New graphics card
-
ATI typically has DVI out, and provides a better 2D signal than the nVidia cards do (or did anyway). The 9500 is a nice card, and it's faster than a nVidia ti4200, but I'm not sure if you have to get a pro to get DVI out. I have a 9700 Pro, and it has DVI out, and it's 50% faster than the ti4600 in most games, and can be had for $250... ------- signature starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- signature ends
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: I have a 9700 Pro, and it has DVI out, and it's 50% faster than the ti4600 in most games, and can be had for $250 I don't think that my cpu could match up with a 9700 Pro :( So maybe I have to get that 9500 dvi model When I was young my mother told me to clean up my room, I told her -1!
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: I have a 9700 Pro, and it has DVI out, and it's 50% faster than the ti4600 in most games, and can be had for $250 I don't think that my cpu could match up with a 9700 Pro :( So maybe I have to get that 9500 dvi model When I was young my mother told me to clean up my room, I told her -1!
Stefan Spenz wrote: I don't think that my cpu could match up with a 9700 Pro I think it can... One of my friends had a PII 400 which had major problems with almost all newer games. Then he got a Geforce4 TI4400, and voila, it could play all the games :) - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
-
Stefan Spenz wrote: I don't think that my cpu could match up with a 9700 Pro I think it can... One of my friends had a PII 400 which had major problems with almost all newer games. Then he got a Geforce4 TI4400, and voila, it could play all the games :) - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
Anders Molin wrote: One of my friends had a PII 400 which had major problems with almost all newer games. Then he got a Geforce4 TI4400, and voila, it could play all the games Lately I ran the Splinter Cell demo on my machine, and even in 640*480 it was almost impossible to get a fluid gameplay X| . I'm no hardware guru, but is there really a significant difference in games when upgrading your graphics card? I mean I'd like to play in fluid 1024*768, and can that 9700 pro really boost performance so much? When I was young my mother told me to clean up my room, I told her -1!
-
Anders Molin wrote: One of my friends had a PII 400 which had major problems with almost all newer games. Then he got a Geforce4 TI4400, and voila, it could play all the games Lately I ran the Splinter Cell demo on my machine, and even in 640*480 it was almost impossible to get a fluid gameplay X| . I'm no hardware guru, but is there really a significant difference in games when upgrading your graphics card? I mean I'd like to play in fluid 1024*768, and can that 9700 pro really boost performance so much? When I was young my mother told me to clean up my room, I told her -1!
Stefan Spenz wrote: but is there really a significant difference in games when upgrading your graphics card? Yes. Stefan Spenz wrote: I mean I'd like to play in fluid 1024*768, and can that 9700 pro really boost performance so much? In most games yes. - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
-
ATI typically has DVI out, and provides a better 2D signal than the nVidia cards do (or did anyway). The 9500 is a nice card, and it's faster than a nVidia ti4200, but I'm not sure if you have to get a pro to get DVI out. I have a 9700 Pro, and it has DVI out, and it's 50% faster than the ti4600 in most games, and can be had for $250... ------- signature starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- signature ends
I personally prefer the nvidia cards even though they are a little slower than ATI's. You don't have that stupid ATI toolbar and my roommate is having trouble with OpenGL support with his Raedon (I'm not sure which one but it's pretty new). I've got a geforce 4 ti4600 and haven't had a bit of trouble with it. Just my opinion, hope this helps. Brad Jennings
-
I personally prefer the nvidia cards even though they are a little slower than ATI's. You don't have that stupid ATI toolbar and my roommate is having trouble with OpenGL support with his Raedon (I'm not sure which one but it's pretty new). I've got a geforce 4 ti4600 and haven't had a bit of trouble with it. Just my opinion, hope this helps. Brad Jennings
Not to start a flame war, but here are my opinions on NVidia and ATI. I also prefer NVidia over ATI. NVidia is on top of their drivers, constantly making updates. Nvidia has their "unified" drivers, so you no longer have to search for the appropriate driver for your card. You simply install their latest Detonator Drivers, and you are good to go. ATI on the other hand is known for their lack of driver updates. They do not have a unified driver approach, so you have to search through their website for appropriate drivers. The one ATI card that I have is not listed in their list of cards... Another thing that bugs me about ATI is how they cheated on Quake3 benchmarks in the past. If you ran Quake3 (quake3.exe), the ATI cards would do something so the game ran faster. I don't remember what it was, but it automatically turned down details or something like that. However, if you ran Quake3 after renaming the executable to something other than Quake3.exe, you would get different results. Why!?!?!? Looks like cheating to me.
