Okay, I did it…I bought a frickin Radeon32ddr….My wife doesn't know I've spent more money though.
So here's the setup….2 basically identical machines except for CPU and amount of RAM and H/D.
Rather than pull my 1200c and replace it with my spare 1000b (making both machines identical except for the amount of ram & HD), I simply reclocked the 1200 down to 1000/100fsb and changed the dram clock to host+pci, which should make the playing field even. I didn't pull the extra stick of ram from my primary machine because it seemed more trouble than it was worth and I couldn't see 384mb making that
much difference from 128mb….but I know some radeon groupie will end up calling me a moron for that, and say that my test was completely unbalanced - I don't care at this point.
I had my friend come over and play-test with me on my LAN.
First we tested SuperBike2001. I decided to go all the way and test the cards at 1600x1280 ultra high
detail, bit mapping on, maximum rendering distance.
At first I was surprised by the Radeon's 1600x1200 performance….But after several minuets of gameplay
we began noticing that there would be random moments (just 2 seconds really) that readeon seemed to stop and recalculate or something…which could be a real drag if it happens just as you're entering a curve because then you find yourself nearly off the road once the frame rate gets going again.
but really I don't see much difference between 1600x1280 and 1280x1024 in the game anyway, so it's not like I need 1600x1280 in that game to be happy. 1280x1024 is enough. 1600x1280 didn't improve much.
And here's the real kicker….neither of us could see a difference in visual quality which contradicts what
I (and others) have been saying about radeon…go figure.
Next we tested LandWarrior at 1024x768x32 max details. I'll admit visual quality was good with radeon…but like I said before…I can get good enough visual quality with GeForce as well. I actually set the Geforce d3d quality to be blended…right in the middle, not leaning toward frame rate and not leaning toward Image. I do see better image quality when I set the properties to lean toward image, but it's not so
radical that I would sacrifice the frame rates for it. However, I play on-line in competition and lead my
own team and I can't afford to be beaten in front of my team mates. Whereas someone who only plays
single player missions against the ridiculously stupid computer opponents will probably be more impressed with maximum window dressing as opposed to supper frame rate.
My friend is playing on the secondary machine with the radeon and I'm spending most of my time watching his screen…the game looks good…smooth enough….So at this point I'm thinking, the
Radeon is not a bad card. We didn't have time last night to test any other games, so when my friend leaves, I decide to really put it to the test. I pulled the Radeon and put it in my primary machine, load drivers, no problems. I log on and go play (under a new name) and jeeez….the radeon is sucking like a cheap whore! What's up with that? It definitely was not as smooth as my Geforce2. Granted, my geforce is overclocked like a mofo….but c'mon…The gameplay was simply choppy as hell…that's when I decided to go to bed, too tired to deal with that problem. My preliminary conclusion is that this card isn't going to cut it for me!!! I can't except any chopping or dropping of frames rates when I'm trying to out lag my opponent anyway. I still played really well and got #1s and #2s on the score card but the chop was fully pissing me off.
So this morning I got up early (I just don't have extra time otherwise), and put the radeon
back in my wife's machine for the simple reason….she takes lots of digital pictures and does
photo-editing everyday….question: Will she see the difference in image quality??? I've got
a dime-note that says she doesn't…..but I'll ask when I get home.
I suppose if I didn't already have a super video card to compare it with, I'd think radeon was great.
But fortunately I do have a bunch of geforce cards to compare it with.
The Driver installation did go really well with radeon, which is more than I can say for my non-Asus
Geforce cards. However, the lack of separate D3D, OpenGl, Desktop, color properties still
really irks the hell out me.
Don't expect me to respond to the plethora of Radeaon gang insults that I know are coming.
I'm sure I'll be called, "IGNORANT", "MISINFORMED", "NVIDIOT TROLL", "RETARD",
"MORON", etc, etc, etc….accuse me of playing in 16-bit, etc…etc….
Actually, moron, feels like I fits right now, as I've already wasted money and time to prove to myself
what I sort of already knew… So to that end I feel buffaloed by the Radeon gang…but at least now
I can jump in and say….hey I've got both cards and can give first hand experience on both.
But I'm not going to waste anymore of my precious resources arguing about this most stupid of threads.
"That's right, I'm the guy who can feel the difference between 50FPS & 100FPS in LandWarrior."
So here's the setup….2 basically identical machines except for CPU and amount of RAM and H/D.
Rather than pull my 1200c and replace it with my spare 1000b (making both machines identical except for the amount of ram & HD), I simply reclocked the 1200 down to 1000/100fsb and changed the dram clock to host+pci, which should make the playing field even. I didn't pull the extra stick of ram from my primary machine because it seemed more trouble than it was worth and I couldn't see 384mb making that
much difference from 128mb….but I know some radeon groupie will end up calling me a moron for that, and say that my test was completely unbalanced - I don't care at this point.
I had my friend come over and play-test with me on my LAN.
First we tested SuperBike2001. I decided to go all the way and test the cards at 1600x1280 ultra high
detail, bit mapping on, maximum rendering distance.
At first I was surprised by the Radeon's 1600x1200 performance….But after several minuets of gameplay
we began noticing that there would be random moments (just 2 seconds really) that readeon seemed to stop and recalculate or something…which could be a real drag if it happens just as you're entering a curve because then you find yourself nearly off the road once the frame rate gets going again.
but really I don't see much difference between 1600x1280 and 1280x1024 in the game anyway, so it's not like I need 1600x1280 in that game to be happy. 1280x1024 is enough. 1600x1280 didn't improve much.
And here's the real kicker….neither of us could see a difference in visual quality which contradicts what
I (and others) have been saying about radeon…go figure.
Next we tested LandWarrior at 1024x768x32 max details. I'll admit visual quality was good with radeon…but like I said before…I can get good enough visual quality with GeForce as well. I actually set the Geforce d3d quality to be blended…right in the middle, not leaning toward frame rate and not leaning toward Image. I do see better image quality when I set the properties to lean toward image, but it's not so
radical that I would sacrifice the frame rates for it. However, I play on-line in competition and lead my
own team and I can't afford to be beaten in front of my team mates. Whereas someone who only plays
single player missions against the ridiculously stupid computer opponents will probably be more impressed with maximum window dressing as opposed to supper frame rate.
My friend is playing on the secondary machine with the radeon and I'm spending most of my time watching his screen…the game looks good…smooth enough….So at this point I'm thinking, the
Radeon is not a bad card. We didn't have time last night to test any other games, so when my friend leaves, I decide to really put it to the test. I pulled the Radeon and put it in my primary machine, load drivers, no problems. I log on and go play (under a new name) and jeeez….the radeon is sucking like a cheap whore! What's up with that? It definitely was not as smooth as my Geforce2. Granted, my geforce is overclocked like a mofo….but c'mon…The gameplay was simply choppy as hell…that's when I decided to go to bed, too tired to deal with that problem. My preliminary conclusion is that this card isn't going to cut it for me!!! I can't except any chopping or dropping of frames rates when I'm trying to out lag my opponent anyway. I still played really well and got #1s and #2s on the score card but the chop was fully pissing me off.
So this morning I got up early (I just don't have extra time otherwise), and put the radeon
back in my wife's machine for the simple reason….she takes lots of digital pictures and does
photo-editing everyday….question: Will she see the difference in image quality??? I've got
a dime-note that says she doesn't…..but I'll ask when I get home.
I suppose if I didn't already have a super video card to compare it with, I'd think radeon was great.
But fortunately I do have a bunch of geforce cards to compare it with.
The Driver installation did go really well with radeon, which is more than I can say for my non-Asus
Geforce cards. However, the lack of separate D3D, OpenGl, Desktop, color properties still
really irks the hell out me.
Don't expect me to respond to the plethora of Radeaon gang insults that I know are coming.
I'm sure I'll be called, "IGNORANT", "MISINFORMED", "NVIDIOT TROLL", "RETARD",
"MORON", etc, etc, etc….accuse me of playing in 16-bit, etc…etc….
Actually, moron, feels like I fits right now, as I've already wasted money and time to prove to myself
what I sort of already knew… So to that end I feel buffaloed by the Radeon gang…but at least now
I can jump in and say….hey I've got both cards and can give first hand experience on both.
But I'm not going to waste anymore of my precious resources arguing about this most stupid of threads.
"That's right, I'm the guy who can feel the difference between 50FPS & 100FPS in LandWarrior."
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram