R
rahul_becks23
Guest
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
absolutelydeathvirus_me said:
Graphics Cards related queries here.
aquamatrix
Journeyman
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
i have a budget of 7-8k which graphic card should i opt for??
i have a budget of 7-8k which graphic card should i opt for??
R
rahul_becks23
Guest
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
7600GS is ur best bet
if u stretch it to 10K,7600GT is a more better deal.
7600GS is ur best bet
if u stretch it to 10K,7600GT is a more better deal.
deathvirus_me
Wise Old Owl
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
yup .. for a budget upto 8k's , the 7600GS would be an awesome choice ...
yup .. for a budget upto 8k's , the 7600GS would be an awesome choice ...
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
Look, I have probably researched more than all of you together about the perormance impact of CPU on GPU.
1900XT + Amd 64 3000 = 1280X1024 MAX AA AF or higher for games like Most Wanted, 45+fps
7600GT + X2 4800 will be something like 10X7 MAX 16x AF no AA and maybe around 50-55fps, by no means can you compare the two.
The thing is that a faster cpu helps mainly while playing at lower settings, but with very high settings and res the game is entirely GPU depedent and most CPUs, not all, are capable of taking it.
Just try running the game and you will feel the difference yourself. Please don't make any comment unless you have concrete proof for it. Please get the proof first. I can get the proof if you want.
RAM doesn't affect the gaming performance even noticeably in current practical cases as quantity is what matters, rest all have DDR 400 or up.
for 8k i don't recommend 7600GS. actually it is for sub 7k or so from leadtek.
rather extend the 8k to 10k+ to get 7600GT which will be much better.
PROOF
Please keep in mind that in most/all cases only average fps are mentioned and not the minimum fps which is also a very important aspect for gaming which is present only in hardocp of the ones I metnioned.
*www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html?modelx=33&model1=300&model2=282&chart=97
*www.tomshardware.com/site/vgacharts/index.html
This proves that even a low end cpu powered with a high end graphic card or other graphic cards will give what kind of performance. So high end graphic card is enough even with a lower cpu, it however doesn't point whether a faster cpu would help or not.
Also, most/all of these games may not exactly be able to use the dual cpus and even if they do to a certain extent the intel D8xx series is crap, so you might get better performance with Amd 64 3000-3500 than with such a CPU in gaming that is.
It also shows the performance difference between different cards.
*www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/15/graphics_card_buyers_guide_2006_part3/
*www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=238&chart=71&model2=212
This compares the different cpus in performance, although the graphic card is the bottleneck, since sometimes low settings have been used and Far Cry and UT04 has tested so it does show some difference and also shows actually that there is not much difference. Also, you might get a very rough idea as to how your system will perform with a 7600GT/6800Ultralevel cards which maybe around 20-30% better than 6800gt with a high end cpu. 7600GT on average may be 20% or so better than 6800gs and 6800gs equals a 6800GT.
So, CPU is not everything.
*xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/cpu-games2.html
This shows that if you have a mainstream card 7800GT there won't be much/any difference in your average fps. Again, no point going for a CPU without a good GPU.
low end cpu oc link
*xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/cpu-games2.html
xbitlabs oced their 3500 winchester to almost 2.6ghz, 2.5x.
*firingsquad.com/hardware/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/call_of_duty_2_dual-core/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/fear_cpu_performance/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/half_life_2_cpu_shootout/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life_2_athlon_xp/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life_2_cpu_shootout/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/oblivion_athlon_64_x2_fx_cpu_performance/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/quake_4_cpu_performance/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/quake_4_dual-core_performance/
*enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjI2LCwsaGVudGh1c2lhc3Q=
A very important link this is: *enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTAwMiwsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0
Anybody who wishes to say against me has to give a proper proof else must keep quiet.
Look, I have probably researched more than all of you together about the perormance impact of CPU on GPU.
1900XT + Amd 64 3000 = 1280X1024 MAX AA AF or higher for games like Most Wanted, 45+fps
7600GT + X2 4800 will be something like 10X7 MAX 16x AF no AA and maybe around 50-55fps, by no means can you compare the two.
The thing is that a faster cpu helps mainly while playing at lower settings, but with very high settings and res the game is entirely GPU depedent and most CPUs, not all, are capable of taking it.
Just try running the game and you will feel the difference yourself. Please don't make any comment unless you have concrete proof for it. Please get the proof first. I can get the proof if you want.
RAM doesn't affect the gaming performance even noticeably in current practical cases as quantity is what matters, rest all have DDR 400 or up.
for 8k i don't recommend 7600GS. actually it is for sub 7k or so from leadtek.
rather extend the 8k to 10k+ to get 7600GT which will be much better.
