hey 64-bit stuff will be coming out soon, that might be fun. and soon fiber optic driven computers will come out, then we will all see a huge preformance jump. and quantum powered computers a little farther down the line, which will bring about huge preformance increases. dont get down just because u dont need to buy a new computer every 6 months, look at it like a blessing. just keep adding stuff and make your computer a beast, since upgrading is becoming less and less needed.
but i have been thinking the same thing for the past year, computer progress has really slowed down. what else do people need to do on their computer, the only thing that requires the modern processing power is games and video editing. sadly this is an expected leveling out of computer preformance, once people really NEED more power the manufacturers will start providing it.
i kinda hope that computers do level out for while, as i just spent 2k+ making my new system and i dont look forward to spending that kind of money again. however i really do get a rush out of buying things, especially the newest, the best, and the most powerful (as any man does). so until some major improvements come out enjoy what you have
but i have been thinking the same thing for the past year, computer progress has really slowed down. what else do people need to do on their computer, the only thing that requires the modern processing power is games and video editing. sadly this is an expected leveling out of computer preformance, once people really NEED more power the manufacturers will start providing it.
i kinda hope that computers do level out for while, as i just spent 2k+ making my new system and i dont look forward to spending that kind of money again. however i really do get a rush out of buying things, especially the newest, the best, and the most powerful (as any man does). so until some major improvements come out enjoy what you have
apoppin
Lifer
You want "new and exciting"? . . .
. . . Try a different Hobby.
(or keep the same one and get another GF)
:shocked:
It isn't that there isn't a lot of changes coming our way - multi-processors/ SLI/ SATA/PCIe - there IS. But most of us are opposed to change . . . .
You clearly are. Your 9800p is SUBstandard for modern games - if you really play at 12x10 you are playing OLD games or else modern games with NO detail.
:roll:
. . . Try a different Hobby.
(or keep the same one and get another GF)
:shocked:
It isn't that there isn't a lot of changes coming our way - multi-processors/ SLI/ SATA/PCIe - there IS. But most of us are opposed to change . . . .
You clearly are. Your 9800p is SUBstandard for modern games - if you really play at 12x10 you are playing OLD games or else modern games with NO detail.
:roll:
I felt the difference when I moved from my 2500 Barton to my 3200 A64, that and the 500mhz RAM and 8mb cache hard drive...
Regs
Lifer
- Aug 9, 2002
- 16,666
- 21
- 81
Originally posted by: apoppin
You want "new and exciting"? . . .
. . . Try a different Hobby.
(or keep the same one and get another GF)
:shocked:
It isn't that there isn't a lot of changes coming our way - multi-processors/ SLI/ SATA/PCIe - there IS. But most of us are opposed to change . . . .
You clearly are. Your 9800p is SUBstandard for modern games - if you really play at 12x10 you are playing OLD games or else modern games with NO detail.
:roll:
He actually stated he had a 9600Pro. Which makes me wonder how he could play D3 at 1280x1024. He must be barly getting by. HL2 doesn't even play that great at 1024x768 with max details on a 9600p. You would need at least a 9800pro for 1024x768 on most of the newer *in the rage* games.
apoppin
Lifer
That was a 'typo'Originally posted by: Regs
Originally posted by: apoppin
You want "new and exciting"? . . .
. . . Try a different Hobby.
(or keep the same one and get another GF)
:shocked:
It isn't that there isn't a lot of changes coming our way - multi-processors/ SLI/ SATA/PCIe - there IS. But most of us are opposed to change . . . .
You clearly are. Your 9800p {edit: oops - 9600p) is SUBstandard for modern games - if you really play at 12x10 you are playing OLD games or else modern games with NO detail.
:roll:
He actually stated he had a 9600Pro. Which makes me wonder how he could play D3 at 1280x1024. He must be barly getting by. HL2 doesn't even play that great at 1024x768 with max details on a 9600p. You would need at least a 9800pro for 1024x768 on most of the newer *in the rage* games.
. . . . mine is a 9800(xt) . . . . i got that his is 'only' a 9600p. . . . that's why i was so harsh . . . . he must NOT be a "gamer" or he would know about "new and exciting". :roll:
(and if you want REAL excitement . . . try dating 2 GFs at the same time)
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,798
- 6,355
- 126
I agree, though as Bendix mentioned, I think it's an issue of age, for me at least. PCs have plataued in performance on the cpu side and the only real changes occur on the video side these days. Win64 will bring some excitement back as Software will begin to push RAM useage again and the result of increased RAM in systems should cause an increase of innovation in Games. Besides that though there isn't much to get excited about.
apoppin
Lifer
Or Quake III engine games . . . games from '03 will run fine on his system.
So the answer the OP's original questions:
1. Yes you are missing something.
2. No, most of us don't feel the same way.
(imo)
:roll:
i dunno . . . . you take your life OUT of your hands using my suggestion . . .Originally posted by: Regs
(and if you want REAL excitement . . . try dating 2 GFs at the same time)
One with 2 kids is all you need.
A 9800 Pro plays HL2 fine with all the eye candy on @ 1600 x 1200, depending on the system it's in. Far Cry and D3 are probably the only games that you need to drop the res down a notch on.
I laugh when people use super high AF and AA @ higher resolutions.
Hell, I can play Morrowind @ 2048 x 1536 @ 85hz with no slowdowns, and Colin Mcrae 2005 only has minor slowdowns @ 2048 x 1536.
I laugh when people use super high AF and AA @ higher resolutions.
Hell, I can play Morrowind @ 2048 x 1536 @ 85hz with no slowdowns, and Colin Mcrae 2005 only has minor slowdowns @ 2048 x 1536.
apoppin
Lifer
But NOT the 9600p.
Even the 9700p can't do 16x12 at HL2.
Doom iii/FC would be a slideshow.
And i do agree about AA being unnecessary at hi resolutions . . . . but AF does have its place .
Why's that? It looks awesome! I guess it really depends on what you consider good looking though. Some ppl can see the diferences, some ppl can't.
In most games, I can run 1600 with 4xAA 16xAF with a single 6800GT @ ultra.
I just upgraded from the good old 2500+/A7N8X Deluxe combo (like you I was usually running it at 3200+ speeds) to a new Athlon 64 3000+ S939/ASUS A8V Deluxe system. I am extremely pleased with the performance improvement. I'm also a bit pleasantly surprised - like yourself, I was a bit skeptical as to whether or not the upgrade would be worth the effort - it was!
Insidious
Diamond Member
- Oct 25, 2001
- 7,649
- 0
- 0
interesting thread, leaves me with two thoughts:
1. Good thing "nothing new and exciting" is comming out because our author says there is no money to be spent on upgrades.... What a bummer it would surely be if you had to sit aside and watch everyone else upgrade.... at least this way you have some time to save some pennies.
2. My sig illustrates one possible solution. :roll:
-Sid
1. Good thing "nothing new and exciting" is comming out because our author says there is no money to be spent on upgrades.... What a bummer it would surely be if you had to sit aside and watch everyone else upgrade.... at least this way you have some time to save some pennies.
2. My sig illustrates one possible solution. :roll:
-Sid
Get a new video card man. 9600Pro was fine for games at max settings last year, but this year you will need a 9800pro or 6600gt level card to get by. Quake 4, Age of Empires 3, and a few more games comming look to be huge system hogs, so try getting a 6600gt.
Originally posted by: apoppin
But NOT the 9600p.
Even the 9700p can't do 16x12 at HL2.
Doom iii/FC would be a slideshow.
And i do agree about AA being unnecessary at hi resolutions . . . . but AF does have its place .
I know...I didn't see your edit when you said a 9800 Pro was substandard for todays games.
AF has very little effect @ resolutions of 1600 x 1200 and up. I've tried the all the AF settings with HL2 @ 16 x 12, and I can barely discern a image quality difference between basic trilinear and 16X.
Originally posted by: Amaroque
Why's that? It looks awesome! I guess it really depends on what you consider good looking though. Some ppl can see the diferences, some ppl can't.
In most games, I can run 1600 with 4xAA 16xAF with a single 6800GT @ ultra.
I'm sure you can with that card. The point I'm making is the whole point of AA was to alleviate the "jaggies" on textures when running lower resolutions. Play a modern game @ 1280 x 1024 on your PC, then play an Xbox game that runs @ 640 x 480...the jaggies get worse as the resoution get's lower. Conversly, the jaggies decrease as te resoution increases. At higher resolutions of 1600 x 1200 and above, jaggies are not really an issue.
Sure you can run it with such a monster card, but that doesn't mean it makes a big difference.
To all saying I NEED a new video card, I disagree...games play fine for me, sure the settings may not be maxxed out, but who cares, I certainly don't, I am a gamer, but not a hardcore omg fragfest one. That said, I didnt enjoy D3 much at all, and while I did enjoy HL2 more, I never finished it, FPS just doesnt have the spark for me anymore, definetly more into racing sims, rpg's and RTS, my laptop with its 9700pro runs everything fine too so meh.
I am glad however to see a few people with my combo had upgraded and were pleased with the results. I still however am rather skeptical about how much my cost would be per performance improvement.
Even though I'm 20, I feel like I'm gettin old!
SLI is a new technology, while its cool, I dont think its practical, perhaps for the uber gamers, but I'm not one of them, I goto school, have a job, girlfriend, and friends so im just a casual gamer.
This has been a good topic of discussion appriciate the input by all of you(even if you ARE bashing my 9600p AIW)
I am glad however to see a few people with my combo had upgraded and were pleased with the results. I still however am rather skeptical about how much my cost would be per performance improvement.
Even though I'm 20, I feel like I'm gettin old!
SLI is a new technology, while its cool, I dont think its practical, perhaps for the uber gamers, but I'm not one of them, I goto school, have a job, girlfriend, and friends so im just a casual gamer.
This has been a good topic of discussion appriciate the input by all of you(even if you ARE bashing my 9600p AIW)
I don't really think "new and exciting" have stopped. You need to widen the perspective. Different parts of computing moves in spurts at different times.
