|
The Official Graphics Card and PC gaming Thread
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
4. March 2011 @ 23:59 |
Link to this message
|
PI = Performance Index. Relative score, as % to HD4870
8800GTX - PI65, 150W, 768MB
HD6850 - PI150, 127W, 1GB
HD6870 - PI170, 151W, 1GB
HD6950 - PI190, 170W, 2GB
HD6970 - PI210, 210W, 2GB
GTX580 - PI230, 290W, 1.5GB
HD5970 - PI280, 290W, 1GB per GPU
HD6850 Crossfire - PI290, 250W, 1GB per GPU
4GB HD5970 - PI310, 350W, 2GB per GPU
HD6870 Crossfire - PI330, 300W, 1GB per GPU
HD6950 Crossfire - PI370, 340W, 2GB per GPU
HD6990 - PI375, 350W, 2GB per GPU
HD6990OC - PI400, 380W, 2GB per GPU
HD6970 Crossfire - PI410, 420W, 2GB per GPU
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 5. March 2011 @ 00:00
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
5. March 2011 @ 00:19 |
Link to this message
|
10% doesn't seem like much gain, to go crossfire against the 6990. And that's an OC'd card taboot! And quite the wattage beasts too :p
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
5. March 2011 @ 00:36 |
Link to this message
|
|
Because the 6990 already is two 6970s!
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
5. March 2011 @ 00:47 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Because the 6990 already is two 6970s!
Well...this isn't my area of expertise :p
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
5. March 2011 @ 10:35 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I looked closer and see that you like Stalker. Well, okay, what is the series about? It's not another "freaks in a subway tunnel" is it? LOL
Isn't it some kind of radiation thing? Maybe I should hit google. Oh, yeah, I was right - Stalker, that Chernobyl thing. Freaks, but not in a subway tunnel.
Well, if you like it, maybe I shouldn't pre-judge.
Actually it's farking awesome you would probably really like it Rich. It has lots of good adventuring, wide open spaces and awesome gun porn :D
Stalker is sort of like an RPG but with tactical combat gear and gun customization right down to what caliber your Desert Eagle is chambered for. The story is long and epic and the gameplay world is huge. I never paid it much attention before, but now I've started it I can't stop playing.
I am using a mod called the "Complete Mod". A total update mod put together by a team of professional modders and artists. It basically updates the graphics and interface to be more streamlined and it brings all 3 games up to the same standard, removing a lot of the bugs and clunkiness. Basically vendors will now buy un-repaired guns, all guns are named correctly, the graphics are prettier, everything gets new textures, etc. The mod comes with a simple installer and there's a version for each of the 3 games. They are just somewhat unpolished and the Complete mod makes them sing.
If a crappy looking game can be easily modded to look better, you bet your ass I'll mod it. Stock graphics are overrated when everything can be brought to a higher standard for free.
Quote:
I did finish Dragon Rising and it was a helluva game. It was quite a challenge to capture the sniper rifle without getting wiped out by fresh Chinese troups with their 50 round high-powered fully-automatic Scar. I picked one up later - very powerful. And good range too. No wonder they were wiping us out.
I ended up leaving all my squad behind, within sight as I raced down the hill having stabbed the sniper in the back. One time I stopped and hit the M key for map, and two red dots were closing in behind me. Yikes!
I read the comments below the new OF game trailer, and a lot of guys were upset with the Dragon Rising game, and didn't plan to buy the new one coming out in the summer. I attempted to add some fairer comments, and then the bulletin board didn't log me in correctly, and my comments were gone. One more bug, kind of like the game. That steamed me, so I just left all the negatives and moved on.
But I will definitely buy the new game.
I thought Dragon Rising was a great game if a little unbalanced. But if you are slow and tactical you'll see that they set up a lot of cool semi-scripted events for you to stumble upon. One favorite in particular is when you are inserted into enemy territory and are tasked with taking out a jeep carrying a high ranking officer. You literally sneak through 4 or 5 miles of wide open forest checking for enemies the whole way and following the jeep to a stopping point. Then you set up on top of a hill at extreme long range and take him out with one well placed sniper round. After you take the guy out, the whole mountain explodes with patrols and helicopters searching for you. So it's a mad scramble under the tree cover to make it back to the extraction point. Talk about epic gameplay.
I really enjoyed Dragon Rising, I just wish it had some sort of targeting system to give you the positions of enemy troops. You'll get shot at from like half a mile away, and not be able to see them because they're not within the range of your radar. I know that's not very realistic, but multiplayer is a hassle when you have no clue where the enemy is... not that I played much of the multi anyway.
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 |
|
Red_Maw
Senior Member
|
6. March 2011 @ 01:55 |
Link to this message
|
Hey sam and rich,
It's about time for me to get a new main monitor as mine's starting to get old and I've been thinking about stepping up and getting a U2711. I know you guys have those crazy 30" monitors with super high res (2560x1600) so I've been wondering if you have trouble reading text on them? Some reviews have mentioned that text on monitors whose pixel pitch is as small as those is too small to read for most people. Unfortunately something like this can't be tested before purchase so I'm having difficulty in deciding between something like a U2410 and the U2711.
TIA
redmaw
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
6. March 2011 @ 02:31 |
Link to this message
|
The U2410 is the direct descendant of my 2407WFP. Unless you have a huge budget, I would say definitely get the 24" screen. Dell seem to use better than average panels in their monitors, and the image quality follows accordingly. My main monitor is 4 years old and still going strong. The size is perfect for movies/gaming and text is just fine.
1920 x 1200 in 24" is a fairly high pixel pitch, but not as high as the 2560 x 1600 monitors. Not only are they bigger and just plain higher resolution, the actual image quality is better still. So this really comes down to a matter of budget. Also if you play any games at all, 2560 x 1600 is proportionately one of the most demanding resolutions you can run. Games that are routine to run on a rig such as mine suddenly become hardcore demanding.
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
|
|
Red_Maw
Senior Member
|
6. March 2011 @ 04:47 |
Link to this message
|
Yeah I don't plan on being able to game at that res at all.
While I'm asking questions, anyone know why the U2311H is so much less than the U2410?
Edit: also any info on the revisions would be nice, spied a U2410 for 380 so I'm looking to see why it's so cheap now lol.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 6. March 2011 @ 04:53
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
6. March 2011 @ 13:48 |
Link to this message
|
Because it's 1920 x 1080 resolution and not 1920 x 1200. 1080p panels are cheaper and will likely not have near the image quality as 1920 x 1200. Just one look at Newegg and you will find several even cheaper than the Dell. They have a lower pixel pitch. Remember they're not a wider screen either, they're a wider aspect ratio on a smaller resolution. It has an effect on image quality.
As far as finding the U2410 cheap the technology has matured and become cheaper naturally. My 2407WFP was $600 when I got it and AFAIK has most of the same parts as other 1920 x 1200 monitors even today.
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
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 6. March 2011 @ 13:55
|
|
Red_Maw
Senior Member
|
6. March 2011 @ 15:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
lol I didn't even think of checking the resolutions, just assumed they were all 1920x1200, stupid me >_>
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
6. March 2011 @ 22:49 |
Link to this message
|
i would go for the 2560x1440 monitor. Its just so sexy!
but i would go for the apple conema display version instead.
as for 24 inch monitors, you can find non tn 1080p monitors now.
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|. |
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
7. March 2011 @ 00:11 |
Link to this message
|
Don't get me started :p You make me jealous talking about insane resolutions LOL! It's not fair. I would love a 30" Dell more than any of you guys :p Sorry, you're gonna have to trust me on that.
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
7. March 2011 @ 08:18 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
you can find non tn 1080p monitors now.
That'll help for colors and black levels but AFAIK it's still a matter of resolution vs size no matter what panel is used. To get image quality anywhere near my 2407 you would need to get one of the 21.5" 1080p panels. The 23" will not be as good, even with a better panel. Standard 30" 2560 screens have better image quality than that, and the ones UNDER 30" even better sill :P
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
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
7. March 2011 @ 08:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
oh i agree but will you really notice it, unless you compare them side to side? i know i cant tell when im using one of mine vs the other till im using both together
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
|
AfterDawn Addict
15 product reviews
|
7. March 2011 @ 09:23 |
Link to this message
|
I certainly do notice it right away. Even without my Acer to compare to directly, I could easily tell you whether or not a monitor has a high pixel pitch just by using it. It especially makes a difference for gaming. High fidelity titles like Crysis, Source, BC2 are all drastically improved disregarding the actual resolution. Something like my 22" 1680 x 1050 Acer or any of the 23.6" 1080p panels can't hold a candle. Now 21.5" 1080p is a different story, but were talking similar to my 2407, still nowhere near a 2560 panel. So yes if image quality is important to you in any way, the difference is immediate.
If I had to get a brand new monitor right now I'd be going for 27" at 2560 x 1600 for the sheer image quality, as opposed to 30" at the same resolution.
Ofc this is all subjective
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
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. March 2011 @ 12:20 |
Link to this message
|
The 3007WFP, 3008WFP and their successor the U3011, have a very similar pixel density to smaller monitors like the 2407/2408/2410.