PROOF
Please keep in mind that in most/all cases only average fps are mentioned and not the minimum fps which is also a very important aspect for gaming which is present only in hardocp of the ones I metnioned.
*www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html?modelx=33&model1=300&model2=282&chart=97
*www.tomshardware.com/site/vgacharts/index.html
This proves that even a low end cpu powered with a high end graphic card or other graphic cards will give what kind of performance. So high end graphic card is enough even with a lower cpu, it however doesn't point whether a faster cpu would help or not.
Also, most/all of these games may not exactly be able to use the dual cpus and even if they do to a certain extent the intel D8xx series is crap, so you might get better performance with Amd 64 3000-3500 than with such a CPU in gaming that is.
It also shows the performance difference between different cards.
*www.tomshardware.com/2006/05/15/graphics_card_buyers_guide_2006_part3/
*www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=238&chart=71&model2=212
This compares the different cpus in performance, although the graphic card is the bottleneck, since sometimes low settings have been used and Far Cry and UT04 has tested so it does show some difference and also shows actually that there is not much difference. Also, you might get a very rough idea as to how your system will perform with a 7600GT/6800Ultralevel cards which maybe around 20-30% better than 6800gt with a high end cpu. 7600GT on average may be 20% or so better than 6800gs and 6800gs equals a 6800GT.
So, CPU is not everything.
*xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/cpu-games2.html
This shows that if you have a mainstream card 7800GT there won't be much/any difference in your average fps. Again, no point going for a CPU without a good GPU.
low end cpu oc link
*xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/cpu-games2.html
xbitlabs oced their 3500 winchester to almost 2.6ghz, 2.5x.
*firingsquad.com/hardware/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/call_of_duty_2_dual-core/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/fear_cpu_performance/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/half_life_2_cpu_shootout/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life_2_athlon_xp/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/half-life_2_cpu_shootout/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/oblivion_athlon_64_x2_fx_cpu_performance/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/quake_4_cpu_performance/
*firingsquad.com/hardware/quake_4_dual-core_performance/
*enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjI2LCwsaGVudGh1c2lhc3Q=
A very important link this is: *enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTAwMiwsLGhlbnRodXNpYXN0
Anybody who wishes to say against me has to give a proper proof else must keep quiet.
Last edited:
anandrules
Broken In
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
dude the card is expected to be out in a few days in the US. So if u are looking for it in india rite now just fuh get it. And neways i think that its gonna be atleast a good 20-30$ more expensive than the PCI -E version of the card. I also dont expect the card to be in india till abt say october-november.Geforce said:Does anybody know the price of Leadtek A7600GT DTH AGP card.
Yes AGP not PCI-e.
deathvirus_me
Wise Old Owl
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
Dude .. ur nuts . even my 6800GS with a 3500+ does 40 fps in NFS MW at 1280*1024 ,maxed settings ... the 7600GT should do the same ..
Also .. ur gpu gets a little uper hand only at res. of 1600*1200 and higher .. so it means that'll u'll have to invest on a monitor as well ... Also .... geneally monitors have 4:3 native res. 1280*1024 is 5:6 .. so the entire process will be equially dependent on both the GPU and the CPU ... at higher res. the story is different ..
Also .. about ur CPU GPU facts .... u can go to bed with ur benchmarks ... i really like to believe what i see ... now here is something i found :
Pentium 2.66 GHz + X1900GT -> 3DMark05 - 6400
3500+ + 6800GS -> 3DMark05 - 6200
Now a X1900GT with a FX57 gives >8000 in 3DMark05 ....
Now if u don't trust benchmark's .. lets do some game test ...
The X1900GT config. gave around 40 fps in NFS MW with some stuttering .. while with the 6800GS i get absolutely smooth gameplay and 40 fps ...
So where ru going to go now ?? And plz. ... can't u find some other stupid forums to pollute ... i'm really getting tired of ur bull****ting .. i really doubt ur normal .... or maybe ur having some review fet**h ..
Also about reviews ... take a close look at Far Cry in other reviews too .. u'll see that the fps hardly varies across diff. res. with high end GPU's ... and the reviewer clearly states that the CPU is a big bottleneck there ... so ur some other genius who thinks CPU is not a big factor eeh ??? then i think if ur the leading IT specialist ... ur concept gaming PC would consist of a Sempron with a X1900XTX Crossfire maybe ???
Dude .. ur nuts . even my 6800GS with a 3500+ does 40 fps in NFS MW at 1280*1024 ,maxed settings ... the 7600GT should do the same ..
