graphics card pci-e advice

[mkc842]

So, I am thinking I want DX10 support and HDMC support. I run my Samsung 226BW (22" LCD) at 1680x1050.

I want to keep the cost down to about $150.

Best option I can find is http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814150229

Any reason not to worry about dx10 or hdmc?

Any better options for the card?? Not interested if >$180.

Whatever your opinions, I am interested in learning WHY, so I can improve my general knowledge on the subject ... thanks a lot!

OH yeah, would be great if it had a 2x 4-pin to pci-e power adapter cable included... just an afterthought though.

 

[mpilchfamily]

All i have to say is if your current PSU doesn't come with at least 1 PCI-e connector then you will want a new PSU before you buy yourself an Nvidia 8 series card. The typical system with an 8600 needs about 24A to 26A on the combined +12v rails. You could get away with 22A but you would be pushing things. My advice would be putting off the upgrade to make sure you have enough money to cover the card and a new PSU.

 

[mkc842]

little more help on that topic plz... "combined +12v rails" = double the amp spec for +12v since my psu has dual 12v rails?? according to the specs on this $140 triple-rail board, the amperage increase with the number of rails (though I don't see how it sums to 40A...) : http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16817139001

My psu is this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16817103012

--specified for +12V1@18A,+12V2@16A -- so do I have 34A available in spite of lacking the pci-e connection???

Thanks for your help.

 

[mpilchfamily]

No finding the combined +12v aperage is not adding the +12v rail ratings. The 18A per rail is the limit that rail can handle without shutting down your system. It not the actuall amperage that rail receives. Here is a guide i wrote exsplaining it all.

http://www.xcpus.com/forums/showthread.php?t=109

 

[Mordachi]

I would wait personally. ATI's midrange cards will be out shortly and is pretty much the only big unknown right now. Also, regarding pure performance bang for the buck, you would be better served by this for current games:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...tion=&Ntk=&srchInDesc=

However, your current power supply will probably not handle either card very well, as was previously stated. You would do well to update to atleast a 450W supply with dual rails and a dedicated PCI-E 6 pin line.

I've been seeing good things about this on the cheap: http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16817701003

At current, there is no reason to bother with a DX10 card unless outlaying the cash for a real performer like the 8800 GTS 320Mb (currently the price/performance king)...

Also, as is usually the case, the midrange first generation DX10 cards will most likely scarce play the forthcoming DX10 games, judging by previous experiences (anyone remember how Doom3 was on GeForce 5 and ATI 9x series)?

 

[fire400]

DX10, 150? even if a video game came out that suppored it, a 200 x1900XT 512mb which is DX9 based would still destroy the 150 DX10 card.

.. you've got yourself brainwashed with microsoft garbage. DX10 my ass.

as far as the PSU goes. you can do 60 bucks for a PSU, but i'd shoot at 70+ bucks for something more decent.

start small think big. afford what you can, build as you go, but don't run faster than the watts and amps.

 

[firewolfsm]

The 7950GT should fit.

 

[mkc842]

ok... still not sure what's indecent about my psu... would appreciate explanation of amperage, etc...

i'm hardly brainwashed, as i'm asking for advice...

is fire's opinion of DX10 pretty much the concensus...?

thank you

 

[hans007]

i really dont think you need that much power for a 8600gt. it uses less power than a 6600gt. you probably need a TOTAL of 15amps on your 12v unless you also happen to be running a dual core pentium D 840 and even then its still probably enough.

i think if you really wanna look around you could get an 8600gts for under 180. i actually got one on ebay for 145. i guess people dont like the new cards.

 

[rmed64]

Originally posted by: Mordachi
I would wait personally. ATI's midrange cards will be out shortly and is pretty much the only big unknown right now.

PLEASE stay away from them, they are going to be slower than the 8600 series. And for 1680x1050.....will be a joke. The 8600 series is a joke, and the HD 2600 series will be even more of a joke.

You can get an X1950XT on newegg for $179 + rebates if you bother with those.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

Originally posted by: rmed64

Originally posted by: Mordachi
I would wait personally. ATI's midrange cards will be out shortly and is pretty much the only big unknown right now.

PLEASE stay away from them, they are going to be slower than the 8600 series. And for 1680x1050.....will be a joke. The 8600 series is a joke, and the HD 2600 series will be even more of a joke.

You can get an X1950XT on newegg for $179 + rebates if you bother with those.

why stay away from them?
where do u get this info from?

 

[f4phantom2500]

you should wait. sure it can run dx10, but that card has so little power that by the time dx10 games come out it won't be able to run them very well; you'd be better off with a higher end gf7 or radeon x1k part around that price point. Do that if you have to upgrade now. If you can wait, wait until the DX10 games you want to play come out. Remember, even to take advantage of DX10 you need vista, and of course there aren't even any real DX10 games out, so what's the point? Plus by then you'll be able to get a MUCH better card for a given price, as there should be a card refresh by that time (and if not just wait a tad longer for a refresh; better cards same price, or same cards better price).

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: f4phantom2500
you should wait. sure it can run dx10, but that card has so little power that by the time dx10 games come out it won't be able to run them very well; you'd be better off with a higher end gf7 or radeon x1k part around that price point. Do that if you have to upgrade now. If you can wait, wait until the DX10 games you want to play come out. Remember, even to take advantage of DX10 you need vista, and of course there aren't even any real DX10 games out, so what's the point? Plus by then you'll be able to get a MUCH better card for a given price, as there should be a card refresh by that time (and if not just wait a tad longer for a refresh; better cards same price, or same cards better price).

I agree. The only DX10 cards worth consideration now are the Nvidia 8800-series and the Ati 2900-series, and even those might not run the first DX10 games at max settings smoothly. The 8600-series are a joke, an equivalently priced DX9 card will totally destroy them in performance. And it looks like the 2600-series will perform about the same as the 8600 series, so if you want a decent sub-$200 DX10 card, it doesn't exist yet. But untlil DX10 games like Crysis and UT3 come out, there's no benefit of having a DX10 card, so you're not missing much by waiting.

 

[mkc842]

thanks guys, appreciate that.

 

[nyker96]

I would say if you care for DX10s get 8600GTS Nvidia is gonna drop price soon I heard. If not then 7900gs or x1950 pro would both be top notch for non-DX10 games probably faster than 8600s. As for ATI entry level HD 2600s, I believe initial benchmark show they are slower indeed than 8600GT/S. So in short the current DX10 mid range cards are soso implementations of DX10, for 150 I'd get something like x1950 pro instead. However, on DX10 games, they will probably be faster.

 

[superbooga]

Originally posted by: munky
The 8600-series are a joke, an equivalently priced DX9 card will totally destroy them in performance.

The 8600 does not get "destroyed" by an equivalently priced DX9 card. It actually wins a fair share of benchmarks against DX9 cards. I'm actually thinking about upgrading my 7800gtx to a 8600gts. The 8600gts is never much slower than the 1950pro at playable settings, and often faster.

 

[Mordachi]

"Destroyed" certainly might be too strong....depending on the resolutions you play at, and what games you play. From all benchmarks I've seen, an x1950 Pro performs roughly 10% better across the board, compared to an 8600GT...

However, as resolutions scale and you add AA and AF options, the margin starts to widen severely...

If just buying for "right now" the card I linked is in your price range and HDCP...

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: superbooga

Originally posted by: munky
The 8600-series are a joke, an equivalently priced DX9 card will totally destroy them in performance.

The 8600 does not get "destroyed" by an equivalently priced DX9 card. It actually wins a fair share of benchmarks against DX9 cards. I'm actually thinking about upgrading my 7800gtx to a 8600gts. The 8600gts is never much slower than the 1950pro at playable settings, and often faster.

It does get destroyed by a 1950xt, which can be had for well under $200 these days. It also get's beaten by a 1950pro in most games, which costs less than a 8600gts. In a few games like Stalker and Oblivion it hangs even with a 1950pro, and that's only without AA. That doesn't happen often. Look at the benches here:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...ce8600gts_9.html#sect1

 

[LOUISSSSS]

but it has dx10 =D