Do I really need a 250 dollar video card??

[Guest]

Here is my situation I am building a new computer with an xp1600+ ecs K7S5A and 256mg ddr ram. I want a stable card can can run unreal, max payne, madden 2002, and deus ex and games like that at a decent framerate with decent resolution. Is a gf3 or radeon 8500 really neccessary? I realize that if i get something less then it will be outdated sooner and it may not play games that are realeased a year or 2 from now. What will give me the most bang for my buck right now?
Thanks for any help

 

[AEboy128]

I'm going to get either a radeon 7500 or the origional. I dunno which to get here are my options

Radeon 7500 for 170 shippping included
or
Radeon (origional) (SE)for $120 shipping included

both are retail but im not sure which to get yet i think i may get the SE just to save the $50. My thoughts are i'll be happy with which ever one i get and they both'll last me a while.

My system: <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=8946" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=8946</A>

 

[Crashman]

The most bang for your buck in Max Payne would come from the Radeon LE. But you have to either flash it with retail BIOS or do the registry hacks to get it to retail spec. You should be able to run Max Payne on that card in medium detail at 1024x768x32, or high detail at 800x600x32, without any noticable frame drops.

Back to you Tom...

 

[Crashman]

Oh, the Radeon 64MB DDR would be a good choice with even better framerates but at twice the cost.

Back to you Tom...

 

[pr497]

i would recommend the radeon 7500 over the original. you wouldn't want a 1 year old graphics card (radeon 64 mb ddr, even though it kicks ass) when you can get a 1 month old card (radeon 7500) for a few more bucks. and besides, the 7500 is a "modified" version of the original so it SHOULD perform better.

I don't claim to know anything about everything, I just tell people what I know.
-PSB

 

[pr497]

oh and to answer the original question, no, you dont need a $250 vid card. if you want the most bang for the buck, i would acutally recommend getting a radeon 7500 (which should range from about $150 - $200) or a geforce3 ti200. if you're looking at the ti200 for your card, you should get the PNY verto version of the ti200 since it performs at the same level as other manufacturer's ti200's for less money (i found a PNY geforce3 ti200 for about $170, but that website didn't have it in stock).

I don't claim to know anything about everything, I just tell people what I know.
-PSB

 

[bront]

On the 7500, some of the benchmarks I saw had it running slower than the Radeon and/or cards it beat in some benchmarking.

I'm happy to be getting my Radeon AiW DDR today. Good price/performance with features I wanted.

60 FPS, 70 FPS, 80 FPS Crash!
Daylight comes and I have to go to work :frown:

 

[Smilin]

I'd grab a GeForce2 Pro for about $99 Online plus shipping. It is actually the card I recently upgraded from and it was running all the games you mention (except madden - don't own that one, can't tell ya.) quite well.

It will be good for every game coming out this christmas season but will go obsolete before next game season, but by that time the $300 cards of today will be around $100.

The general advice: If you want your shiz to stay up to date, make continuous purchases of N-1, where N is the greatest thing available.

Me? I purchase the best continuously but I'm a freak ($100 worth of games played per month, every month).

 

[Matisaro]

Smilin, is this your first name on this forum, your posts remind me of someone who was here several months ago.


Do you think that faster frames per second allows you to run faster and jump higher in fps games? That belief was what this other person was most famous for. I wish I could remember the name though.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~

 

[tomkit]

Yes, you do. In fact, you have to purchase the Quadro graphics card; the one that has 4 GPUs...

 

[Smilin]

Yep, this is my one and only name here. I'm Smilin all the time (hehe) so you may have read my posts elsewhere (shuga shack, q3world or something).

I WILL however agree with that mystery person on one point.

A higher framerate will allow you to jump higher in quake 3. I don't think it makes you move any faster in any other respect but it does allow you to jump higher.

Why? Because when you jump your flight path is a parabolic curve. It's not really a curve, but a very close approximation. The curve gets broken into a number of straight line segments based on how many times per second your cpu calculates your position. At something very, very low like say 8 frames per second, your flight path will resemble the top half of an octagon. At 125fps it will almost be a perfectly smooth curve.

