Radeon card for high res office use and a little gaming

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
M

Migroo

Diamond Member
Jul 14, 2001
4,488
9
81
This is going to be for my office machine.

I run a Sony 19" monitor which is awesome. My original Radeon DDR (64mb!!) died earlier in the year and I've been running on a Matrox Mystique (the original 4mb, baby!) ever since.

Use is going to be mainly desktop/office type stuff - which I know will be fine with almost any card (hey the Mystique is fine but I don't get a high enough res ;)). I like to run 1280x1024.

Other (occasional) use will be a little WoW and perhaps some CS, and this is where I trip up. How much of a beefy card do you need in order to run WoW? I'm not looking for awesome performance, or even running the game at high res. I just want to be able to play the game :) Is a 9550 good enough, assuming the rest of the PC is up to scratch?
 
M

Migroo

Diamond Member
Jul 14, 2001
4,488
9
81
Ok, putting it another way, how bad would a 9550 (with 256mb - its an extra £5) be, say running 800x600?

I'm not after 80fps here :)

I don't really want to spend 97/9800 money.
 
P

pulsedrive

Senior member
Apr 19, 2005
688
0
0
The 9550 will run WoW pretty damn well at 1024x768. And it will even run descently at 1280x1024 with some of the quality settings turned down a little. I personally run it in my secondary machine which is my wife's and used by my buddy when he comes over to play WoW. So it will work fine for you.
 
C

cmrmrc

Senior member
Jun 27, 2005
334
0
0
office usage is definitely not a problem...games might be just fine...i too have a 9550 which i overclock to 425/275 for gaming and im playing cs:s at high setting at 1024*768 with 4xaa and 2xaf on...
 
P

Peter

Elite Member
Oct 15, 1999
9,640
1
0
9550 is a die shrink of the 9600 chip. Same feature set, cheaper to make, a bit slower.

For office use, I'd either go for a 9550SE (fanless, cheapest, full DX9 feature set but VERY slow in 3D) or, if there's going to be a little gaming, opt for the Sapphire plain 9600 (still fanless, much less slow thanks to 128-bit memory bus and higher clock).
 
P

Peter

Elite Member
Oct 15, 1999
9,640
1
0
I prefer HIS cards, never been let down. So I'd possibly spend the extra one quid for that one. HIS also make the only 9550 cards with video-in capability - but the description of _these_ here doesn't mention it. Check for that, it might come handy for digitizing old VCR tapes or something.

Typing this on an HIS 9550SE/VIVO serving twin 20" CRTs at 1280x960 each. No gaming here at all ;)
 
D

dfloyd

Senior member
Nov 7, 2000
978
0
0
My 9600 XT ran wow Perfectly, ran it much better in fact than my 6800 OC did. I hear a patch fixes the 6800 OC issues but depending on how the card compares to a 9600 XT I would say i should run it very well in fact. A least WOW, not speaking for all games of course.
 
C

cmrmrc

Senior member
Jun 27, 2005
334
0
0
i think you should go the 128mb version...256mb is overkill for the performance it gives and 128mb will be cheaper
 
Gamingphreek

Gamingphreek

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
11,679
0
81
There is no point in going with last last gen stuff. The 6200 (OCed) will eat those alive. Also, (although it is last last gen) look at used 9500 (L- Shaped Memory) and 9700's.

-Kevin
 
M

Migroo

Diamond Member
Jul 14, 2001
4,488
9
81
Hi everyone.

When '6800' is mentioned, is that an nVidia card?

Excuse the noobishness, I'm more familiar with older cards like the origianal Radeon DDR and 7500 / 8500 Radeon products.

Could someone briefly explain the product line to me?

9200 - I'm assuming this is the budget card with low clock speed, low speed RAM etc.
95xx - These are mid range cards, with some OK 3d performance
9600 - Where do these fit in, are they an older generation?
9700 - ??
9800 - I've got one of these, so I'm fairly familiar with it being an (older generation) top of the range card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom