Home

News

Forums

Hardware

CPUs

Mainboards

Video

Guides

CPU Prices

Memory Prices

Shop



Sharky Extreme :


Latest News


- Outdoor Life: Panasonic Puts 3G Wireless Into Rugged Notebooks
- Averatec Launches Lightweight Turion 64 X2 Laptop
- Acer Fires Up Two New Ferrari Notebooks
- Belkin Debuts Docking Station for ExpressCard-Equipped Notebooks
- Logitech 5.1 Speaker System Puts Your Ears At Eye Level
News Archives

Features

- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with ATI's Terry Makedon
- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with Seagate's Joni Clark
- Half-Life 2 Review
- DOOM 3 Review
- Unreal Tournament 2004 Review

Buyer's Guides

- September High-end Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- September Value Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- October Extreme Gaming PC Buyer's Guide

HARDWARE

  • CPUs


  • Motherboards

    - Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 Motherboard Review
    - DFI LANPARTY UT nF4 Ultra-D Motherboard Review

  • Video Cards

    - Gigabyte GeForce 7600 GT 256MB Review
    - ASUS EN7900GT TOP 256MB Review
    - ASUS EN7600GT Silent 256MB Review
    - Biostar GeForce 7900 GT 256MB Review





  • SharkyForums.Com - Print: Which video card: A, B or C?

    Which video card: A, B or C?
    By Gary7 January 31, 2001, 03:20 PM

    Which card would you get for around $200?

    A. Creative Annihilator2 32 DDR?
    B. Asus V7700 Pure 32
    c. None of the above wait because... (fill in the blamk).

    Thanks!

    By drdoom January 31, 2001, 03:26 PM

    Well as usual that depends. What is your current video card? What CPU do you have?
    If you have a S3 VirGe then get something anything. But post that info and you'll get a much better answer.

    By Humus January 31, 2001, 03:36 PM

    c) Radeon 32MB DDR
    or
    d) Radeon 64MB DDR Vivo

    By Mr Roboto January 31, 2001, 03:37 PM

    c. go with a ledtech winfast geforce2 it has a 220% larger heatsink then standard, and performs as one of the ebest in its catagory

    By Bateluer January 31, 2001, 03:41 PM

    two things,

    1. You need tell us your CPU, current vidcard, and preferably RAM count as well.

    2. You really should wait until the end of April. By that time, NV20 boards will have been floating around for awhile, reviews and analysises will have been done, and the price on current cards will be lowered.

    And if you do have a Virge, I hope you just woke up from your coma or recovered from a several year heroine binge. lol

    By Nephalim January 31, 2001, 03:47 PM

    quote:Originally posted by Humus:
    c) Radeon 32MB DDR
    or
    d) Radeon 64MB DDR Vivo

    I second this motion!

    By Willy-Willy January 31, 2001, 03:47 PM

    C) Radeon 32MB DDR or Radeon VIVO 64MB DDR

    Because the Radeon has more future proof, already partly support the DirectX 8, third textureunit, perfect DVD playback, want more??

    By jagojago12 January 31, 2001, 04:16 PM

    Yeah, faster low-res(1024x768 and below) gameplay. Not a lot of us here play at 1600x1200x32bpp to fully take advantage of a Radeon. You can't say 1024x768 is not the most widely used resolution.

    By jagojago12 January 31, 2001, 04:18 PM

    redunant post

    By Gary7 January 31, 2001, 10:26 PM

    Thanks for the input, I hadn't considered the Radeon, I've never been fond of ATI.
    Currently I have a PII 400/64 ram, Voodoo3 3000 AGP.
    This card, however is for the new rig I'm building it is a PIII 933 w/256 mb, Asus CUSL2-c mobo.

    By coolqf February 01, 2001, 12:08 AM

    yeah, go for Radeon. it is the most 'future proof' you're guaranteed for the drivers to be way better than any other company (even though the latest official drivers currently suck big time)
    and the NVIDIA chips suck big time... totally lack future proof.

    Since you are a voodoo user just decide which you would personally prefer.
    The Radeon
    Radeon 64MB (more powerfull than the regular Radeon, has more clock speed on the gpu and the memory)
    the Geforce2 GTS
    Geforce2 Pro
    Geforce2 Ultra

    Personally if you're going for good budget cards I would go for the Radeon 32Mb or the Geforce2 GTS.

    Just go to the websites and look at statistics on the graph and just basically look at information that mainly interests you for a video card.
    you always have C) wait it out for another month. personally, I recommend that you buy the video card last for your new computer. video cards are the hardware in a computer that have price drops the quickest.
    a month ago the cheapest I could find a retail Radeon was $145 now I hear people say $115. $30 in just a month and no new card have been released yet. Plus waiting it out for a video card only really helps you. companies would have better drivers and you would be able to ask people help on the card since more people have already bought the card.