The highest pixel density desktop display currently is the U2711, which is a fabulous display, and also the best value of the entire Dell Ultrasharp series. Spectacular display, I would heartily recommend one to anybody. Unless you have relatively poor eyesight or will be sitting at a distance from the monitor far greater than normal, then you will have no problems reading the text. Don't forget, everything in windows vista/7 can be zoomed with ctrl+mousewheel.
I would definitely take the Dell over the Apple. The 27" Cinema is a whopping £220 more expensive than the Dell equivalent, and the Apple has no connectivity to any standard display connector. All you get with the Apple is a mini-displayport connector. For any other input, you need an adapter.
With the U2711, you not only get two Dual-link DVI, an HDMI and Regular displayport, you also get VGA, component and composite as well. It's near enough an HDTV but without the tuner. 7 times as many inputs, for £220 less, with the same display panel in it? The Dell is a no-brainer.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
7. March 2011 @ 13:10 |
Link to this message
|
|
but but led! And its sexy!
MGR (Micro Gaming Rig) .|. Intel Q6600 @ 3.45GHz .|. Asus P35 P5K-E/WiFi .|. 4GB 1066MHz Geil Black Dragon RAM .|. Samsung F60 SSD .|. Corsair H50-1 Cooler .|. Sapphire 4870 512MB .|. Lian Li PC-A70B .|. Be Queit P7 Dark Power Pro 850W PSU .|. 24" 1920x1200 DGM (MVA Panel) .|. 24" 1920x1080 Dell (TN Panel) .|.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. March 2011 @ 13:52 |
Link to this message
|
|
An LED backlight is not worth £200 plus having a greatly inferior monitor, let's be honest...
|
|
Red_Maw
Senior Member
|
7. March 2011 @ 14:20 |
Link to this message
|
Thanks for all the info/comments guys.
Originally posted by Estuansis:
If I had to get a brand new monitor right now I'd be going for 27" at 2560 x 1600 for the sheer image quality, as opposed to 30" at the same resolution.
Do they even make those? That's what I was originally looking for but was under the impression that they don't exist yet.
Originally posted by sammorris:
The 3007WFP, 3008WFP and their successor the U3011, have a very similar pixel density to smaller monitors like the 2407/2408/2410.
The highest pixel density desktop display currently is the U2711, which is a fabulous display, and also the best value of the entire Dell Ultrasharp series. Spectacular display, I would heartily recommend one to anybody. Unless you have relatively poor eyesight or will be sitting at a distance from the monitor far greater than normal, then you will have no problems reading the text. Don't forget, everything in windows vista/7 can be zoomed with ctrl+mousewheel.
I would definitely take the Dell over the Apple. The 27" Cinema is a whopping £220 more expensive than the Dell equivalent, and the Apple has no connectivity to any standard display connector. All you get with the Apple is a mini-displayport connector. For any other input, you need an adapter.
With the U2711, you not only get two Dual-link DVI, an HDMI and Regular displayport, you also get VGA, component and composite as well. It's near enough an HDTV but without the tuner. 7 times as many inputs, for £220 less, with the same display panel in it? The Dell is a no-brainer.
Now I want to get the U2711 again, but dang they're expensive....could buy a 6990 instead and save money lol.
Once again thanks for the input.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. March 2011 @ 14:24 |
Link to this message
|
The U2711 is 2560x1440 at 27". There's no such thing as a 27" 2560x1600 sadly, but close enough :P
The U2711s are 90% of the pixel count of the 30", 81% of the size, but only 60% of the price here in the UK, they're a comparative steal.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
7. March 2011 @ 15:56 |
Link to this message
|
Wow, the U2711 could be a good idea one day. I definitely like the idea of the largest possible monitor though. But as people have said, mega resolution = mega hardware upgrade ;) E.g. expensive graphics hardware. A lot to commit to. Though I suppose running games at 1920 x 1200 on the 30" dell wouldn't look too bad :p Or would it?
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. March 2011 @ 16:26 |
Link to this message
|
It'd look crap, unless you 1:1 pixel mapped them into a 23" box.
|
AfterDawn Addict
7 product reviews
|
7. March 2011 @ 16:31 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
It'd look crap, unless you 1:1 pixel mapped them into a 23" box.
Mmm hmm. I think I understand. Aww well. I can't afford it right now anyway. Sure wish I had a second income :(
To delete, or not to delete. THAT is the question! |
|
Red_Maw
Senior Member
|
7. March 2011 @ 18:51 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
It'd look crap, unless you 1:1 pixel mapped them into a 23" box.
Yeah that's another draw back, I'd have to do that for games since I can't afford gpu power for it's native res lol.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
7. March 2011 @ 18:57 |
Link to this message
|
If you want a big display but can't afford a high-end monitor or the graphics power to run it just buy an HDTV.
|