Also .. ur gpu gets a little uper hand only at res. of 1600*1200 and higher .. so it means that'll u'll have to invest on a monitor as well ... Also .... geneally monitors have 4:3 native res. 1280*1024 is 5:6 .. so the entire process will be equially dependent on both the GPU and the CPU ... at higher res. the story is different ..
Also .. about ur CPU GPU facts .... u can go to bed with ur benchmarks ... i really like to believe what i see ... now here is something i found :
Pentium 2.66 GHz + X1900GT -> 3DMark05 - 6400
3500+ + 6800GS -> 3DMark05 - 6200
Now a X1900GT with a FX57 gives >8000 in 3DMark05 ....
Now if u don't trust benchmark's .. lets do some game test ...
The X1900GT config. gave around 40 fps in NFS MW with some stuttering .. while with the 6800GS i get absolutely smooth gameplay and 40 fps ...
So where ru going to go now ?? And plz. ... can't u find some other stupid forums to pollute ... i'm really getting tired of ur bull****ting .. i really doubt ur normal .... or maybe ur having some review fet**h ..
Also about reviews ... take a close look at Far Cry in other reviews too .. u'll see that the fps hardly varies across diff. res. with high end GPU's ... and the reviewer clearly states that the CPU is a big bottleneck there ... so ur some other genius who thinks CPU is not a big factor eeh ??? then i think if ur the leading IT specialist ... ur concept gaming PC would consist of a Sempron with a X1900XTX Crossfire maybe ???
R
rahul_becks23
Guest
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
@akshayt-
Its good that u told us what u knew about these things and i appreciate ur post BUT u gotta see this...........
Dont u think a processor like AMD 64 3000+,3200+,3400+.... will act as a bottleneck for such cards like 7900GT / GTX , X1900XT , 7950 GTX......
So,there is no point in getting a slow PRO. with a high-end G C because it will not allow the G C to show its TRUE Potential.
AND a comb. like 3800+ and 7600GT will ALLOW the G C to show its FULL potential.
Whatever be ur proof or ur way of MAKING them,u cant just get a 3200+ with a 7900GT because u will waste some potential of the G C.
Getting a 7600GT with a 3800+ will allow the G C to perform at its best.
So,what do ya want.....SPENDING 20,000-30,000 for a G C(with a slow pro.) that will never give u what its GOT in its belly
OR
spending 12,000 for a G C(with a medium pro.) that will give u every buck u paid for.
SO,what should i want to tell u here,buddy..........ITS this that if anyone gets a 7900GT,HE should ALSO get a fast PRO. like 4200+(or the likes) SO that the G C works with its FULL strength.
P.S.---These were just some GENERAL OPINION of mine and in no way they were meant to go against ur posts.
@akshayt-
Its good that u told us what u knew about these things and i appreciate ur post BUT u gotta see this...........
Dont u think a processor like AMD 64 3000+,3200+,3400+.... will act as a bottleneck for such cards like 7900GT / GTX , X1900XT , 7950 GTX......
So,there is no point in getting a slow PRO. with a high-end G C because it will not allow the G C to show its TRUE Potential.
AND a comb. like 3800+ and 7600GT will ALLOW the G C to show its FULL potential.
Whatever be ur proof or ur way of MAKING them,u cant just get a 3200+ with a 7900GT because u will waste some potential of the G C.
Getting a 7600GT with a 3800+ will allow the G C to perform at its best.
So,what do ya want.....SPENDING 20,000-30,000 for a G C(with a slow pro.) that will never give u what its GOT in its belly
OR
spending 12,000 for a G C(with a medium pro.) that will give u every buck u paid for.
SO,what should i want to tell u here,buddy..........ITS this that if anyone gets a 7900GT,HE should ALSO get a fast PRO. like 4200+(or the likes) SO that the G C works with its FULL strength.
P.S.---These were just some GENERAL OPINION of mine and in no way they were meant to go against ur posts.
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
I will make you understand these concepts. Just promise that you have thoroughly gone through each and every link I mentioned and analysed it to the best of your ability. If you find a link that proves otherwise, please mention it.
@deathme virus, let us solve your doubts first
A 6800GT/Ultra/7600GT does 10X7 MAX 16x AF and can't do 12X1q0 PERIOD
I have myself tried it and the performance won't be that good irrespective of what fps you are getting. Performance - first, fps -second
A friend of mine is comfortable with FEAR when the gameplay according to me is pure crap but according to him is acceptable.
There is no benchmarks where a 6800GS can score 40fps at that settings, prove it if you can, also us about your smoothness etc.
