Advice on a decent graphics card ?

Florent · Post by **Florent** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:16 am

So yesterday I proudly mentionned I was getting a new computer, and that it was only missing a screen, keyboard and mouse. Well it turns out it's also missing a graphics card !

Can anyone give me some advice on a fairly good AGP card ?
It's for a Shuttle mini PC, Pentium IV 3.0 GHz processor, 1 Gb RAM.
I'm not looking for hardcore gamer stuff, but maybe I'd like to try play Half-Life 2 so I guess I will need something pretty powerful.
Anyway, it shouldn't cost more than 150 euros (ideally).

Thanks for any input !

Oh and, to Linflas and the other Parisians, if you know any good, cheap computer stores or any interesting deals, please let me know ASAP !!! Merci !

Post by **linflas** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 12:21 pm

For HL2, you must have 256Mo graphic card. I suggest you the Powercolor-Radeon-9600XT-Bravo-256M, excellent price/quality...
I buy all my graphics cards at Pany PC (4 rue Crozatier Paris), the guy is cool and funny when you buy something tom him but gets very angry when you come back with a problem... so you've been warned

http://www.pany-direct.com/contents/cat ... 69&cat=105
http://www.pany-direct.com/contents/cat ... 43&cat=105 (+ Video IN)

Post by **Gambit37** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 12:24 pm

must have 256Mo graphic card

That's a bit heavy. My cards out of date at *only* 128MB and runs HL2 at very acceptable quality. A 256MB card or more is truly hardcore gamer for modern games, most older stuff will play acceptably on much much less.

Florent · Post by **Florent** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 2:08 pm

Thanks Linflas for the cool address, I didn't know that one. I used to go to LCDI Advance near the Père Lachaise but they're out of business.

Video In... Mmmh what's that for ? Does this mean this card is capable of recording digital video from a camcorder or a VCR's Video Out ? That's pretty interesting, although I already have a Firewire digital video conversion module (never tried it because I didn't have Firewire on my previous computer).

Also thanks to Gambit for some wise advice, I'm trying to quit gaming (except for DM) so I might as well save some money and go for a 128 Mb card.

Post by **Gambit37** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 2:16 pm

If you want to future proof (a bit!) and have the cash, definitely go for a 256MB or higher as games are getting more and more complex all the time. But if your'e not too concerned about all the new shader stuff, reflections and such like then an older cheaper card should suffice.

I'm sure others will disagree with me though...

Post by **linflas** » Wed Feb 23, 2005 4:19 pm

yep, i have a geforce fx5700 128Mo card and HL2 runs well on it but a 256 Mb card at 130 eur is quite interesting for future.

Tom Hatfield · Post by **Tom Hatfield** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:02 am

You guys are making the same mistake many consumers make when rating video cards. Memory does not equal performance. I can cite some examples if you want to know why. The best card you can get right now is a GeForce 6800 Ultra. It is hands-down the most ridiculously powerful chipset on the market, not to mention the only one that supports PS/VS3.0 at this time. It also has some interesting on-board features such as shadow volume culling and MPEG compression. Of course, it's $400 US. . .

If you buy a GeForce FX, don't get anything less than a 5600, and I honestly wouldn't recommend less than a 5900. Do not, under any circumstances, by a GeForce 4 MX. You'd actually be buying a slightly faster GeForce 2. (This is not an exaggeration. GF4 MX uses the NV18 CPU, which is only three builds above the original GF2.)

I bought a GeForce 4 Ti 4600 about a year and a half ago. It's an NV25 128 MB (128-bit DDR1) card running at 300 MHz (650 MHz memory). I don't overclock it. I'm using the Detonator 61.77 reference drivers with ForceWare 5.10 for my M7NCD Pro motherboard. (I've switched drivers numerous times to determine the best combination of performance and stability for all the programs I use, and this seems to be it.) I don't use the ForceWare memory controller or IDE drivers because one (or both of them causes my system to sporadically reboot.

I can run Half-life 2 at full detail without any noticeable decline in performance. It runs better when I turn the texture detail to medium, but the margin is virtually negligible. My card cost about $158 and performs twice as well as a GeForce FX 5200, particularly in the pixel shader category. You can buy a Radeon 9800 for a comparable price. It outperforms the GF4 Ti 4600 in all categories except pixel shaders (which are half as fast, but this is expected because Radeons have much higher quality shaders). I'd recommend either card if you don't have the cash to dump on a GF6800. . . or you can wait until the price drops.

Post by **Gambit37** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 1:11 am

Yeah, I have a Geforce 4 Ti 4600 also -- bought it as soon as they came out, May 2002. It's ancient in some respects, but still a bloody good card. I've been very happy with it. Doom 3 and HL2 perform admirably on it, although my PC holds them back as it's only and AMD Athlon 1800 XP. But As long as I'm sensible with detail settings, most current games are playable.

Post by **linflas** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:39 pm

Tom Hatfield wrote:You guys are making the same mistake many consumers make when rating video cards. Memory does not equal performance. I can cite some examples if you want to know why.

then please tell me more : if i had 256Mb card for HL2 i could play with higher texture resolution. am i wrong ?
i play actually in 1024x768 high res and i have some slow parts sometimes...

sucinum · Post by **sucinum** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 1:31 pm

radeon 9800 pro - imho by far the best. of course i'm biased because i hate nvidia.

beowuuf · Post by **beowuuf** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 1:36 pm

i use the radeon 9800 too, and with my barton 3000+ and 1Gb memory, plays half life 2 like a dream

a strange dream involving white-faced gimps attacking me with glowing sticks and guns...

Post by **Gambit37** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 2:47 pm

God I am so jealous beosplod. Wish I had some cash to upgrade my machine....

Florent · Post by **Florent** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 5:28 pm

Thanks everyone for your input ! Got the Radeon 9600. My PC still doesn't work though, I have to change my Shuttle because it doesn't support my processor...

Post by **linflas** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 5:31 pm

the main problem for people with a 1 year old (and more) graphics card is simple : HL2 is quite ugly while UT2004 and Doom3 were not.

beowuuf · Post by **beowuuf** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 5:39 pm

oops, beosplod wishesd to apologise - not beign a huge gamer, he got the 9600 like florent and has had no problems with HL2

yeah, the comp upgrade was my gift to myself, i don't upgrade much so i ewnt and got a completely new machine : )

Post by **cowsmanaut** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 6:14 pm

Will point out once again that Nvidia cards are better if you want to use 3D softwareor any other program that is striclty openGL. ATI has always been bad with openGL and horribile with their drivers as well. ALSO, their customer service and support sucks major ass. I had one of their cards and was having an issue with it. Trying to play quake 3 (back in the day when it was still new) and they wouldn't reply to the frist two emails. The 3rd was particularly nasty explaining that I had paid money for this card and had tried to support a canadian company and so on... They finally respond with "Yes we are aware of the issue and we have no plans on dealing with it at this time. We suggest if you would like to play quake 3 you should buy our newest card which supports it"

WTF???? ok a card that is not even a full year old.. you no longer support it... Then shortly after I learn their "new card" was set up to cheat the benchmarks and they got a lot of flack for that one.

Anyway, Nvidia *STILL* supports their old cards in the detonator driver pack. They didn't abandon them. XP drivers were made for them and maintained. Trying to get my AllInWonder to work in XP.... forget it.. not with their drivers I won't.

One of my students.. got himself a Raedeon a few years back. Put it into his computer and XP refused to boot anymore.. He tried reinstalling...... nothing. he took it out.. got a geforce 2 (that was the latest at the time).. bingo.. worked. I then shortly after read an article in a game mag.. explaining the same incident from one of their reviewers. Also talking about the DVD play back on it.. how it stuttered like a young boy at a school dance..

Anyway, as I said.. I would like to support ATI.. they are canadian.. but instead the embarrass me. To think a canadian company which is supposed to be a leader in technology... they do such a crappy job!! They make great hardware.. but their software (drivers and such) SUCKS!!!..

end of rant...

beowuuf · Post by **beowuuf** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 6:42 pm

i will add in my two cents about that, the drivers that came with the card didn't work and knocked win98 when i imnstalled the, - i forgot that...i had to get the spanky new drivers from their website instead and it all worked out

Florent · Post by **Florent** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:27 am

Nice... Guess I'm not out of trouble then. Reminds me I liked my Nvidia card a lot.

Sucinum, why do you hate Nvidia ?

Post by **cowsmanaut** » Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:52 am

Maybe he's crazy.. SHHHHH!... oh uh.. think he heard me