What video card to get? (Play UT2003?) Celeron 1.4 (100 MHz bus).

[Eug]

OK I have a very old BX board now running a 1.4 GHz Celeron.

I'm considering a new video card, but it must:

1) Have excellent 2D VGA quality.
2) Have DVI
3) Be fast enough to run UT2003 adequately with this machine (if possible).
4) Run not too loud with the stock heatsink/fan. (All of my PCI slots are filled, so I can't use a big honkin' aftermarket heatsink.)
5) be US$100 preferably, and definitely not more than US$150.

I recently returned an Asus Geforce4 MX 440 9180 Video Suite dual DVI-I because the 2D quality was terrible.

Edit:

I'm running a Radeon 7200 right now. VGA quality is excellent, and a bit better than a Sapphire Radeon 9000 Pro I tried.

 

[AT]

Radeon 9100. Formerly known as Radeon8500 and will do everything you are asking for. You'll be able to pick one up for less $100.

 

[bluemax]

A Retail Radeon 8500 or OEM 9100 would be a super choice. 😉
Anything more is overkill for that CPU, really.

 

[Eug]

The last time I tried installing a Sapphire on this machine I had driver problems. I tried as much as I could to remove every last remnant of the old ATI drivers, but I couldn't ever get XP to go over 60 Hz for the refresh rate.

I'm inclined to stick with retail Radeon, but it seems that ATI doesn't sell the 9100??? The 8500 is clocked faster too no? However, the retail 8500 seems to be $$$. And the Radeon 8500 LE doesn't have DVI?

Arrrggh!

BTW, how bad would UT2003 be on a Radeon 7200?

 

[gregor7777]

BTW, how bad would UT2003 be on a Radeon 7200?

it will be a slideshow at anything above 640 x 480.

 

[mooojojojo]

Originally posted by: AT
Radeon 9100. Formerly known as Radeon8500 and will do everything you are asking for. You'll be able to pick one up for less $100.

the radeon9100 is the same as radeon8500? are there any differences? and which one is faster, radeon9100 or radeon9000pro? sorry for the OT question... 🙂

 

[Mingon]

I have a power color 9100 on order, its the same as the LE and runs @250/250 - but is the LP version in 64mb guise.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Did you look at the videocard roundup at Tomshardware? The "slow" system is pretty close to yours (it's a little slower).

 

[mooojojojo]

Originally posted by: Mingon
I have a power color 9100 on order, its the same as the LE and runs @250/250 - but is the LP version in 64mb guise.

so the 9100 is an 8500LE with 64MB?
what about the pixel pipelines and the shaders? are they the same as in the 8500 or the 9000pro? and the rage theater is it embedded like in 9000pro? sorry I ask too many questions 🙂

 

[bluemax]

I'm curious too, mainly because ATI hasn't disclosed much on the subject. As a matter of fact, ATI doesn't even MAKE one - OEM partners only.

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Did you look at the videocard roundup at Tomshardware? The "slow" system is pretty close to yours (it's a little slower).

OK according to Tom's roundup, on an Athlon 1000 (which I'm thinking is comparable to a Celeron 1.2A maybe?), UT2003 would be playable with a bare minimum of a Radeon 9000 Pro. Better with a Radeon 8500 LE and even better with a Radeon 8500. A Radeon 9500 would be a bonus, but then one is starting to get quite CPU limited.

A Radeon 9700 will be a total waste a slower CPU.

Yep, my Radeon 7200 would be fairly useless. 🙁

 

[bjc112]

An 8500 would suit you perfect.

Has a bit of time left in it too! It's likely you will get a nice overclock from it too... crank out those extra Frames...

😀

Good Luck.

 

[0roo0roo]

from what i remember about unreal benchmarks, there was a roundup to see how well cpu scales on that game. it turns out cpu scaling doesn't do much😛 its mostly gpu. after 1.2ghz athlon not much difference. just get the fastest gpu u can afford.

 

[gotsmack]

so whats the deal with the 8500 vs the 9100?