To play games like GRAW and Oblivion and the upcoming games a card like the 1900XT is useful even at 12X10 without AA and maybe without AF too.To paly games like FEAR, you are advised to get a 1900XT at 12X9 with AA and AF. Even a 1900XTX should preferably play Serious Sam 2 only at 10X7 MAX 4x AA 16x AF. At 12X10 the minimum fps become too low. So this point is again negated.
6800GT/GS can play the most intensive games at 10X7 MED and the ones like FEAR at 10X7 MAX soft shadows off and the upcoming games at 10X7 Med and the even more intensive games at 800*600 med and at 800*600 med cpu counts a lot.
Please understand that never rely on synthetic benchmarks like 3d mark. A 1900XT gets 5000 and 1900XTX gets 5800, yet in most cases the XTX is 5-10% faster only. A 7900GTX gets around 6200fps yet it is many a times slower than 1900XT. Rely on real world tests only.
Anyway you yourself proved yourself wrong as the lower cpu with higher graphic card got a higher score.
3D mark scores might be affected by a faster cpu but in real world you may not notice any difference.
Please mention who conducted the tests, on what system, all details, drivers used, when was the system formatted, how much had it been used etc.
Far Cry is really cpu dependent. 100% agreed. But tell me on thing, don't you think a Amd 64 3500 + X1800XT can handle the game at 12X10 MAX no AA fine? Do you think a Amd X2 3800 + 7600GT would do it as well? Oblviously, not. Also, although FarCry gives higher fps, how does it matter whether you get 70fps or 90fps, all cpus are ok for playing as along as you get a certain minimum performance and minimum average performance.
Ideal is a 1900XT-XTX OC CF with E6600.
YOU HAVEN"T TRIED TO UNDERSTOOD ONE THING. I NEVER SAID THAT A CPU DOESN'T AFFECT GAMING PERFORMANCE. I MEANT THAT BEYOND A POINT THE IMPACT OF CPU ON PERFORMANCE IS MINIMUM. THIS MEANS THAT IF YOU GET INTEL 2.8GHZ OR LOWER THEN YOU WOULD BE BOTTLENECKING YOUR CARD IF IT IS A GOOD ONE ATLEAST. SIMILARLY IF YOU HAVE AMD NON 64 CPU OR A SEMPRON CPU THAT TOO BOTTLENECKS THE CARD( A GOOD ONE THAT IS). HOWEVER IF YOU HAVE AMD 64 3000+ OR HIGHER OR INTEL 3.2-3.8 DEPEDING UPON CORE AND ALL THEN FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF GAMES AT HIGH SETTINGS THERE WILL NOT BE A MUCH INCREASE IN PERFORMANCE IF YOU UPGRADE YOUR CPU. HOWEVER IF YOU HAVE A CPU LOWER THAN THIS THERE WILL BE A PERFORMANCE DIFF. 2.66GHZ IS UNDOUBTEDLY INADEQUATE. X2 ON THE OTHER HAND GIVES PERFORAMNCE BOOST ONLY IN A FEW GAMES AND IN THE FUTURE THOUGH IT WILL GIEV A BOOST, BUT THE IMPACT OF THAT BOOST WON'T BE THAT MUCH IF YOU PLAY AT A HIGHER RES ALTHOUGH A TIME WILL COME WHEN THE X2 WILL BE MUCH BETTER EVEN AT HIGH RES AND SETTINGS BUT THERE IS NO POINT COMPROMISING ON THE GPU AS THEN YOU WOULD ANYWAY NEED TO PLAY AT A LOWER RES AND SETTINGS. I HOPE YOU DO UNDERSTAND NOW.
NOT THAT A FASTER CPU ISN'T BETTER, BUT THE LOWER AMD 64 NON SEMPRONS ARE GOOD ENOUGH FOR MOST CURRENT GAMES AT THE MOMENT ESEPCIALLY IF YOU CAN PLAY AT HIGHER SETTINGS WHICH MAY BE JUST 10X7 MAX OR MORE.
@ rahul
1900XT will bottleneck these cpus in the future games, but in most current games they don't bottleneck much if at all. Also, see it this way, Amd 64 3000 + 7900GT < Amd 64 3000 + 1900XT, so it is still better to opt for 1900XT.
Anything over a 1900XT/XTX/7900GTX OC should not be bought as then the CPU will count in the future, money can be saved. I advise not to go higher than 1900XT/7900GTX but as of now a 1900XT + Amd 64 3000 may>7900GT + X2 3800.
It is evident that you have not gone through my links else you wouldn't emphasize on cpu bottleneck which they have proved doesn't exist or is minimal.
7600GT bottlenecks amd 64 3800.
most amd cpus can be overclock to 3800 speeds or higher, that is another plus.
