Video Card Thread (Mostly Gecube x1950xt)

Well I can't run it at very high lol! Only have a HD 3850 here, not freakin cross-fire 3870 rich boy!

 

It's funny, to buy two 3870s now would set me back less than my current GPU did. Of course no Crossfire mobo though.

 

I heard that the guys over at HP got their "Blackbird" pc to be both compatible with ATi and Nvidia Sli and Crossfire. Any news on how the hell they got that to work???

BTW abuzar, I get about 20-25fps in the editor on very high in vista, so I bet you could at least get 25 or even 30 on high. Also, I think that config works for high setting as well.

 

Simple, if you want SLI, put a SLI mobo on there, if you want X-Fire put a X38 mobo on there.

What is the config site?

 

^Well yeah I know that! lol. But they somehow got a 680i board to work with both configurations...

Ok, which site do you want? The one with the edited cvars or the Ultra high?

 

My god, I finally caught up! Yeah, hi Sam, nice to be back. I'll try to keep up with you guys.

Ray does 20,000+ 3d mark - jeez luizz! "Rich boy" =)

So, Ray, I know you had to turn your voltage back down or fry your quad core, so what volts are you running now, below 1.6, (are you at 1.52 per Sam's recommendation?) and what 3d mark are you now getting, since you no longer have to break 20,000. (I admit, I am very impressed - almost speechless !!!)

Anyway, I know your parents chipped in because your grades have been good, but the last I remember is you had a budget of about $1500. What did that sweet rig set you back, Waymon?

And now MaccerM is cruising at 11,000+, "Nvidia fanboy" - just kidding, MaccerM. I guess there is no question about it - the 8800 is at the top of every fps chart I have found.

Sam, you repeatedly say that the 8800 does not put out the same graphically pleasing image as the 3870. Do you have proof? (Screenshots?) A bit back you said something about no DX10.1 support, meaning no AA support on DX10 titles? Or am I getting that wrong.

But even on DX9 you seem to be indicating that the 8800 does not paint as pretty a picture as the 3850/3870. So, is there an article you can reference about that? Anandtech? Screenshots? I would be quite interested in seeing that verified.

Not to steal MaccerM's thunder - he makes some good points about smooth playability - but if you can provide proof of the graphic superiority of the 3870, that's the card I'll stick with when I get some commission checks.

Give me the proof Sam!

After all, since Waymon is now the undisputed performance 3dmark king of this forum (and virtually the entire world when he was at 1.6 volts and 4 ghz) and he is running crossfire 3870, then when I sell a friggin house or two I'll just follow his lead.

Rich

 

Man you guys have too much money on your hands lol.

I get 11000 too, with my 3850!

 

with only 1 card, I get around 14k but I think it is mostly the CPU that increases the score as 3dmark06 is heavily CPU dependent.

 

Waymon: With hacked chipset drivers it could well be doable, that's an impressive mod, a general purpose motherboard....
Rich: Here sits me with my 6870 marks. <sighs> To be honest though if you exclude Crysis (which is a ridiculous game anyway) I can still play games at higher resolutions than most people because even my X1900XT can keep up at up to 1920x1200. You can imagine how annoyed I get when people with 8800GTXs and HD3870s use screens of 1680x1050 or 1280x1024 - what a waste of all that GPU power!

As for the image quality results, it's difficult to provide any concrete proof. The one benchmark that actually provided screenshots, the images are so different it's hard to draw any comparisons. Most of the people who own the card comment that it seems to provide a better image, but don't provide any pictorial proof. It essentially seems to boil down to the shadows mostly. If you like your well rounded shadows, then there's good reason why you want an HD3870.
One of the games I can definitely say the 8800 series fails on is Tomb Raider Legends, in the image quality aspect, and if a humble X1900 can out-image an 8800GTX, I certainly think a 3870 can do the same for an 8800GT.

X1900XT: http://img137.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tombraiderlegend1cn0.jpg
8800GTX: http://img166.imageshack.us/my.php?image=trl2006120121395734tt0.jpg
Worst areas highlighted.

Yuck.

 

Hey Rich,

I have to have it a 1.6 when I run the Q6600 at 4Ghz, or 3dmark06 will come up with an error and crash. I only have it at 1.6 for benching, so I think the next time I try to break my score with the modded BIOS for the 3870, I will bring the voltages back up. In addition, that's with everything else set to "auto" voltages except for the ram which I have at 2.2v (default) 5-5-5-15.

Sam, is that x1900 overclocked at all? 6k is a pretty nice score, considering that before my max was 4.6k with overclocks on the CPU and the graphics card.

I agree sam, but I only play with high resolutions in games where I know my card(s) can handle it. Crysis for example runs at 1152/864, which is better than the 800x600 which I ran on the x1950xt. Also, I can now see the difference between 800x600 and the 1152/864, I guess just because it was impossible to notice a difference with frames below 5 with my older card.

I have an extra case, and with all of the older parts I think I might put them into it and have a smaller machine, not to sure what I will use it for though as it is a lot slower compared to my newer rig. I still need a HDD though...

 

Ray: Yeah, it's overclocked to 663/873 from 625/725.
As for the resolutions, I quite agree. It needs to be smooth for FPS/

 

I don't think running a 8800 (except perhaps the GTX/ultra) or a 3870 is a waste at 1280x1024 as there are games out there like Crysis (booo - we know!) that will seriously tax them. And that's before we really get any DX10 games out. The current gen G9x's and R700s are going to be useless for the majority of upcoming DX10 games much higher than that res anyhow, they just won't hack it. I didn't even think about DX10 when I got my GT and I will not be getting Vista either until it is an absolute necessity. I just wanted a card that would own dx9 (which it does) and I don't particualrily think running 40-50fps with ultra detail 4xAA and 16xAF is a waste anyhoo - that's pretty sweet and a wholly appropriate use of gpu power IMO!! And, There's nothing worse than having to scale back from native resolution on a TFT monitor - It looks kack.

 

Crysis is the only game that taxes them, let's be honest.
I can run any game out there at 1680x1050 at least without performance issues, and my GPU's half as fast as an 8800. As for DX10 - I refuse to play games with no Anti-Aliasing, they always look ass, so until DX10.1, it's DX9C for me.

 

Well you wouldn't be able to run Dirt in ultra at 1280x1024 either. I couldn't run it properly in medium with my X1950XT. This is the point tho, more and more near future releases are gonna kill current gen gpus. I bet when Assassins Creed and GTAIV come out they will rinse my card at 1280x1024 and they are the kind of titles I want to play in the next few months. As for Crysis and AA I will post you some screens (when I have got it again) that show the difference between AA and non AA on my system - it's very noticeable, at least with DX9.

 

As for DiRT, it is a hugely demanding game in the grand scheme of things, but I could run at 4x8 at 1680x1050 on my card, based on the benchmarks I've seen. Based on the X1950XT AGP discussion, I don't think that card's a valid benchmark test...

 

Hmmm, I doubt it personally. Probably run it ok in medium with less AA and without the motion blur effect which is a framerate killer. But I couldn't face playing it without the shadows on high - it looks awful in medium. In ultra I only get 35-40fps at 1280x1024 now with my current setup.

 

At 4x16 a 2900XT gets that many at 1680x1050 according to a benchmark I recently read...
<confused>

 

Really? What was the rest of their test rig? A Q6800 @4ghz!? Seriously though that might be true of a point to point rally race, but do the 'Rally Raid' or 'Rallycross' style races when you have 10 opponents and you will get nowhere near that. As I say, I get 35-40fps when all the cars are in view and that will even drop down to the high 20s in the really intense bits - say a pile up on the first corner. Yes I get a constant 60 in the single rally and crossover tracks but my X1950 would play those in medium settings. I don't believe you can 'run a game' unless you can play all the levels seamlessly at the desired settings, and the campaign mode is about 50% of those type of more intense races. (Sorry - I should have fully explained what I meant the first time!)

 

The game sounds interesting - I'll grab it this weekend and see how I fare.
I'm willing to settle for a low res as long as I can grab top detail with AA and AF. Of course, I have my limits there. ideally no lower than 1440x900, or at a stretch 1280x800!

 

You know I might just download the Dirt demo (is there one?) when I get home... Maybe do some benches? I don't own a freakin wheel or pedals though - I was never a fan of racing games.

And the x1950xt - I think they did something with that card to make it perform far less than the x1900. I mean look at sam's! Hes hitting well above what we could hit with the x1950xt, even know the x1950xt "should" be a better card. Maybe it's the AGP 8x?