If you jump for a ledge you can make it if your cpu calculates your position above the ledge at the moment you reach it. At a lower fps this becomes unlikely to impossible.

For you that still don't believe and have the graphics card to pull it off, try this:

Quake III Arena, map: q3dm13.
Go find the mega-health and try to jump to it (from the front, not walking around to the ledge above). You probably won't make it. Now turn the fps cap off: from the console type "/com_maxfps 125". Try again. If your graphics card has enough muscle you'll make it every time.

Another interesting thing...try it while carrying the quad damage. The quad puts a bit of a glow around you and puts some additional blue polygons around your weapon. If your graphics card is marginal you won't make it in this state because it's slowed you down just enough to screw up your flight path.

(This post got long...my bad.)

Short answer: No never posted here before under a different name, but yes having a better video card can allow you to move better in fps games.

 

[Matisaro]

Smilin, I will have to disagree, like many did with the other guy, damn what was his name. If anyone cares to look it up he posted mid way in mine and fuggers 3dmark brawl long ago.(the most viewed thread in thgf history!)

regardless, the movement in modern games is determined by the games physics engine which is completely independant of the video refresh. Having more fps(above the minimum required to actually control the game, its hard to play quake 3 at 15fps) does not endow the games character with any more speed/agility/aim.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~

 

[Smilin]

Look man, if you're going to be one of those people who still doesn't believe after it's been proven then it's not really worth my time having a discussion with you.

Have you tried what I suggested to see for yourself? No, you have not. Otherwise you wouldn't be here still arguing.

The physics engine and graphics engine ARE separate from each other, but both run at the same time and are interdependant. These two "engines" along with the network code run in a nice little loop, round and round taking turns sucking on the CPU. In Q3 there is a nifty little setting called com_maxfps. This is a governor of sorts that stops the rendering engine from dominating the cpu and causing the remainder of the code problems. You get this setting too high on a system that isn't fast enough and your rendering engine will make your network latency go up.

If you ask any GOOD quake 3 player they will tell you that your framerate CAN affect your movement. There are certain intricate movements that will exploit the physics code and allow you to perform maneuvers that the newbie will find impossible.

There was actually a mod written for quake3 back in the version 1.17 days (before they made some changes to the physics code in the 1.29+ versions) that was called the 125fps mod. This was a mod that made quake physics behave as if you had a system capable of 125fps. It leveled the playing field a bit between those who had powerful video and those that didn't. Have you ever seen a demo of Fatality playing in a tournament? Go watch. You're going to ask yourself, "How the hell does he move so fast???" Until you understand what he's doing you will swear he's cheating somehow. He knows how to get to full strafejump speed in only two hops when it takes most people 10. You do know what a strafejump, circle-strafejump, and doublejump are don't you? Know how to climb up walls with a plasmagun? You probably think a rocket-jump is "advanced" hehe.

My previous post explained how your framerate can affect your jumping height and also provided an example that allows you to see for yourself (if you have a video card worth a [-peep-] that is). It may seem counter-intuitive to think that the "rules" of the game can change depending on your computer, but they can. Please try the example I gave on Q3DM13 and see for yourself. If you've honestly never seen this you'll be amazed. If you're not willing to at least see my side of this please let me know so I can stop wasting my time. If you do take a moment to try the MH jump on dm13, come back here and I'll let you know about a shitload of other "trick jumps".


(longpostbad!)

 

[Guest]

bront, what Radeon are you talking about?!? The 8500? Because there is not a single Radeon card <i>cheaper</i> than a GeForce Ti200 ($170 OEM) that can even come close to it in performance! In many reviews, the Ti200 even beats the Radeon 8500, and you can get it for $30-$50 less right now!

If you don't want to spend more than $200, go with the Ti200.

By the way, don't be duped into getting an OEM Radeon 8500--both the core and memory are clocked slower than the retail version.

Save the children

 

[Crashman]

"the 7500 is a "modified" version of the original so it SHOULD perform better."
Oh sure, like the GeFroce2 MX is a moidified version of the GTS? Or like the MX200 is a modified version of the MX? Or like the TNT2-M64 is a modified verions of the TNT2? Do you think any of these outperform the original?



Back to you Tom...