7900GT + 3000 > 7600GT + 3800
You can get the 1900XT with amd 64 3200 and you will not be wasting it for any practical purpose. And even if you do waste it, it doesn't matter and is of no consequence. Please see all my links and read my example.
Whenever we need to shop for somethnig we don't see whether we can use something fully but whether which of the two is better in our budget.
Suppose you have Rs.35000 with you, you have the following choices
1900XT + amd 64 3500
7900GT + X2 4600(near future price)
7900GT + FX 60 class price
In majority of current games the first choice will perform higher provided you use AA and AF preferably at 12X10 or higher.
you can oc a 3500 to 2.6-2.8, and then in current games it will perform more than x2 4600 in many cases and maybe almost as fast as a single core FX 55/57. This much cpu speed is enough for gaming. X2 4600 will give a little boost in most/all cases and a substancial boost in some cases but the graphic card will seriously hold it back and the output will be lower than the former.
Rahul please go through my links as you haven't understood the concept yet. It is not mugging up here but the concept, if a cpu x mhz is required then 2x won't help you as much as a graphic card upgrade from 0.6y to 0.9y when y mhz is required.
To put it simply, will ut04 run better on 4-8gb ram than it would on 1gb ram. I am talking of single player deathmatch.
I will make you understand these concepts. Just promise that you have thoroughly gone through each and every link I mentioned and analysed it to the best of your ability. If you find a link that proves otherwise, please mention it.
@deathme virus, let us solve your doubts first
A 6800GT/Ultra/7600GT does 10X7 MAX 16x AF and can't do 12X1q0 PERIOD
I have myself tried it and the performance won't be that good irrespective of what fps you are getting. Performance - first, fps -second
A friend of mine is comfortable with FEAR when the gameplay according to me is pure crap but according to him is acceptable.
There is no benchmarks where a 6800GS can score 40fps at that settings, prove it if you can, also us about your smoothness etc.
To play games like GRAW and Oblivion and the upcoming games a card like the 1900XT is useful even at 12X10 without AA and maybe without AF too.To paly games like FEAR, you are advised to get a 1900XT at 12X9 with AA and AF. Even a 1900XTX should preferably play Serious Sam 2 only at 10X7 MAX 4x AA 16x AF. At 12X10 the minimum fps become too low. So this point is again negated.
6800GT/GS can play the most intensive games at 10X7 MED and the ones like FEAR at 10X7 MAX soft shadows off and the upcoming games at 10X7 Med and the even more intensive games at 800*600 med and at 800*600 med cpu counts a lot.
Please understand that never rely on synthetic benchmarks like 3d mark. A 1900XT gets 5000 and 1900XTX gets 5800, yet in most cases the XTX is 5-10% faster only. A 7900GTX gets around 6200fps yet it is many a times slower than 1900XT. Rely on real world tests only.
Anyway you yourself proved yourself wrong as the lower cpu with higher graphic card got a higher score.
3D mark scores might be affected by a faster cpu but in real world you may not notice any difference.
Please mention who conducted the tests, on what system, all details, drivers used, when was the system formatted, how much had it been used etc.
Far Cry is really cpu dependent. 100% agreed. But tell me on thing, don't you think a Amd 64 3500 + X1800XT can handle the game at 12X10 MAX no AA fine? Do you think a Amd X2 3800 + 7600GT would do it as well? Oblviously, not. Also, although FarCry gives higher fps, how does it matter whether you get 70fps or 90fps, all cpus are ok for playing as along as you get a certain minimum performance and minimum average performance.
Ideal is a 1900XT-XTX OC CF with E6600.
YOU HAVEN"T TRIED TO UNDERSTOOD ONE THING. I NEVER SAID THAT A CPU DOESN'T AFFECT GAMING PERFORMANCE. I MEANT THAT BEYOND A POINT THE IMPACT OF CPU ON PERFORMANCE IS MINIMUM. THIS MEANS THAT IF YOU GET INTEL 2.8GHZ OR LOWER THEN YOU WOULD BE BOTTLENECKING YOUR CARD IF IT IS A GOOD ONE ATLEAST. SIMILARLY IF YOU HAVE AMD NON 64 CPU OR A SEMPRON CPU THAT TOO BOTTLENECKS THE CARD( A GOOD ONE THAT IS). HOWEVER IF YOU HAVE AMD 64 3000+ OR HIGHER OR INTEL 3.2-3.8 DEPEDING UPON CORE AND ALL THEN FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF GAMES AT HIGH SETTINGS THERE WILL NOT BE A MUCH INCREASE IN PERFORMANCE IF YOU UPGRADE YOUR CPU. HOWEVER IF YOU HAVE A CPU LOWER THAN THIS THERE WILL BE A PERFORMANCE DIFF. 2.66GHZ IS UNDOUBTEDLY INADEQUATE. X2 ON THE OTHER HAND GIVES PERFORAMNCE BOOST ONLY IN A FEW GAMES AND IN THE FUTURE THOUGH IT WILL GIEV A BOOST, BUT THE IMPACT OF THAT BOOST WON'T BE THAT MUCH IF YOU PLAY AT A HIGHER RES ALTHOUGH A TIME WILL COME WHEN THE X2 WILL BE MUCH BETTER EVEN AT HIGH RES AND SETTINGS BUT THERE IS NO POINT COMPROMISING ON THE GPU AS THEN YOU WOULD ANYWAY NEED TO PLAY AT A LOWER RES AND SETTINGS. I HOPE YOU DO UNDERSTAND NOW.
NOT THAT A FASTER CPU ISN'T BETTER, BUT THE LOWER AMD 64 NON SEMPRONS ARE GOOD ENOUGH FOR MOST CURRENT GAMES AT THE MOMENT ESEPCIALLY IF YOU CAN PLAY AT HIGHER SETTINGS WHICH MAY BE JUST 10X7 MAX OR MORE.
@ rahul
1900XT will bottleneck these cpus in the future games, but in most current games they don't bottleneck much if at all. Also, see it this way, Amd 64 3000 + 7900GT < Amd 64 3000 + 1900XT, so it is still better to opt for 1900XT.
Anything over a 1900XT/XTX/7900GTX OC should not be bought as then the CPU will count in the future, money can be saved. I advise not to go higher than 1900XT/7900GTX but as of now a 1900XT + Amd 64 3000 may>7900GT + X2 3800.
It is evident that you have not gone through my links else you wouldn't emphasize on cpu bottleneck which they have proved doesn't exist or is minimal.
7600GT bottlenecks amd 64 3800.
most amd cpus can be overclock to 3800 speeds or higher, that is another plus.
7900GT + 3000 > 7600GT + 3800
You can get the 1900XT with amd 64 3200 and you will not be wasting it for any practical purpose. And even if you do waste it, it doesn't matter and is of no consequence. Please see all my links and read my example.
Whenever we need to shop for somethnig we don't see whether we can use something fully but whether which of the two is better in our budget.
Suppose you have Rs.35000 with you, you have the following choices
1900XT + amd 64 3500
7900GT + X2 4600(near future price)
7900GT + FX 60 class price
In majority of current games the first choice will perform higher provided you use AA and AF preferably at 12X10 or higher.
you can oc a 3500 to 2.6-2.8, and then in current games it will perform more than x2 4600 in many cases and maybe almost as fast as a single core FX 55/57. This much cpu speed is enough for gaming. X2 4600 will give a little boost in most/all cases and a substancial boost in some cases but the graphic card will seriously hold it back and the output will be lower than the former.
Rahul please go through my links as you haven't understood the concept yet. It is not mugging up here but the concept, if a cpu x mhz is required then 2x won't help you as much as a graphic card upgrade from 0.6y to 0.9y when y mhz is required.
To put it simply, will ut04 run better on 4-8gb ram than it would on 1gb ram. I am talking of single player deathmatch.
R
rahul_becks23
Guest
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
@akshayt...............u r going nuts........and i laugh at ur noobish posts..............
Ultimately,i'll surrender to u and i dont wanna argue with u.............so u win again and i lose.
Happy now.............
@akshayt...............u r going nuts........and i laugh at ur noobish posts..............
Ultimately,i'll surrender to u and i dont wanna argue with u.............so u win again and i lose.
Happy now.............
gaurav_indian
CG Artist
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
Guys I have bought nvidia 6600 GT 256 MB for Rs 7600 and I have Pentium D 3.0.So I want to ask whether its a good graphic card and how many FPS it supports?
Guys I have bought nvidia 6600 GT 256 MB for Rs 7600 and I have Pentium D 3.0.So I want to ask whether its a good graphic card and how many FPS it supports?
deathvirus_me
Wise Old Owl
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
Here u go ... a little ingame FEAR test with my config .. the settings were 1280*768 , 2x aa , MAXED SETTINGS
*img62.imageshack.us/img62/2768/feartest3md1.th.jpg
I think i'm doing quite well with a 6800GS coupled with a 3500+ at high res. like 1280*768 , the time i was testing a widescreen LCD ... now .. i play FEAR at 1280*960 with the same settings ...
