Graphics card.

[cbarger]

I have a AMD 900 Thunderbird on a Abit kt7a board with Win XP and 458 megs of ram. I was wondering how I can match up a good graphics card to this system. I have a G-Force 2 400mx now. I was also thinking of upgrading my cpu to a 1.4 Amd chip any comments would help...

 

[CrownV3]

Once you upgrade that cpu we have the same system. I'm using a Radeon 8500. But I'm trying to get a Geforce 4 card right now. Possibly a Geforce 3 with the price drops. The only advice I can give from experience, if you ever get into beta testing (Which I do alot of) you'll find majority of games are designed with nvidia in mind. Especially the G3's. You'll almost always find ATI as a problem with software. I seen the Geforce 3 Ti200 in action and I was very impressed. With the price drops right now these are very attractive cards. But you have the money G4's might be a thing to look at. Hope this helps.

 

[chuck232]

If you're going to a 1.4GHz then just about anything would go. Unless you want the best of the best and get a Ti4600, Id go for either a Ti4200 or a GF3 Ti200, Ti4200 being my first choice. First of all, your proc wouldn't limit it that much (if you got the 1.4) and the Ti4200 whoops the Gf3 Ti200 anyday. When the Ti4200 comes out, it'll push the price of the Ti200 down a bit, but it'll only be a bit cheaper then a Ti4200. Therefore, if you have the ~$90 for a 1.4GHz proc and then ~$160 for a video card, you'll be rockin'!

 

[cbarger]

So I would be better upgrading my cpu than just my video card?

 

[chuck232]

Even right now, you're GF2 MX will have been maxed out in most games so a video card upgrade would be more important. All I'm saying is that since you're thinking of upgrading you proc, it'd be wise to do so. You'll get much better frame rates and you'll be able to play on higher resolutions. If you're willing to spend the extra $90, I'd go for it.

 

[cbarger]

thanks now off to pricewatch

 

[bdaley]

"You'll almost always find ATI as a problem with software."

Huh? What is that bullshit? I don't have any problems with mine.

"There's no such thing as gravity, the Earth just sucks."

 

[cbarger]

what do you think about a G-Force 4mx 440 or a G-force 3 Ti200? I am on a budget for around 150 or less. Both of these should be a improvement over my g_force 2 mx400.

 

[shmeggegie]

If I may, I'd like to caution you against getting a GeForce3. Don't get me wrong, they're great cards, BUT!!! a) You're one generation closer to not being able to play certain games. This is important because:
b) I own a GeForce3, and while I've been happy with it without exception, I've started to notice that all the software developers are going GeForce4 crazy far more than they ever did with the GeForce3 (they practically didn't with that card.) Games exist right now that I have to run in 640x480 to get the full detail in them. For instance, the SOFII mptest can't run well at anything higher than 640x480 if I want 32 bit textures, high detail textures and models. This is, admittedly, asking a lot, but I think the games market is wholeheartedly embracing the Geforce4 and not the Geforce3, so I would go for the 4.

<b>Studies have shown that most people prefer the taste of AMD to the taste of Intel</b>

 

[shmeggegie]

The Geforce4 MX series would barely outperform your Geforce2. you'd actually do better to save your money for a little longer to afford a more expensive card. In my opinion (which is not necessarily the same as others') you shouldn't blow 150 on a card that'll only perform slightly better. If you don't want to wait, look into ATI's line of cards. They perform very well for their price.

<b>Studies have shown that most people prefer the taste of AMD to the taste of Intel</b>