Jump to content

Welcome to Geeks to Go - Register now for FREE

Geeks To Go is a helpful hub, where thousands of volunteer geeks quickly serve friendly answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts. Register now to gain access to all of our features, it's FREE and only takes one minute. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more.

Create Account How it Works
Photo

new grpahics card for noobie


  • Please log in to reply

#31
jrm20

jrm20

    System building expert

  • Retired Staff
  • 2,394 posts
ummm no.
  • 0

Advertisements


#32
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
The x800 is an all new core, i dont know where you are getting your information from but its not correct.

SM3 doesnt actually give you anything new its just more efficient ATI didnt use it in the x800s or x850s as they didnt need that efficiency and they had the cards optimised so much for SM2 it worked out the same.

They were all new cores in that generation(the 6600GT came out at the same time as the x800 as well and kicked its [bleep] even then) i dont have any preference other than whats the best going for someone like me(a gamer that likes hid games fast and beautiful) so thats why i go ATI the image quality is superior and with the new generations they can run HDR and anti aliasing simultaneously where the 7 series cards cant so thats why i would never buy a 7 series unless it was ridiculouly cheaper than an ATI card which it isnt its more expenisive.

GTOs are very nice cards, kinda like the kind of thing nvidia had going with the GS except ATI went even lower down the market with the GTO.
  • 0

#33
jrm20

jrm20

    System building expert

  • Retired Staff
  • 2,394 posts
lol. Maybe if you stick around you can learn something from me or warriorscot.
  • 0

#34
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
Yeah we are both so geeky as to have most of the specs on gfx cards and most other high performance hardware in our heads.
  • 0

#35
jrm20

jrm20

    System building expert

  • Retired Staff
  • 2,394 posts
lmao. We should talk on msn sometime.
  • 0

#36
suplexx

suplexx

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
The r420 core is based on the r3xx architecture. It's like the r3xx with more pipes and stuff. It's not completely new, which is probably why it does not support 3.0.
  • 0

#37
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
All gfx carsd released at the moment are based on the previous core, they use them for reference they change bits that need changed not the whole core, the R400s were a new core design there are fundamental differences in the architecture that seperate the 3xx core and the 4xx cores just like the 5xx cores are different from the 4xxs, SM3 wasnt implemented because it wasnt needed it was for nvidia to give them the extra efficiency to get the cards to the same level as the R4xx core cards in terms of visual performance.
  • 0

#38
Naz-T

Naz-T

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts
yey! its finally arrived my new card!!

on your advice i purchased a new 256mb ati all in wonder x800gto!

its on my desk in work, cant wait to get home to see if my powersupply will cope lol, its really heavy!
also upped my ram to by one more stick from 512, picking up a pair of matched 512's tommorow so should be rocking this weekend gonna try BF2 on full pretty mode lol

cheers guys

Matt/Naz-T
  • 0

#39
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
Just dont turn the AA on if you try that, mostly pretty mode maybe all pretty mode si quite hard on gfx cards.
  • 0

#40
Naz-T

Naz-T

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts
thanks for that


ps guess whos shopping tommorow for a new powersupply lol
:tazz:
  • 0

Advertisements


#41
Naz-T

Naz-T

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts
right dont know what im doing wrong but here goes,


now got 1 meg of memory, new graphics card 256 all in wonder x800, new 400 watt power supply and BF2 still seems to lagg and stuff, dont get it,

i have a dell 15" lcd monitor will do 75mhz, i have set up desktop to that refresh rate so no probs there,
when i adjust settings in BF2 to full pretty mode ie 1078 by whater and 75 mhz ref. rate it displays nicely but now and again my direction will stick on movement in the game ie ill take up to 5-10 steps in which ever direction i was going in before stopping even when i take my finger off the keys ( as if lagging)?? but only now and again which is what puzzles me it is the same when i turn everything off or down to low quality mode???
any ideas? ive altered my agp on motherboard to 256, i belive i have the latest drivers so...


short of buying a new system i dont know what to do..
  • 0

#42
Comrade General

Comrade General

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 387 posts
Hmm, processor?

I mean everything else sounds good. Turned off AA right? Also, maybe try 60 mhz as a refresh rate? I don't know if refresh rates play that big of a role though...

Edited by Comrade General, 08 January 2006 - 02:21 PM.

  • 0

#43
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
I cant believe your playin on a 15" monitor, wow not much point in highest settings with only 15" of screen your going to miss half of the detail, CPU would be my thinking as well, its probably the game loading new textures into memory i think combined with a bit of lag on the cpu processing the data.
  • 0

#44
Comrade General

Comrade General

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 387 posts

I cant believe your playin on a 15" monitor, wow not much point in highest settings with only 15" of screen your going to miss half of the detail, CPU would be my thinking as well, its probably the game loading new textures into memory i think combined with a bit of lag on the cpu processing the data.


But a 15inch moniter ain't too bad is it? :tazz:
  • 0

#45
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
It isnt whe you are using it, i used to use a 15" TFT on my old system, and waht a difference when i bought my 19" syncmaster i use the old computer occasionally and i cant beleive i was able to use it, its so tiny and small. Once you know what its like to use something bigger you cant go back.
  • 0






Similar Topics

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

As Featured On:

Microsoft Yahoo BBC MSN PC Magazine Washington Post HP