|
Intel vs. AMD
|
|
|
crowy
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
25. March 2007 @ 21:33 |
Link to this message
|
If the facts dont fit the theory, change the facts." -- Albert Einstein This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. March 2007 @ 21:39
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
25. March 2007 @ 21:43 |
Link to this message
|
Thanks for that.
The 7900GTO is 500au inculding GST which is over what i was thinking LOL! the 7600 GT is 220au but hey i have to think that i wont upgarde this or buy a new PC for another 1-1 1/2 or even 2 years so putting better stuff i guess but i think i still might go for the 7600GT well im happy if the 7600GT can run games like flight simulator X (Which is the hardest game to run to date) on high?
the 7600GT would go into a Pentium D 3.4ghz PC with 2gb DDR2.
do you think it would run games like that on high?
http://www.auspcmarket.com.au/index.php?...t[category_id]=
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. March 2007 @ 21:44
|
|
crowy
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
25. March 2007 @ 22:52 |
Link to this message
|
dazila,
Quote:
the 7600GT would go into a Pentium D 3.4ghz PC with 2gb DDR2.
do you think it would run games like that on high?
I'm pretty sure it would(I'm not right up with all the latest cards),but there are more knowledgable folk here who should be able to give you an idea what to expect with that card/setup.
Just had look at the minimum system specs for flight simulator x...
Minimum System Requirements
* Windows XP SP2 / Windows Vista
* Processor: 1.0 Ghz
* RAM: Windows XP SP2 - 256MB, Windows Vista ? 512MB
* Hard Drive: 14GB
* Video Card: 32MB DirectX 9 compatible
* Other: DX9 hardware compatibility and audio board with speakers and/or headphones
* Online/Multiplayer Requirements: 56.6 kbps or better for online play
I'm certain your system will be fine @ max settings.
If the facts dont fit the theory, change the facts." -- Albert Einstein
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. March 2007 @ 23:17
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
25. March 2007 @ 23:34 |
Link to this message
|
|
mm. but alot of people are saying they've been tricked by microsoft saying that those are min when they ahve pc's much stronger and it lags.
but yeah i guess if i were to buy this pc then i should run it cause
Minimum System Requirements
* Windows XP SP2 / Windows Vista -Id have XP pro
* Processor: 1.0 Ghz id have a dual core 3.4ghz
* RAM: Windows XP SP2 - 256MB, Windows Vista ? 512MB - id have 2gb ddr2
* Hard Drive:14GB -id have 300gb
* Video Card: 32MB DirectX 9 compatible -id have a 256mb GPU
* Other: DX9 hardware compatibility and audio board with speakers and/or headphones -id have a 5.1 sound card with 5.1 speakers
* Online/Multiplayer Requirements: 56.6 kbps or better for online play -I have 9.9mbps Cable.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. March 2007 @ 01:46 |
Link to this message
|
Games that only need a 32MB graphics minimum dudn't used to be too taxing, I mean Unreal 2004 needs a 64MB minimum GPU and even my old X800 Pro walked all over it at max settings. However, MS being MS, you'll want the fastest Graphics card you can get. As to whether you can run flightsim X at max detail (I haven't used it personally so I can't tell you how my PC performs in it) it depends what resolution you want to play at. If your monitor only allows 1024x768 you'll be fine with a 7600GT I'd expect, if 1280x1024 you may have to sacrifice a few settings or get the 7900GS. If it's more than that you'll need to either get a very meaty graphics card like a 7950GT or drop the resolution a bit.
if you want to see how the respective graphics cards compare, http://www.tomshardware.com offer the "VGA charts" which is pretty comprehensive.
As an example, in the game Prey, running at 1600x1200 max detail with image filtering on (this shows its a true test of the graphics card rather than anything else)
7600GT: 24fps (a bit jerky)
7900GS: 36fps (relatively smooth)
7900GT: 43fps (mostly smooth)
7950GT: 45fps (mostly smooth)
X1900XT (my card): 50fps (mostly smooth)
8800GTS: 67fps (smooth)
8800GTX: 93fps (absolutely smooth)
Now I don't know how different these numbers will be in Flightsim, but the relative differences should stay about the same.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. March 2007 @ 02:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
1280x1024 is what im thinking of running it at if it jerks on high i would just put it down to 1024x760 i always like hgher detail over Resolution it all depends person to person funny thing in a game i dont mind resolutions like 800x600 in old games which that is the maxumin but i fell like throwing PC's out the window that have it as their Normal desktop resolution no matter what i dont go under 1024x760 about 11 years ago i had people laugh a the resolution i always used they were used to the then "640x480 or 800x600" i just hate big chunky text my way 15"= 1024x760, 17"=1280x1024 and so on LOL!.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. March 2007 @ 02:03 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ive played Flight Sim X on a X1900XTX about 100 times but hey 7600GT and X1900XTX are 2 different things comparing to each other.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. March 2007 @ 02:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well, how did it run on the X1900 and at what settings? It should run at around 45-50% of the speed that it did on the radeon.
