|
x1900 crossfire vs 8800 ?
|
|
|
chamonofx
Member
|
19. June 2007 @ 23:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
i think people get sympathy to some brands... how cute lol
fan boys are just nice people with huge hearts lol
EDIT: BTW going a little bit off topic, how have rebates been for you guys? for me they almost never work, i usually get only 20% of them, and i put a lot of care when making them (and im not stupid). When i check the websites (like ocz for the power supply), then i get something like invalid upc code, yeah right
Last time I sent them with delivery confirmation and I took a picture of the form with the upc code and extra requirements (like the serial number for the hard drive). Out of 4 rebates guess what? I got NONE! 1 from western digital, 1 from corsair, 1 from sapphire, 1 from ocz. All with delivery confirmation !
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 20. June 2007 @ 00:06
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
20. June 2007 @ 09:55 |
Link to this message
|
Rebates are an excuse to sell a product at a higher price than advertised and get away with it. I wouldn't trust the system unless I was buying from a local retailer I could query the staff about. Quote:
fan boys are just nice people with huge hearts lol
Is that why they're always shouting at each other in allcaps? lol
|
|
chamonofx
Member
|
20. June 2007 @ 21:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yeah, don't trust the rebates !
Going back to the original topic, I think I'm gonna stick to the x1900xtx for a while. Seems like 8900 is on the way, which will make 8800 prices drop, and x1900xtx performance at 1440 x 900 (what I got) seems still very good. Unless I finally buy a 1600x1200, I think I will keep this baby for a few more months...
|
Senior Member
|
20. June 2007 @ 22:07 |
Link to this message
|
|
What games do you play anyway? Pretty much any games I play right now play fine on max settings on 1440 x 900. Sometimes I use my 22" at 1050 but it didn't seem to make much of a difference. That is with a 7950 GT 256 MB Ram. The only game I have trouble with is Oblivion, I absolutely can not get that game to run smoothly. I guess I could take the settings down a bit since their on Ultra High with everything turned on such as distant trees. I tried it at 1440 x 900 but it lagged too much so I took it down to 1280 x 1024, now it's playable, but I still feel like it should run smoother than it should for one of the best DX9 cards. I don't know how a single 8800 would handle that game.
|
|
chamonofx
Member
|
20. June 2007 @ 23:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
I play many games, I'm an occasional gamer but own quite a few games. One of the ones I play is oblivion, with everything maxxed out plays nice on my 1440x900 19" widescreen. It doesn't go smooth, but very very playable. Actually I play with everything maxxed out. I play css which is cake, eventhough the new HDR high dynamic range lighting drop the framerates in some maps to 60-80 which is decent for me. I got a sapphire x1900xtx 512mb which I overclocked 10% btw. I play dark messiah maxxed out as well, and it is very playable, I drop the settings just a bit to play smoothly. The e6600 at 3.15 helps too :)
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
21. June 2007 @ 05:46 |
Link to this message
|
|
I run my games at 2560x1600 using an X1900XT, and most games run fine. Even Oblivion was OK, but didn't seem to look right. Stalker and Rainbow Six vegas are the only games it absolutely cannot handle, but then neither could an 8800GTX!
|
Senior Member
|
21. June 2007 @ 09:17 |
Link to this message
|
Thats odd because I can run Tom Clanys Rainbow Six Vegas on max settings with a low but very playable framerate, but that was with a resolution of 1440 x 1900. So I guess your high resolutions make a difference.
Quote:
It doesn't go smooth, but very very playable
I guess thats a better way to describe how mine plays. It isn't jumpy all the time, and for the most part it has a high frame rate but there is an occasional pause here or there (especially with a lot of effects like fire). It just doesn't play through without any lag like most games I play.
I haven't tried stalker yet so I don't know what that will be like for me. And of course CSS run perfectly on max settings.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
21. June 2007 @ 11:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
The jumpy feel to Vegas is because the game speed varies, not just the frame rate, it's a bug from porting from the 360 which they didn't bother to fix. 2560x1600 is 3.16 times as many pixels as 1440x900, so my frame rate will suffer from that. I typically run at 1680x1050 with most of the shaders on low. Then it runs acceptably, but not well. Stalker I run at 1680x1050 max, but using Object Dynamic lighting, not full. The game's frame rate is again just passable, but the load lag makes it unpleasant to play. This, however, occurs regardless of the settings used.
|
Senior Member
|
21. June 2007 @ 11:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
Would a SLI or Crossfire setup help any of those games run smoother? I've herd that SLI Crossfire is kind of a waste now because the game has to support it for it to do any good, and that not very many games support it. But I thought if they were wrong, it would be an easy was to make my games run smoother.
But yes, with Vegas I did notice what you were talking about, it doesn't feel like a hardware problem. So I guess that would make it an actual game issue.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
21. June 2007 @ 17:35 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sometimes it makes a huge difference, other times no difference. I wouldn't recommend it unless the cost was of no significant burden to you.
|
Senior Member
|
21. June 2007 @ 18:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
No, it's not like I can spend a ton of money of the latest hardware for gaming. But on the other hand, who can? With that being said, I do spend enough so that I can play pretty much any game I want at max or atleast high settings. I spend enough for a nice computer but I don't go overboard. I buy pre built PCs from different companies like HP, with some of the best specs at the time, and then upgrade then as until I eventually make it into (basically) a custom built PC.
|
|
chamonofx
Member
|
21. June 2007 @ 22:03 |
Link to this message
|
Hey Spenman, I recommend you to build your own pc. Sometimes companies like HP use crappy motherboards that drop the performance of the whole pc for up to 25%, and it can be even worse.
Same thing happens with memory, and other parts as well.