Well .. this statement of your prooves what a n00b ur ... in 3DMark06 ... the X1900XT does around ~5200 the X1900XTX around ~5800 and the 7900GTX around ~5500 .... the X1900XTX being the clear winner here ... that too with a FX57 ... the the synthetic benchmark performance diff. between the X1900XT and the XTX is over 15 % ... but actually i varies under 15% depending upon the game ... so the limiting factor here would be the remaining system rite ??? So the CPU plays a more important part while gaming ... and thus u need a better CPU to handle the monster GPU's like that of the X1900XTX or the 7900GTX ....
Now about the myth that the higher res. lowers the CPU bottleneck , its true ... but the res. should be atleast 1600*1200 or higher ... and the monitor should support atleast 100 Hz referesh rate at that res. so that vertical sync can be turned off ... so now u'll have to invest in a good 19" LCD that'll probably cost another 35k's ..
Yeah rite ... the FX60 would alone cost around 30k's ....
Yeah rite ... and the L1/L2 cache , FSB , HTL , DRMA : FSB etc. etc. are just bogus things rite ??? So a OC'ed 3500+ is going to perform like a FX 55 ... so a oc'ed akshayt will be like Fatality ??? Dude ... have u ever tried messing up with the hardware urself or u jsut going to get married to the reviews ... ur comparisons can make Laden look like Lalu
Ditto .... i'm done with this guy ... and if he keeps on going like this .. i might even be out of this forum ....
Here u go ... a little ingame FEAR test with my config .. the settings were 1280*768 , 2x aa , MAXED SETTINGS
*img62.imageshack.us/img62/2768/feartest3md1.th.jpg
I think i'm doing quite well with a 6800GS coupled with a 3500+ at high res. like 1280*768 , the time i was testing a widescreen LCD ... now .. i play FEAR at 1280*960 with the same settings ...
Well .. this statement of your prooves what a n00b ur ... in 3DMark06 ... the X1900XT does around ~5200 the X1900XTX around ~5800 and the 7900GTX around ~5500 .... the X1900XTX being the clear winner here ... that too with a FX57 ... the the synthetic benchmark performance diff. between the X1900XT and the XTX is over 15 % ... but actually i varies under 15% depending upon the game ... so the limiting factor here would be the remaining system rite ??? So the CPU plays a more important part while gaming ... and thus u need a better CPU to handle the monster GPU's like that of the X1900XTX or the 7900GTX ....
Now about the myth that the higher res. lowers the CPU bottleneck , its true ... but the res. should be atleast 1600*1200 or higher ... and the monitor should support atleast 100 Hz referesh rate at that res. so that vertical sync can be turned off ... so now u'll have to invest in a good 19" LCD that'll probably cost another 35k's ..
Yeah rite ... the FX60 would alone cost around 30k's ....
Yeah rite ... and the L1/L2 cache , FSB , HTL , DRMA : FSB etc. etc. are just bogus things rite ??? So a OC'ed 3500+ is going to perform like a FX 55 ... so a oc'ed akshayt will be like Fatality ??? Dude ... have u ever tried messing up with the hardware urself or u jsut going to get married to the reviews ... ur comparisons can make Laden look like Lalu
Ditto .... i'm done with this guy ... and if he keeps on going like this .. i might even be out of this forum ....
R
rahul_becks23
Guest
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
@deathvirus_me-
me too done with this guy,but dont go out of forum because we r some of the guys which give useful and correct info to other guys which dont know much about.
So,what i want is just ignore that guy's posts because u know whats right and whats wrong and u dont need to explain that to him.
Ok........
-Peace-
@tech_mastermind-
ur pro. will be good with a 7600 GT nVIDIA from XFX.
@deathvirus_me-
me too done with this guy,but dont go out of forum because we r some of the guys which give useful and correct info to other guys which dont know much about.
So,what i want is just ignore that guy's posts because u know whats right and whats wrong and u dont need to explain that to him.
Ok........
-Peace-
@tech_mastermind-
ur pro. will be good with a 7600 GT nVIDIA from XFX.
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
1)You say you play FEAR at those settings.
My friend specs:
Amd 64 3200 Venice
2gb
7600GT
7600GT is about 20% or so better than 6800GS class
He gets around 50-60 or more fps using FRAPS at 12X9 MAX no soft shadows yet the stuttering makes it unplayable for me but playable for him. I prefer to play at 10X7 MAX no soft shadows as it is much smoother. Although fps are enough in 12X9, but the performance is crap. Also, are you including soft shadows in max? The settings you mentioned is what somebody plays if one has a 1800XT or atleast 7900GT.
2)3d mark series does not give the real picture especially with the overall score. PERIOD. 1900XT is still a better choice than 7900GTX yet even the 1900XTX looses to it.
*xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/powercolor-x1900xt_18.html
3)You are getting the wrong concept, with FX 60, the GPU is no longer bottlenecked by the CPU. Had it been so you would not have noticed any diff in performance between 1900XT and CF, but there is a difference in performance. Also even with core 2 Duo in most cases amd and intel give more or less same scores at 1600*1200 with AA and AF with a single high end card, this proves that CPU is not bottlenecking the card.
4)To make full use of card in the future you need a faster CPU. Agreed.
But atleast today, Amd x + 1900XT>Amd x + 7900GT
5)The new price of FX60 may be around 20-25k, yeah still pricy.
6) Let lower cpu be x, GPU be y, higher CPU be z.
800*600 med
x+y= n
y+z=n+30%n
1600*1200 MAX
x+y=m
y+z=m+-2%m
but, m<n PERIOD
Also, even at 1280*1024 with AA and AF there might not be that big a difference and anyway high end GPU may be required for todays games even at 10X7 like Serious Sam2 with AA and AF.
7)Amd 64 3000 = 1.8ghz
Amd 64 3000 @ 2.4ghz = Amd 64 3800
Amd 64 3000 @ 2.8ghz = Imaginery Amd 64 4500
Now we can assume that Amd 64 4500 imaginery will surely be better than Amd 64 4000 at stock. Amd 64 4000 at stock equals FX53 or higher, this means Amd 64 3000 @ 2.8 is better than Amd 64 4000/FX 53. In fact Amd 64 4500 imaginery will almost be as good as a FX55 if not as good.
Opeteron 165 Dual Core @ 3ghz will probably beat even Amd FX 60/62.
PLEASE READ THOSE LINKS
To bottleneck Intel Pentium D930 you need a 1900XT class GPU. 6600GT is bottlenecking your CPU. You should find performance diff even while moving from 7900GT to 1900XT with that CPU.
1)You say you play FEAR at those settings.
My friend specs:
Amd 64 3200 Venice
2gb
7600GT
7600GT is about 20% or so better than 6800GS class
He gets around 50-60 or more fps using FRAPS at 12X9 MAX no soft shadows yet the stuttering makes it unplayable for me but playable for him. I prefer to play at 10X7 MAX no soft shadows as it is much smoother. Although fps are enough in 12X9, but the performance is crap. Also, are you including soft shadows in max? The settings you mentioned is what somebody plays if one has a 1800XT or atleast 7900GT.
2)3d mark series does not give the real picture especially with the overall score. PERIOD. 1900XT is still a better choice than 7900GTX yet even the 1900XTX looses to it.
*xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/powercolor-x1900xt_18.html
3)You are getting the wrong concept, with FX 60, the GPU is no longer bottlenecked by the CPU. Had it been so you would not have noticed any diff in performance between 1900XT and CF, but there is a difference in performance. Also even with core 2 Duo in most cases amd and intel give more or less same scores at 1600*1200 with AA and AF with a single high end card, this proves that CPU is not bottlenecking the card.
4)To make full use of card in the future you need a faster CPU. Agreed.
But atleast today, Amd x + 1900XT>Amd x + 7900GT
5)The new price of FX60 may be around 20-25k, yeah still pricy.
6) Let lower cpu be x, GPU be y, higher CPU be z.
800*600 med
x+y= n
y+z=n+30%n
1600*1200 MAX
x+y=m
y+z=m+-2%m
but, m<n PERIOD
Also, even at 1280*1024 with AA and AF there might not be that big a difference and anyway high end GPU may be required for todays games even at 10X7 like Serious Sam2 with AA and AF.
7)Amd 64 3000 = 1.8ghz
Amd 64 3000 @ 2.4ghz = Amd 64 3800
Amd 64 3000 @ 2.8ghz = Imaginery Amd 64 4500
Now we can assume that Amd 64 4500 imaginery will surely be better than Amd 64 4000 at stock. Amd 64 4000 at stock equals FX53 or higher, this means Amd 64 3000 @ 2.8 is better than Amd 64 4000/FX 53. In fact Amd 64 4500 imaginery will almost be as good as a FX55 if not as good.
Opeteron 165 Dual Core @ 3ghz will probably beat even Amd FX 60/62.
PLEASE READ THOSE LINKS
To bottleneck Intel Pentium D930 you need a 1900XT class GPU. 6600GT is bottlenecking your CPU. You should find performance diff even while moving from 7900GT to 1900XT with that CPU.
Last edited:
samanvya_ad
Broken In
Re: All Graphics Cards related queries here.
Dont know much but my 6600GT with X2 4200+ gives much better scores than 7600GS tested on AMD 64 3200+.....
Dont know much but my 6600GT with X2 4200+ gives much better scores than 7600GS tested on AMD 64 3200+.....