Jump to content


Photo

New Graphics Card


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Combiseries

Combiseries

    68% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 208 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 05:12 AM

I have bought a Sapphire HD2600XT. Its a budget DX10 card, I did a little research into its benchmarks, done by many reviewers and it performs nearly as good as the X1950. However, I`m starting to think that perhaps my purchase was a wrong one, because it doesn`t perform very well with my Dungeon Lords game, which is rather old. I have tried the Futuremark 3dMarks and for some reason they crash before getting past the splash screen at the intro, and won`t even load up. I`m going to try updated drivers and see if that helps.

When the box came, it was not selaphane wrapped, it was in the original box with a sticker closing the lid. And the antistatic bag was not sealed. Do you think I should send it back and get an X1950pro....

Help me out guys, I think I dun a boo boo.

And I know I`m only on here a few months at a time, I`ll try to be here more often. I promise.

#2 Combiseries

Combiseries

    68% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 208 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 10:25 AM

I`ve updated the drivers and that seems to solved the problem with my Dungeon Lords game. We`ll see how the card runs with X2: The Threat. On full graphics.

#3 Combiseries

Combiseries

    68% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 208 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 03:12 PM

Got an average framerate of 29fps, on full graphics settings with X2 and high resolutions. The standard 1024 setting gives me 38fps average. Which is playable. However, after downloading Half Life Lost Coast, I am noticing lines in the screen. Blue and cut up a little. I think these may be artifacts, which shows that the card may have either been overclocked before, or its overheating. I increased the resolution to the highest and the computer crashed. FPS in Half Life seems to be quite good.

This is turning out into a little blog, however, I think it may be usefull for me to write my findings down somewhere.....

#4 Combiseries

Combiseries

    68% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 208 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 04:25 PM

Got about 98FPS with Half Life Lost Coast. So, not bad, considering I only paid 61 for the card. I`m waiting for a replacement DVD ROM Drive, so I can test it with Oblivion. Thats the real test as I only bought the card to play that game and its ilk. I`m using XP by the way.

#5 kodiak536

kodiak536

    100% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 336 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 05:47 PM

If I were you, I'd return the card and opt for a better card ,if not only for the reasons you listed and if your budget allows. The way technology's advancing, this card will be outdated in 6 months or so, if not already, just as mine probably will too blink.gif The games coming out now days is getting more and more demanding on our system; graphics card in conjunction with other system hardwares must stay in top shape and up to date for us to be able to play them or suffer the performance lags.
I just built my system last year and already I had to upgrade my graphics card to prepare for the upcoming new games, such as COD 4, BioShock and Crysis wacko.gif Ahhhh, wonderful world of gaming, they eat your budget faster than you can say upgrade.

#6 Combiseries

Combiseries

    68% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 208 posts

Posted 04 November 2007 - 10:34 AM

Yes, I agree with you, however, it was because of my budget that I bought the card in the first place. Others on this forum will probably know the reason why I said that. I knew I could have probably bought an X1950 XT or Pro for a little bit more. I used to have one in an AGP version; it flew like a concord on games like Oblivion and COD2. I also won a 8800GTX from the Gameshadow site, and boy did that fly like a spaceship on starwars. I sold it tho, to buy a new car, as a new car was more important to me and to my family. Which was the reason I spent so little on a DX10 card. My next upgrade is more important to me than a super duper gfx card. I need a new case, so that`ll come first, and then I think another gig of memory, and then after that perhaps I`ll persuade my wife to let me have vista. By then the card I`ll have allready will be DX10 combabtible and I`ll test it out on a few DX10 games. If its a load of rubbish, I`ll get rid and buy an 8800gtx or gts, by which time they`ll be at a more affordable price.

I`m a tight budget gamer, and I believe all the hardware I`ve bought, albeit they may have been cheap; out of it I have always had a machine that gave me great performance by bang for pound choices. Check out my spec below, it may not seem like an uber machine. Believe it or not it only cost me 300 british pounds (give or take a few) to build and I`m very happy with it.

By the time I`ve completed all the games I`ve got a couple of times over and grown tired of them, it`l be time for my next upgrade, and I`ll completely rebuild my machine ready for the next line of games.

I know I`m rambling on, so I`ll sign off.....................

#7 dualchart

dualchart

    1% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 3 posts

Posted 26 November 2007 - 12:08 PM

not to shabby peice of Hardware if your into ATI that is biggrin.gif

#8 2005

2005

    120% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 1,375 posts

Posted 26 November 2007 - 06:55 PM

I'm all but done with console gaming, just because of the sick amount of money you need to invest to play new games. I think the 8800GT is the best choice out there at moment, it performs on part with the 8800GTS and GTX for far less money and its a DX10 card.

If I do buy a new card, it won't be before Star Craft 2 and that will probably be the last performance graphics card I ever purchase.

#9 MaLing

MaLing

    Official Birthday Wisher

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 2,117 posts

Posted 26 November 2007 - 09:09 PM

If you use console to play games, there is at least one advantage: The games are designed and guaranteed playable with your console, you do not have to worry about the efficiency of the components, especially the display component.

Computer games never consider this, they are just developed for the high performance, and players always need to care about their display cards, etc, and buy new ones. sad.gif

#10 Jito463

Jito463

    Forum Support

  • Support Team
  • 5,625 posts

Posted 27 November 2007 - 04:13 PM

Yes, but for the PC - while many developers like to try pushing the cutting edge - even they will still scale back to appeal to the lowest-common-denominator. In other words, they try to make their games playable and available to the largest percentage of the PC market possible. And while PC owners have to dish out a little more for hardware, console owners have to dish out more for the software (games cost more on consoles than on the PC due to licensing). The benefit the PC has is that the graphics are considerably better than anything the consoles can do. Even if the consoles manage to surpass the PC, it's only for a short time and then the PC is back on top.

#11 2005

2005

    120% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 1,375 posts

Posted 27 November 2007 - 09:53 PM

With my PS3 and HDTV the graphics are good enough for me, the computer no longer has that check mark on the list for me wanting to play games on it over the computer.

The thing I hate most is I just dumped $2000 into the system in my sig with shipping and everything about 19 months ago and now the stuff in it is basically worthless. The newer games today will bring it to its knees and it needs at the very least a GPU update and couldn't hurt to have a new motherboard, CPU and ram.

PS3 and 360 games are $59 each, but even if you buy 30 games (which is a lot) your still only spending on average an extra 450 odd dollars or so then buying it for the PC. Then you have to consider initial PC investment and and then consider upgrade investments, that far outweighs the 450$ even if you only consider CPU, GPU and memory alone.

The computer has its uses though, and mine isn't going anywhere. It will just be a while before I rebuild this system.

#12 Jito463

Jito463

    Forum Support

  • Support Team
  • 5,625 posts

Posted 30 November 2007 - 02:42 PM

Part of your problem was going with the Opteron. The only real advantage of the Opty over the Athlon64 is the thermals (Optys are obviously designed for lower wattage and thermals for servers), but they cost much more for that same reason. If you get a standard Athlon64 (Newegg had an FX-62 for $159!! not long back), and a decent video card upgrade such as the 8800GT (which could be transferred to a new machine later since you have PCIe), you'd be set on your PC. Figure maybe $500-$600 for a really good upgrade, even less if you don't go as high on the CPU.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users