    By Vindir February 01, 2001, 12:08 AM

    quote:Originally posted by Gary7:
    Thanks for the input, I hadn't considered the Radeon, I've never been fond of ATI.
    Currently I have a PII 400/64 ram, Voodoo3 3000 AGP.
    This card, however is for the new rig I'm building it is a PIII 933 w/256 mb, Asus CUSL2-c mobo.

    I'd say go with the ASUS card. Or a different 32meg card.

    By Diablo SV February 01, 2001, 01:36 AM

    Go for Radeon 64 DDR ViVo Retial
    Becasue I can find it for $190 (My Own choice)
    and if you wanted more Value A Radeon 32DDR for $118!
    (These Prices is from the latest Weekly CPU & Video Prices @ www.anandtech.com)
    and They List the Retailers there.

    By Captain Iglo February 01, 2001, 07:04 AM

    quote:Originally posted by Mr Roboto:
    c. go with a ledtech winfast geforce2 it has a 220% larger heatsink then standard, and performs as one of the ebest in its catagory

    ...she may have big boobs, but
    have you seen the size of my heatsink?...

    By mrwhite February 01, 2001, 08:24 AM

    Well, Id go for your original 3rd option. Wait. With the Nv20 being on the doorstep and the radeon2 following in its footsteps the prices of vidcards will sink fast. By the beginning of may you could have a Geforce II Ultra in your system for that $200 or even a NV20 MX (if thats even coming out) You could probably get a Radeon 64 DDR VIVO for little more than $100. I think waiting would be your best bet.

    By RLX7 February 01, 2001, 02:07 PM

    I'd wait for the NV20 to come out and for prices to drop. There's no use in beating yourself up in a few months over paying way to much for the same card.

    By shizumaru February 01, 2001, 02:32 PM

    I would strongly suggest you go with a Geforce 2 rather than a Radeon. I purchased the Radeon 64mb ddr vivo about a week ago and have not been able to get a single game to run right. I went to rage3d.com boards for support and everybody seemed to think it must be my fault, i must not be correcting the right settings in the registry or i must need to format my computer to get rid of old drivers (even though i did that already), or i must not have correct bios settings, or maybe i am an idiot. basically i tried 2 different sets of drivers and vaiours settings in games, and bios, and radeon settings but nothing worked. maybe i am just an idiot but i did see plenty of other people having problems on that board.

    anyhow, yesterday i ordered a leadtek winfast geforce 2 (retail) from newegg.com for $172 (no tax) and paid a little extra for quick shipping. if you can wait then shipping is free. when i receive it and install it i can let you know how it goes.

    you might not have the same problem as me, but i see you are gonna use the exact same mobo as me (cusl2-c) so if it has anything to do with my config, i'd say you should steer away from it...

    i'll also add that the card looked beautiful and i'd be really happy if i could get it to run right, but i don't think you should have to go through so much trouble just to make a card run right after paying so much for it. i had no problems in 2d, only 3d.

    good luck with whatever you choose.

    By kev0ut February 01, 2001, 03:02 PM

    last night i got the radeon 64MB DDR from buy.com for $163 with shipping. ($30 off 150 coupon)

    I wouldn't recommend waiting for new cards to come out and prices to drop, cause you're wasting all that time waiting to save what, 30 or 40 bucks? not worth it in my opinion

    By AssNasty February 01, 2001, 03:08 PM

    Shizu, what's your specs?

    I think I remember you from the Rage3d forums...

    By shizumaru February 01, 2001, 06:25 PM

    quote:Originally posted by AssNasty:
    Shizu, what's your specs?

    I think I remember you from the Rage3d forums...

    p3 733eb
    asus cusl2-c
    256mb infineon pc133
    45gb ibm deskstar 75gxp
    radeon 64mb ddr vivo
    soundblaster live value

    when i get out of work i am gonna try a couple of last suggestions that were given to me today...i will post here and over at rage3d if they help...also i will post my experience with the gts when it comes, which should be tomorrow...


    hey, you might recognize my problem from here, i posted the issue first here and i think you were the one who referred me to rage3d where i posted it again...

    By Gary7 February 01, 2001, 07:52 PM

    Thanks, guys this is just the back and forth dialogue I wanted so I could see all the argumenst for and against.

    Why do so mmany call the Raedeon "futureproof"? What's so special about it v. the Geforce2 GTS?

    By Cam February 01, 2001, 08:33 PM

    Hi I have the ASUS 7700 Pure 32 meg. I had a Creative Labs and made em change it for this one cuz I heard Creative use lower quality parts apparently. Although honestly the 2 cards perform identically in all games on my setup. I can't say anything about the Radeon cuz I haven't seen one in action but I'm happy with my GTS I must say. Very fast overall. Hope this info helps you either way.