And, if you make a decent set up with the right parts, you can easily overclock it to get easily a 25% extra with no hazard to the processor. EDIT: And prebuilt pcs most times are locked so you cannot overclock them! (i.e. dell)
About crossfire / sli, I think those are solutions for people that have tons of money to burn. Otherwise, getting 20-30% more performance and needing to spend 2x video card price, doesn't seem like a reasonable solution to me.
Quote:
I've herd that SLI Crossfire is kind of a waste now because the game has to support it for it to do any good, and that not very many games support it
hmmm I thought games didn't need to support crossfire/sli, please correct me if i'm wrong
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 21. June 2007 @ 22:31
|
Senior Member
|
21. June 2007 @ 23:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
I would love to build my own computer. But I've always thought it would be too overwhelming to put all of that together and make sure it works right together. I mean for the most part I know exactly what I would build if I did it and what all of the parts would be. But if I ran into a problem I would be screwed. When I rebuild PCs it doesn't seem that bad, because I do maybe one or 2 things at a time. Replace the GPU and PSU, then replace the ram, add another HDD or a DVD drive maybe. I do alot of things like that. But I've never changed cases, and I've never upgraded a processor. So it seems like the three hardest and main things in building a PC, I have no experience in. Since I've never installed a new motherboard, never changed cases, or processors. Pretty much any of the other stuff I've done though.
|
|
chamonofx
Member
|
22. June 2007 @ 00:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well, there's a chance to mess up, that is for sure. But if you never do it, you never learn, so it's a bit of a risk you're taking but a rewarding one. If you research enough and you have common sense, you won't have any problems. Oh and patience, because if you run into a problem you can research and ask in forums, and find a solution. I only build my own computers which is every 2 years usually, and I started as a teenager. The hardest thing, in my humble opinion, is attaching a damn heatsink / similar to the processor. Like the ninja plus I have attached to my e6600, what a freakin pain in the a** to install the damn thing right.
EDIT: prebuilt pcs always f**k you up! you can save money and get a better set up doing it yourself, and it is not that hard at all!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 22. June 2007 @ 00:37
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. June 2007 @ 03:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
Pound for pound, dollar for dollar, home-built PCs obliterate anything you can buy from a retailer, as mentioned the motherboards are very limiting, and all too often the cheapest part that meets the bullet point on the specification is used. It wasn't that long ago I was in your position (having done most of the upgrades by modifying prebuilt PCs) but the bigger steps really aren't that much more difficult.
As for SLI/Crossfire, there's no official "these type of games support SLi and these don't", but it depends how the game is coded. SLi works more often than Crossfire, and the gains are often bigger, but they are very rarely 100%, usually nowhere close.
|
|
chamonofx
Member
|
22. June 2007 @ 05:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
oh ok I know some games work better for sli than crossfire and viceversa, but same thing happens with nvidia / ati ...
|
Senior Member
|
22. June 2007 @ 07:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
So do you guys think it would be worth trying to just rebuild my current computer in a few months when I get some money. Or should I just leave that one and start over.
I would give you my specs, but this has nothing to do with the original post. So I will continue over in the "Official PC Building Thread".
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
22. June 2007 @ 09:11 |
Link to this message
|
|
it's alright, we've answered the original Post. I will see you in the PC building thread.
|
|
chamonofx
Member
|
22. June 2007 @ 22:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
I don't mind if you guys wanna continue here anyway :)
I usually build my pc every 2 years with 100% new parts, and change the video card probably once in those 2 years.
This one might last a little bit longer thou , due to the fact i got very high end (at least for me) parts when I bought it. I might just get the 8800GTS 640mb when the 8900 is released , for the price drop.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
23. June 2007 @ 04:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'm contemplating an 8900, depending on how much better they are than the GTX. If they're only a minor improvement, I may hang on to my X1900 a bit longer.
|
Senior Member
|
23. June 2007 @ 12:01 |
Link to this message
|
|
I feel like I should have already gotten an 8800 GTS instead of the 7950 GT. But I don't have Vista and when I put a thread up asking what card I should get at the time, everybody told me to go with the 7950 GT because the 8800 GTS had a lot of problems and drivers issues. And also said that I couldn't even use DX10 without Vista (which I knew already). But I still feel like I should have gotten it so I wouldn't want to be upgrading right now.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 23. June 2007 @ 12:02
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
23. June 2007 @ 12:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
The Directx10 issue is still bull, there still aren't any games that require DX10 cards to look their best, and Vista still annoys me. (For a start it's not compatible with my PC, for reasons unknown). On average the 8800GTS is 50-51% faster than the 7950GT, but notably 168% faster in Oblivion Outdoors. This, however is for the 640MB version.
In the UK the 7950GT is £123 and the 8800GTS £247 (From Scan)
In the US the 7950GT is $200 and the 8800GTS $380 (From Newegg)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 23. June 2007 @ 12:11
|
Senior Member
|
23. June 2007 @ 13:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
That might have to be my next upgrade. Either that or a Core 2 Duo. And if I did get a Core 2 Duo I would want either the E6600 or the E6700, probablly. But I've heard that the E6600 overlocks a lot better.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
23. June 2007 @ 14:12 |
Link to this message
|
|
If you're an overclocker get the 6600. that ocs to pretty much the same speed as the 6700.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
23. June 2007 @ 15:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
I don't know the first thing about overclocking to to tell you the truth. The main reason is because all of my previous computers have been store bought, so I couldn't overclock them. I do know that how high you can overclock depends on different parts of your system such as your ram and motherboard and not just the processor. And I think the more heat you can get rid of the higher you can overclock. So I guess that would be why water cooling would be better (and quieter). I know you change the multiplier to get different speeds. But thats about all I know. If I tried to overclock anything I don't know how far I would get.
But I have heard of some people such as DocTY getting 3.4 GHz and sometimes I've heard 4 GHz + mentioned.
|