I always prefer high detail over resolution, but that's usually when I can turn on Anti-Aliasing :P I don't necessarily mind dropping res (except for me it's typically 1680x1050 or 1280x800 from 2560x1600) but I don't like jagged edges. Unfortunately with Rainbow Six Vegas I have to suffer both! As a pretty crummy rip from an Xbox 360 game it's overly demanding and doesn't support Anti-Aliasing or Anisotropic filtering even if they're forced in hardware. Even at the stupid detail setting I have to play it at to run well on my GPU it looks good. I'm told its performance is improved by running ATi cards in Vista, so I'll have to try that.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. March 2007 @ 02:16
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. March 2007 @ 02:58 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Well, how did it run on the X1900 and at what settings? It should run at around 45-50%
Wow i never thought the X1900 was that ahead of a 7600GT LOL!
it ran on everything high,high texture,shadow detail,water,cloud rendering,world texture visibilty on 100% etc AA was on max,AF on etc and at 1680x1050 resolution it got about 59fps i tell people this on other places like gamespot and they say im lying how am i freakin lying LOL! some guys over there are desperate to get 20+fps on guy said he is happy with 10fps in the game LOL!
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. March 2007 @ 03:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
Lol owned!
if you can get 60fps with the X1900, then with similar other specs, a 7600GT should pull at least 25-30, which is acceptable. With a D950 and 2GB of RAM the other components shouldn't pull you down that much either. If you're only playing at 1280x1024, then chances are a 7600GT could managed up to 40fps, which isn't too shabby. This is with all the maximum detail shaders left on. I've seen far worse running games than that.
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. March 2007 @ 04:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
The PC with the X1900 was slower ion other terms then the one i was thinking of getting it was:
3.4ghz P4 with HT
2gb DDR Pc3200 ram
7,200rpm S-ATA
the one i was thinking
3.4ghz Pentium D
2gb DDR2 pc5400
10,000rpm S-ATA
would the CPU affect any of the frame rate?
|
Senior Member
|
26. March 2007 @ 05:02 |
Link to this message
|
|
i recently updated from a single core amd running 2.4ghz with 1gb ram to a core2duo with 2gb and it has unlocked about 10% more from my 7600gt in synthetic benchmarks and it has boosted my framerates quite a bit more than that in battlefield 2142.
the thing of it is for the price i paid for the 7600gt i could go and get a 1950xt today. aint life grand.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. March 2007 @ 05:39 |
Link to this message
|
|
Heh I paid £550 for my X2 4200+ and X1900XT, you can buy them for a third of that.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
26. March 2007 @ 12:39 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well, If you can find some store with a backshelf 6800 Ultra I wouldn't say no. Or if you can score an X1800GTO
6800U=7600GT=X850XT=X1800GTO
But on stuff that runs with OpenGL (ie. Doom3, Quake 4, Prey) the 7600GT and 6800U will mostly beat out the ATi Cards.
I've used all of them and I kinda have a feel for their performance.
Your D950 WILL NOT DRAG DOWN YOUR SYSTEM!!! It's slow compared to some X2s but it's still got enough horsepower to kick some ass. That and 2GB of RAM and you're screaming :)
EDIT:
As a guesstimate I would rate the D950 3.4GHz around the X2 4200. A nice fast processor. You're gonna fly with it.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. March 2007 @ 12:41
|
AfterDawn Addict
6 product reviews
|
26. March 2007 @ 13:09 |
Link to this message
|
the low prices of video cards P me off too. I paid $165 for my X850XT PE not that long ago.
Quote:
As a guesstimate I would rate the D950 3.4GHz around the X2 4200. A nice fast processor. You're gonna fly with it.
yeah, that's still a good cpu for the money. it'll tear up any P4. only con if any is they run a bit on the warm side.
Rig #1 Asus Rampage Formula Mobo, Intel Core2Quad Q9450 CPU @ 3.55ghz, 2gb Corsair DDR2 1066 Dominator Ram @ 5-5-5-15, TR Ultra 120 Extreme w/ Scythe 9 blade 110 cfm 120mm Fan HSF, HIS Radeon 512mb HD3850 IceQ TurboX GPU, Corsair 620HX P/S, CM Stacker 830 Evo Case, Rig #2 Asus P5W DH Deluxe Mobo, Intel C2D E6600 CPU @ 3.6ghz, 2gb Corsair XMS2 DDR2 800 Ram @ 4-4-4-12-2t, Zalman CNPS9500LED HSF, Sapphire Radeon X850XT PE GPU, Corsair 620HX P/S, Cooler Master Mystique Case, Viewsonic 20.1" Widescreen Digital LCD Monitor, Klipsch Promedia Ultra 5.1 THX Desktop Speakers, http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=348351 http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=236435 |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. March 2007 @ 14:51 |
Link to this message
|
|
Not THAT long ago I paid £292 ($574) for an X800 pro!
|
AfterDawn Addict
6 product reviews
|
26. March 2007 @ 14:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
OUCH!!
Rig #1 Asus Rampage Formula Mobo, Intel Core2Quad Q9450 CPU @ 3.55ghz, 2gb Corsair DDR2 1066 Dominator Ram @ 5-5-5-15, TR Ultra 120 Extreme w/ Scythe 9 blade 110 cfm 120mm Fan HSF, HIS Radeon 512mb HD3850 IceQ TurboX GPU, Corsair 620HX P/S, CM Stacker 830 Evo Case, Rig #2 Asus P5W DH Deluxe Mobo, Intel C2D E6600 CPU @ 3.6ghz, 2gb Corsair XMS2 DDR2 800 Ram @ 4-4-4-12-2t, Zalman CNPS9500LED HSF, Sapphire Radeon X850XT PE GPU, Corsair 620HX P/S, Cooler Master Mystique Case, Viewsonic 20.1" Widescreen Digital LCD Monitor, Klipsch Promedia Ultra 5.1 THX Desktop Speakers, http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=348351 http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=236435 |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
26. March 2007 @ 15:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
You know it! :-)
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
26. March 2007 @ 16:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
I got my X850XT at newegg for $149.99 when they had it there for the longest time. It's still a mid-high card and can be found for super cheap in some places. My local PC Shop is having a sale to get rid of the last gen cards and I found it there for $120.
The X850XT is one of the very few cards to really use crossfire. It actually showed an 80-100% performance increase... I'm not kidding.
I'm thinking of picking up an X850 Crossfire Master and getting a nice LGA775 Crossfire board. My X850XT will easily match a 7900GTX when Crossfired.
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. March 2007 @ 20:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
I walked past the store and saw a geforce 7800GS which is AGP if the mainboard was AGP would the 7800GS be better then a 7600GT?
|
Senior Member
|
26. March 2007 @ 20:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
yes by quite some difference at higher resolutions
edit
please correct me if im wrong here (nudges sam) but i thought that it was the ati cards that got the best out of open gl based games.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. March 2007 @ 20:47
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. March 2007 @ 20:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
no the Nvidia ones do look at all the benchmarks.
about 10% better never knew why?
|
Senior Member
|
26. March 2007 @ 21:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
yep i just looked and they do.
hhmm must of been somthing i was smoking.
i stand corected
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
27. March 2007 @ 00:59 |
Link to this message
|
It always used to be that nVidia cards had a huge advantage in the opengl arena, Doom 3 was the classic benchmark for that. The 6000 and X000 series was the last generation where it happened a lot. The 7000/8000 and X1000 series has closed the gap quite a lot, and now I disregard it completely. I'm not entirely convinced a 7800GS AGP would be that much faster than a 7600GT personally, and past trends tell me it'll be a lot more expensive.
As for the X850 using crossfire, from what i've seen crossfire performance varies from game to game, not from card to card. I've seen plenty of cards get 80-100% increases all across the performance spectrum, but just not in very many games, and the same is true of SLI, although it's coverage is slightly better, or at least was.
This compares an AGP 7600GT with an AGP 7800GS. If anything, the 7600GT may be marginally faster on PCI express:
Quake 4:
7600GT: 32-72
7800GS: 28-73
Chronicles of Riddick EFBB
7600GT: 16-71
7800GS: 15-65
Splinter Cell Chaos Theory
7600GT: 28-73
7800GS: 27-73
3DMark05
7600GT: 4887 @ 1280x1024
7800GS: 4669 @ 1280x1024
3dMark06
7600GT: 2929 @ 1280x1024
7800GS: 2686 @ 1280x1024
A quick newegg shows a 7600GT is available for $100. The 7800GS? $155.
No contestm 7600GT wins.
Benchmarks from http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?cid=3&id=2031
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. March 2007 @ 01:10
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
crowy
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
27. March 2007 @ 01:03 |
Link to this message
|
|
sammorris,
What would you recommend for my system as far as bang per buck goes?
Nearly forgot,how's the weather over there at the moment?
My cousin just returned to Kent last week after leaving temps here in the mid 30s.
If the facts dont fit the theory, change the facts." -- Albert Einstein
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 27. March 2007 @ 01:05
|
