Time for an upgrade but this is an interesting time...

[FluxCap]

Ok, I currently have a sapphire Radeon 9000 (non-pro) and it actually does ok for me.....for now. I am looking down the road and thinking about the games I want to play later this year. Mainly Half Life 2 and possibly Doom 3. One good choice would be a Radeon 9500 Pro but will it be "enough" coupled with a Barton 2500 and 512 PC2700 ram? That is hard to say I would guess. I will probably up my ram to 1gig and keep the processor as is for the next "big" games. My main dilemma is should I go for a 9500 Pro now and mess with trying to flash the bios like so many have done? Or should I hold out for a little more price drop on the 9700 line? The 9500 Pros are getting harder to find so if I wait to long it will be a hassle to get one. I could wait but I wouldn't mind a boost in performance for my current games (ie Galaxies, Generals, Battlefield, etc.) Any advice would be great !

 

[Jeff7181]

Personally, I'd wait for the new GPU cores to come out... nVidia's NV40 and ATI's R400 (that's what it's called right?)... then I'd buy up one of the cards that are top of the line right now, like the FX5900 Ultra or 9800 Pro.

 

[FluxCap]

I guess I should have added that I don't want to spend more than $200 probably so those new cards would be out of the question

 

[fishbreath]

I think this is not a good moment to upgrade your video card. Wait for Half Life 2 before making any decision. You might want to consider the review of the 5900 Ultra over on tomshardware. What is clear to me is that Doom3 will make (for most of us) a 9800 Pro or a 5900 Ultra the MINIMUM video card for the next-generation games. I don't generally consider a frame rate of below 60fps as acceptable.

I was going to buy the 5900 Ultra (a cough here at the price of nearly $500) however I've decided to skip a generation of video card and wait to see what Doom3 (in particular) and Half Life 2 actually require in order to get good frame rates and resolutions. Maybe the demos are not fully optimized?

At the moment your 9000 card will allow you to play most of the current games at reasonable resolutions. When the next generation (post-5900) cards appear you should be able to snap up a 9800 Pro at a much more acceptable price. Not sure the 5900 Ultra will ever drop into your price range, but the 5600 and the 9800 Pro 128MByte should (eventually).

You also need to consider the CPU. Something running at 2.6GHz or greater is likely to be needed if you want to get best use of a high-end graphic card. Depends heavily on what games you like to play!

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: FluxCap
I guess I should have added that I don't want to spend more than $200 probably so those new cards would be out of the question

Like I said... wait... they won't be over $200 forever.

running at 2.6GHz or greater

So you're saying my Athlon XP2500 @ 2.2 Ghz isn't any good? =)

 

[squidman]

For now, the 9700 will hold above 200 bux. This isnt about competition, its just that the 256bit memory is rather pricey, and new technological innovations have not been made in this area. Id get a 9700 - cuz on my GF2 GTS i wasnt even able to play generals with lowest graphic settings at 640x480 (looked REALLY UGLY). With my 9700 i run it 1024x768, at high settings, with 2x aa and 4x af on!!!!

 

[1ManArmY]

BUMP AF to 16X only 5% performance hit

 

[FluxCap]

I agree with what you say fishbreath on most points BUT a 2.6 will not be a requirement if you ask me. I think a 2.4 P4 or a 2.0 AMD will be fine processor wise.

 

[FluxCap]

anymore feedback?