-
I personally prefer the nvidia cards even though they are a little slower than ATI's. You don't have that stupid ATI toolbar and my roommate is having trouble with OpenGL support with his Raedon (I'm not sure which one but it's pretty new). I've got a geforce 4 ti4600 and haven't had a bit of trouble with it. Just my opinion, hope this helps. Brad Jennings
ATI just released a driver update that is supposed to fix some OpenGL problems. I don't know for certain though because I don't have an ATI card. The Ten Commandments For C Programmers
-
Not to start a flame war, but here are my opinions on NVidia and ATI. I also prefer NVidia over ATI. NVidia is on top of their drivers, constantly making updates. Nvidia has their "unified" drivers, so you no longer have to search for the appropriate driver for your card. You simply install their latest Detonator Drivers, and you are good to go. ATI on the other hand is known for their lack of driver updates. They do not have a unified driver approach, so you have to search through their website for appropriate drivers. The one ATI card that I have is not listed in their list of cards... Another thing that bugs me about ATI is how they cheated on Quake3 benchmarks in the past. If you ran Quake3 (quake3.exe), the ATI cards would do something so the game ran faster. I don't remember what it was, but it automatically turned down details or something like that. However, if you ran Quake3 after renaming the executable to something other than Quake3.exe, you would get different results. Why!?!?!? Looks like cheating to me.
mgama wrote: They do not have a unified driver approach, so you have to search through their website for appropriate drivers. They have started to change that; when they released the Catalyst line of drivers you would download the same file for all the Radeon cards. You need to use the search to find out what additional software you need to make full use of the cards capabilities (multimedia center for TV tuner playback). Now they're going against that again with the Catalyst 3.0 drivers you have two different sets of drivers depending on if you have a 9500/9700 card or a different Radeon card because of the driver signing in XP. I hope that changes again :) mgama wrote: Looks like cheating to me. That depends on the purpose of the tweaks, is it done to just give better benchmarks or is it done to make the game run better. Unfortunately we'll never know. :rolleyes: FWIW, I do prefer nVidia over ATI because they have the track record; but if ATI can keep it up I'll convert eventually (just like I converted from 3Dfx many moons ago :)) James "It is self repeating, of unknown pattern" Data - Star Trek: The Next Generation
-
I personally prefer the nvidia cards even though they are a little slower than ATI's. You don't have that stupid ATI toolbar and my roommate is having trouble with OpenGL support with his Raedon (I'm not sure which one but it's pretty new). I've got a geforce 4 ti4600 and haven't had a bit of trouble with it. Just my opinion, hope this helps. Brad Jennings
I don't have any ATI toolbar... I also don't have any trouble with OpenGL... ------- signature starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- signature ends
-
I personally prefer the nvidia cards even though they are a little slower than ATI's. You don't have that stupid ATI toolbar and my roommate is having trouble with OpenGL support with his Raedon (I'm not sure which one but it's pretty new). I've got a geforce 4 ti4600 and haven't had a bit of trouble with it. Just my opinion, hope this helps. Brad Jennings
Just dont RUN the toolbar. Also, no funky OpenGL issues here. Running Quake3 @ 1600X1200 32 bit color and it flys like a dream.
Paul Watson wrote: "At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote: "Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
