What graphic card you using?

I run at 100Hz at most resolutions, I can go higher but don't see any difference above that. I have to run at 85Hz at 1600x1200 but it's still acceptable.

As far as temps go the refresh rate should make absolutely no difference to your video card temps as the RAMDAC which handles feeding the video signal to your monitor is completely separate from the core (where the temp is measured).
 
scanning quickly through this thread i noticed that noone has my card.

Sapphire Radeon X800 XT - Stock (bumped to XT PE speeds before, no problem, but no need).

read it and weep :P
 
Looked at that card but decided to go NVIDIA route after reading a stack load of reviews. The consensus currently is that NVIDIA seems to have a slight edge over the ATI chipset. But this could swing round the other way tomorrow. Such is the nature of the beast.

I want to OC my 6800GT to Ultra speeds can anyone point me to a how-to?
 
The consensus currently is that NVIDIA seems to have a slight edge over the ATI chipset
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is the consensus of Nvidia users. The thing is, the Radeon is a better, smaller, cooler, and faster card. Its just way more expensive, so ppl settle for the 6800gt. Don't get me wrong, the 6800gt is a beast, I ordered one for my brother and it runs like a dream. But in real world performance, the X800XT looks more crisp and has more power. Simple truth.
 
ATi also suffered from negative press over thier shoddy drivers and even though that's no longer an issue, the damange was done.

Nvidia seem more "open" than ATi - releasing thier Linux drivers for ages now.
Also, there was the Doom3 alpha leak that was rumoured to originate from ATi as well as the ATi bundled HL2 fiasco when HL2 was delayed.

Last time I tried a Radeon it was a 7000 or something, I hated the damn thing, so I took it back and have been with Nvidia ever since.

Most people will indicate that ATi has far crisper image quality on the Desktop and has better anti-aliasing/FSAA abilities in 3D gaming - the benchmarks for the 3D gaming tend to prove this.

My next card will most likely be ATi - I need a change !
 
Yes, the first ATI card I owned was a Radeon 8500, and that can be seen as the first true Radeon that actually performed well. It too had driver bugs at first, but this was a good thing since the card could be picked up for relatively cheap. This can be compared to the AMD Athlon Thunderbirds that came out and surprised everyone.

Last time I checked, Nvidia had, at one time, an official driver and a host of unofficial drives. The WHQL certified drivers were usually out of date. ATI releases new drivers every month. I don't know about Linux as its not the most widespread OS around, Windows is <duck flames>.

Video card history - S3 Virge, Voodoo Banshee, Radeon 8500, Radeon 9800 Pro, X800 XT

Brother's cards - Riva TNT2, Radeon 9500 Pro (nice), PNY GeForce 6800 GT

In the end, its a matter of preference and the depth of your pocket.
 
not anymore the new 6600 and 6800 cards cant be beaten awesome if you ask me

i bought ati 9600 pro for 1000 got a 2200 3d mark score

bought 6600 normal and got over 4500 for the same money

ati is expensive now
 
I used to only buy Nvidia's (and S3's before that), then got a Radeon 8500. It was love at first sight. Had two other ATI's cards since then.
One to two years ago, the choice was easy, i.e. ATI. However, ATI's are not better bang for buck any more. I think things are pretty even at this stage.
 
for what you get nvidia kickin ati's ass but its a swing 3 months from now ati will be better and we all fork out over 1000 bucks for a new card not that we needed it but still
 
I got my card on Christmas, had my mother bring it over from the states. I paid R2700 for an X800XT when the equivalent card cost R5000 in SA. Otherwise, I would never have dreamt of owning one, its just too expensive.

My 3dmark scores:

3dmark03 - 12 310
3dmark05 - 5 840

i bought ati 9600 pro for 1000 got a 2200 3d mark score
Click to expand...

I take it you're referring to 3dmark 2003. My brother's 9500 Pro scored 3500, and he got the card more than two years ago. The 9600 Pro was less powerful, the 9500 Pro was basically a 9700 with lower clocks.

PS. I know that Nvidia has SLI, but, that is a whole different story as it concerns more than the video card itself and involves motherboard upgrades etc. Whole new can of worms.
 
Killadoob: ATI actually have a cheaper version [X800XL] which in most games outperform the 6800 GT even though it is $100 less than the GT @ $300! The X800XL also, in some games matches the FPS of the X850XT PE.

Cloud: yes I still can't believe how inflated our prices are here - it is just incredible and although it should be higher, max price should be about R4000.
 
3300 in 2003 eish what card you got? if i overclock my 6600 i can get nearly 6000 stable but dont see the point in overclocking all games i play hl2 bf vietnam bf 1942 chronicles of rid****( by the way what an awesome game) all run well except when vertical sync is on what is that when its on everything run slow?
 
Yes, Rid**** is great.

jjtoymachine, see here for 3D Mark 2003 scores:
http://www1.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041004/vga_charts-04.html#3dmark_2003
Your score seems reasonable for a slightly hot 9550. Obviously it also depends on the CPU of the computer.

Except for the SLI madness, ATI is currently the top dog as far as I know, but by so little it does not really matter :) :
http://www1.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041222/vga_charts-03.html
http://www1.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041222/vga_charts-04.html
http://www1.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041222/vga_charts-09.html

VSync means the frame rate is tied to the vertical sync rate of the screen. Some games would recommend having it on, in which case one should do that. Otherwise I think it is best switched off, as you have seen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X