Intel have sort of got stuck, that is true. Their 3.8GHz may very well not be able to perform more than 1-5% better at sustained load than CPUs available 2 years ago (3.06@533, 2.8C), due to advanced power management features regulating heat and clock. But AMD have sort of crept steadily forward. And it might be that had we been on 64-bit software, that would have been slightly more noticable as well.
But OK, CPU action is slow at the moment.
But other areas have improved. Harddrives for instance, have grown thremendously in past years.
More recently, graphics have made huge leaps forward. Much faster than Moore's law, and also I think more & faster progress than ever before.
Personally, I think doing without AF (anisotropic filtering) is a huge loss. AF looks so incredibly much better. Same with AA, even for 1280X1024. Regardless of resolution, AF & AA makes the 3D world *come together*, and loose the pixel noise and that cardboard feel.
Also, while not normally playing FPS, I noticed FC looks a lot better on some of the very highest settings, than on the next highest (light, textures and detail/environment). FPS is also much easier on 'instantenous' framerates. As well as less straining for the eyes.
All these things, very good reasons to get a a very good videocard.
I find that the OP somewhwere motivated his restraint on videocards by the very fact that the progress was so fast, and the money "wasted" or better spent on the cpu. This is a bit peculiar logic :/ ...considering the topic line...
For personal private use, I always buy cards featuring the high end chipset. Not the premium and most expensive, down a bit in clocks is OK, but the top end architecture, GF3 Ti, GF4 Ti, FX5900, R9800, 6800, whatever that is at the moment. It's so much more rewarding than the 'medium' cards. I've noticed some people, even gamers, put more emphasis on the CPU. Often financing the CPU with a pedestrian videocard. I'd suggest the very opposite.
Recently, many hardware introductions have been largely for the manufacturers. Like PCI-e, SATA, DDR2. These will not offer the user any sudden revolutionary breakthrough, but will offer easier manufacturing of higher specs in the long run.
For the user, videocards is the currently most exciting area.
But I'm hoping that the future will bring some excitements through software improvements: 64-bit, better multithreading for multi CPU, dualcore and hyperthreading, better vector optimization. The software have to change a bit, then we can probably have the CPU train rolling again. If/when it does, it might be almost as hard and expensive to hang on, as it currently is with videocards.
Intel have sort of got stuck, that is true. Their 3.8GHz may very well not be able to perform more than 1-5% better at sustained load than CPUs available 2 years ago (3.06@533, 2.8C), due to advanced power management features regulating heat and clock. But AMD have sort of crept steadily forward. And it might be that had we been on 64-bit software, that would have been slightly more noticable as well.
But OK, CPU action is slow at the moment.
But other areas have improved. Harddrives for instance, have grown thremendously in past years.
More recently, graphics have made huge leaps forward. Much faster than Moore's law, and also I think more & faster progress than ever before.
Personally, I think doing without AF (anisotropic filtering) is a huge loss. AF looks so incredibly much better. Same with AA, even for 1280X1024. Regardless of resolution, AF & AA makes the 3D world *come together*, and loose the pixel noise and that cardboard feel.
Also, while not normally playing FPS, I noticed FC looks a lot better on some of the very highest settings, than on the next highest (light, textures and detail/environment). FPS is also much easier on 'instantenous' framerates. As well as less straining for the eyes.
All these things, very good reasons to get a a very good videocard.
I find that the OP somewhwere motivated his restraint on videocards by the very fact that the progress was so fast, and the money "wasted" or better spent on the cpu. This is a bit peculiar logic :/ ...considering the topic line...
For personal private use, I always buy cards featuring the high end chipset. Not the premium and most expensive, down a bit in clocks is OK, but the top end architecture, GF3 Ti, GF4 Ti, FX5900, R9800, 6800, whatever that is at the moment. It's so much more rewarding than the 'medium' cards. I've noticed some people, even gamers, put more emphasis on the CPU. Often financing the CPU with a pedestrian videocard. I'd suggest the very opposite.
Recently, many hardware introductions have been largely for the manufacturers. Like PCI-e, SATA, DDR2. These will not offer the user any sudden revolutionary breakthrough, but will offer easier manufacturing of higher specs in the long run.
For the user, videocards is the currently most exciting area.
But I'm hoping that the future will bring some excitements through software improvements: 64-bit, better multithreading for multi CPU, dualcore and hyperthreading, better vector optimization. The software have to change a bit, then we can probably have the CPU train rolling again. If/when it does, it might be almost as hard and expensive to hang on, as it currently is with videocards.
ronach
Senior member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 485
- 2
- 81
Take it from an old guy who has been around these PC's and digital stuff, for lo these many years. SAVE YOUR MONEY NOW....why....the vendors are not in hibernation, they are dreaming up some new toys for us to buy, and they will not be cheap. I'm going to have the cash when that time comes, are you ?
I didn't think I need an upgrade 3 months ago with my P4 2.8 + 1GB RD1066 + 9700Pro since it gives me playable fps @ 1024x768. And that's until my FX-55 + x800 got up running. Games looks so much better @ 1280x960 with high details. High fps makes games feel much smoother and easier on my eyes.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter