-
Ultimate Member
It's not about what the games minimum requirements are... nor even if you can get the games to run at a decent speed... its about power, realism, and pure color - most of all FSAA (my favorite) New GPU's are more about running games at the peak of its settings without seeing so much as a hiccup even if it gives you more frames than you need - I cant stand a scene that isn't at least 2x FSAA, and I'd love to use 4x-8x AA while still getting 100fps when looking at volumetric smoke (like that in MOHAA).
-
but all anyone needs is to do that at 50fps max, not 100 min . . .
-
Ultimate Member
That may be true corrupted - but GPU's aren't based on necessity of any sort (exept for really simple operations). They're based on want, you want 100 fps min at 6x FSAA - Your gonna spend alot of money for it. It just proves to no end if you complain when something better come out. First off no one is making you buy it and - basically, but not always - you get what you pay for. So if you're content with you GPU at 50 fps then you certainly don't need a GPU that goes at 100 fps, that said - you wouldn't *want* the one that can go at 100 fps?
I say bring it on - I want 100+ fps - I dont care if I can see them or not, but the excess means that there is still more quality that can be tweaked out without visual preformance costs.
-
i'm happy with my GF2mx400, so no, i wouldn't want 100fps.
what i'm really worried about is the fact people will often buy the greatest thing on the market without knowing if they can use it. i've had to fix too many computers where this has been the case all because a shop wanted to make a sale on an expensive item
-
Ultimate Member
Well... It's the consumers responsibility to know what he's buying and all the aspects and circumstances that it may include.
Truly - if there weren't ignorant consumers, alot of markets wouldn't survive.
-
ever tried to educate some of those consumers?
-
Originally posted by Apostle 83
Ahem.
Unless there is something amazing about the architecture of this chip, it will take more than 500mhz to beat the 9700, which has a vpu running at 620mhz.
9700 VPU: 320MHz
9700 Mem: 625MHz
NV30 VPU: 500MHz
NV30 Mem: 1GHz
-
Member
there is one reason, the main reason to get the geforce FX. I could come on here and say, "hah, i've got a geforce FX!"
-
does bragging rights now add to the list of reasons to get something? or should we be more focused on what it can do, not what we can say?
-
Member
Don't take my comments seriously
-
it's still a valid question. is anyone going to give an answer?
-
Originally posted by rraehal
I haven't upgraded my graphics card in a long time.
ATI Rage Pro Turbo 4x
It runs most software I have. 2 games do not work due to the 8MB of RAM and games require 32.
I have been eyeing GeForce 4 and Radeon 8500 or 9000 series. I will upgrade soon. Not to the new cards. Don't need it until the Athalon 64 is affordable and I have one of those.
Go for the Radeon 8500LE. I bought a 128mb ddr version made by Sapphire for $90 at a place I found through pricewatch.com. I use 384MB of PC133 SDRAM and it scores over 5000 on 3DMark2001 SE!! $90 isn't bad at all for the 5th best Video Card in the market according to 3DMark's rankings.
-
what mobo / cpu combo do you have sang?
-
Member
G Force FX
I know I will be Buying that card not right away but perhaps in June of 2003 Still Working on my Upgrade.
Long Live the G force FX
I am still Running a P /// 450 and a Matrox G450 Vid card
and I am going ALL Out on my next upgrade No Excuses this time around
-
Member
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|