia way before the ATI was released....and most people have fallen for that trap, yes the Nvidia's play todays dx9 games great...they wont keep up tih the ATI in dx10, the 2900 will push a much costlier 8800gtx to the edge.

Choice is yours, if u want bang for buck go for the 2900xt or if you want to follow what these guys are saying go for the 640mb gts

Reply to motorhead12
prof_chaos   06-18-2007 at 10:06:15 PM
- 0 +

You considered paying $550+ for a GTX but never considered a $270 GTS 320MB + a $200 22" LCD?

22" Acer widescreen $200 after $70 mail in rebate
http://www.officedepot.com/ddSKU.d [...] =acer%2022

Reply to prof_chaos
motorhead12   06-18-2007 at 10:46:07 PM
- 0 +

the 320 is a waste of time, he will need to upgrade in a year

Reply to motorhead12
aevm   06-18-2007 at 11:01:59 PM
- 0 +

Yeah, but then he's got a GTS with a monitor that's too big for the GTS. Sucks, doesn't it? How about not doing anything and saving some more cash until he can get the GTX and the monitor? Prices will go down for both in time, that also helps him.

Reply to aevm
TheGreatGrapeApe   06-19-2007 at 12:34:08 AM
- 0 +

Quote :

hang on here. i heard 8800gts320 is not good. the '320' is not good enough and higher amount is needed huh. explain this please?



The GTS will be fine for lower resolutions (below the maximum of that monitor), but 1600x1200 is the point of diminishing returns. Paul's talking about the reality that for your current situation it's fine, but try to game above that resolution you're going to have issues. Something to consider also IMO is that aliasing or AA on a 17" 16x12 monitor isn't as noticeable as AA on a 21" 16x12 monitor so the level of benefit diminishes as well.

Should you be looking at a new monitor then the bar of quality is raised and you will see an appreciable difference offer by the GTX.

Now the GTS (and likely GTX) will be weak in DX10 mode compared to their DX9 performance, but you will be able to balance settings for it, and it will do ok for while.

If you think about your spending, for what you save on the GTS, you can roll that into the next products that will liklely handle the games like Crysis, etc better.

So IMO you have two options: the GTS for someting now with an eye on refreshing by the end of the year or early 2008, or the GTX if you plan on holding this card for much more than a year.

Personally I'd recommend buying the GTS-320 for your current situation, and then take the savings and roll them into something better later (at which time buy a new monitor with the money you get from selling the GTS).

Reply to TheGreatGrapeApe
shellofinsanity   06-19-2007 at 01:47:01 AM
- 0 +

if you can afford it get the GTX, in 2002 they said no one with a small moniter needs more than 64mb, come DX9 titles that 64mb chocked, while the 128mb geforce4's played farcry at medium settings. There is never such a thing as to much memory only to little, you can always have extra ram, but not enough and you will notice it. Go with 8800GTS640 or 8800GTX, eVga is the best brand as there stepup and double lifetime warranty plus the super friendly customer support and there close ties to nvidia and cheap prices make them the best brand, easily better than BFG, PNY, and XFX.

Reply to shellofinsanity
locky28   06-19-2007 at 03:02:23 AM
- 0 +

I'd go for the GTX, going high end is the way to go if you can afford to do it.

In 2003 I bought my 6800GT which was top of the line (bar the 6800U) and much more than I needed back then and it lasted me 4 years, It still performed well giving me great FPS with medium-high settings, but not up to my standard so I upgraded in March of this year.

Now, I bought my X1950Pro just to give me something to last until I saw how the 2900XT performed. Disappointed by ATI, I ordered my 8800GTX yesterday, and plan to hold onto it for a long time. I have a 19" monitor and don't plan to go WS until it's fully supported by the games I want to play, therefore my 8800GTX is going to be much more than sufficient for a long time to come.

Top of the line cards are like Muscle Cars, there's no replacement for displacement and while the newer cars/card might have newer tech, the big guns are always able to keep up.

Reply to locky28
merwan   06-19-2007 at 01:01:37 PM
- 0 +

im so confused lol, kiddin i get you all. ill get GTX not GTS arrrrrrrr, i hate graphics cards for that reason. i guess its a hunderd pounds more but worth it as it will stay longer i guess.

Reply to merwan
blade85   06-19-2007 at 05:45:21 PM
- 0 +

or you could get the gts and overclock it :oops:

Reply to blade85
merwan   06-20-2007 at 03:58:31 PM
- 0 +

to blade85



ill overclock you soon








lol kiddin

Reply to merwan
Ask the community Add a reply
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Graphic & Displays > Graphics Cards > new graphics card?
Go to:

There are 1119 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Forum map
Bestofmedia Forum ©
2000-2009 Bestofmedia Group
Page generated in 0.448 seconds
Please mind

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.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
Related Topics
See all relatives topics
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them
How do I win badges?