    By coolqf February 02, 2001, 12:50 AM

    Ig nore the future proof part for the Radeon. It's pretty much BS. people say that it can have much more potential than what it currently has. (I think this rumor/gossip started because they saw that NVIDIA could give their vidoe cards around 25% boost with just improving the drivers) so it goes like this.. If NVIDIA can do it why can't ATI?
    that's my opinion on how people see it as future proof.
    ATI has always lacked great driver support. I haven't heard of any news of them getting new employees to help make better drivers.
    NVIDIA on the other hand.... hey!!! getting stuff from 3DFX!!! now htat company started off with some great technology.
    two things I hate about the ATI Radeon.
    1) people calling it future proof. compare the Radeon and the Geforce and the geforce is overall more stable. things can only get better.... so far the Geforce is ahead.
    2) i'll tell you when I think of one : )

    statistically the Geforce2 is better.
    here's another thing... when the Geforce 256 came out they decided to compare its pics with Voodoo cards and the Viper II. to show the difference on how things looked. They're not doing that with the Geforce2 and the Radeon. you decide why... I'm assuming that both are pretty close in graphics.

    By mazeikabedes February 02, 2001, 02:06 AM

    all those cards dont go with such a low end cpu the voodoo card isn't the a perfect match for your cpu but it cant be improved on that much.
    need a faster cpu to make it benifit more

    By Humus February 02, 2001, 07:17 AM

    quote:Originally posted by coolqf:
    Ig nore the future proof part for the Radeon. It's pretty much BS. people say that it can have much more potential than what it currently has. (I think this rumor/gossip started because they saw that NVIDIA could give their vidoe cards around 25% boost with just improving the drivers) so it goes like this.. If NVIDIA can do it why can't ATI?
    that's my opinion on how people see it as future proof.
    ATI has always lacked great driver support. I haven't heard of any news of them getting new employees to help make better drivers.
    NVIDIA on the other hand.... hey!!! getting stuff from 3DFX!!! now htat company started off with some great technology.
    two things I hate about the ATI Radeon.
    1) people calling it future proof. compare the Radeon and the Geforce and the geforce is overall more stable. things can only get better.... so far the Geforce is ahead.
    2) i'll tell you when I think of one : )

    statistically the Geforce2 is better.
    here's another thing... when the Geforce 256 came out they decided to compare its pics with Voodoo cards and the Viper II. to show the difference on how things looked. They're not doing that with the Geforce2 and the Radeon. you decide why... I'm assuming that both are pretty close in graphics.

    You missed the news that ATi has doubled the staff working on Radeon?

    The "futureproofness" of Radeon is mainly with it's features. Three texturing units, 3d textures, HyperZ, 16x anisotropic, EMBM etc. will keep it up longer than for example a GTS.

    By mrwhite February 02, 2001, 07:43 AM

    Also The driver team on ATI is still concentrating on compatibility problems, once those are fixed they'll start working on performance and then the Radeon will start getting faster every update.

    By happy_happa February 02, 2001, 10:41 AM

    With the new cards coming around in spring, I'd OC you voodoo3 and wait it out, buying a card now would have little value since none
    of the cards now are really future proof (I have a Radeon, and its not, read the Beyond3D article). Even if you can't put down the cash for the NV20 or Radeon2, the GTS Pro's and Ultra's should be running in the mid to low $200's by then, and they both kick the crap out of the cards mentioned so far.


    Abit KT7-Raid
    Duron 650@950
    ATI Radeon 32MB DDR @191/191
    20G Maxtor
    Kenwood 72x
    KDS 19"

    By Humus February 02, 2001, 03:04 PM

    quote:Originally posted by happy_happa:
    With the new cards coming around in spring, I'd OC you voodoo3 and wait it out, buying a card now would have little value since none
    of the cards now are really future proof (I have a Radeon, and its not, read the Beyond3D article). Even if you can't put down the cash for the NV20 or Radeon2, the GTS Pro's and Ultra's should be running in the mid to low $200's by then, and they both kick the crap out of the cards mentioned so far.

    The Beyond3D article is among the worst kinda crap I've ever seen. The guy talks like he knows 3d graphics even though he DOES NOT. And who the hell would mix John Carmack and DX8 together. Carmack is exclusively using OpenGL and will probably continue to do so until hes death.

    "John Carmack mentions 2 things, which are key for DX8: 'Flexible dependent texture reads" and "register combiners'."

    Register combiner doesn't even exist in DirectX!

    Aarrgh, I only get mad reading that article. Why can't they let competent people write technical articles instead?

    By Humus February 02, 2001, 03:06 PM

    Perhaps it's "Beyond3D" because 3D is beyond their knowledge?


    Contact Us | www.SharkyForums.com

    Copyright 1999, 2000 internet.com Corporation. All Rights Reserved.


    Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46

    previous page
    next page





    Copyright 2002 INT Media Group, Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. About INT Media Group | Press Releases | Privacy Policy | Career Opportunities