Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: ZmaN on February 09, 2006, 11:10:19 pm
-
Hey guys... After getting my copy of X3 today and finding out that i needed to turn the resolution down to 1024x768, im getting eyesores...
Im thinking about selling my X850 Pro for about $225 to $240... It is like brand new, and has never really been overclocked before... I've never ripped the heatsink off, and I have all the software that came with it....
So in short... This is the card I have:
http://www.sapphiretech.com/en/products/graphics_landing.php?gpid=16
This is the card I want to buy:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814150108
And heres a copy of the reciept for proof of all this...
New Egg Invoice
Order Information
Invoice # Order # Order Date Order total
13555494 22625502 10/11/2005 5:18:20 PM $268.93
SAPPHIRE 100128 Radeon X850PRO 256MB GDDR3 PCI Express x16 Video Card w/ TriXX OC Utility - Retail
Item #: N82E16814102594 $249.00
Subtotal: $249.00
Tax: $14.94
Shipping: $4.99
Amount Paid: $268.93
I'm sorry if this is inappropriate for this forum... please close, if so, at your discretion moderators..
-
2 things: Great price! and... I've an AGP motherboard... :(
-
you should be able to get a cheap pci express motherboard.....
Depending on what kind of processor you have, that is...
-
Put it on ebay. If you advertise it well, some sucker may well coming along and pay a lot more than you're expecting for it. That's what happened with my 6800 GT. :D
-
.....and how long have you had that card before???
-
.....and how long have you had that card before???
well i did post the reciept for you...
Its about 6 months old.... never overclocked... runs games quite well, especially if you have an older card like a Geforce 6600 or a Radeon 9600...
EDIT: Oh... I forgot to mention that the card that I'm selling is NOT the same sapphire X850 Pro that new egg has in stock right now... they dont sell that card anymore... I think mine comes with more software and a better heatsink....
-
IMO 6 months should be -100 dollars off the original price
-
IMO 6 months should be -100 dollars off the original price
that seems a little overkill on price chopping....
-
I really am going to have to get a PCIe board at some point, at least the 3Gig Pentium can handle it, it's just a question of dragging all the guts out of my computer again, which I hate doing :(
-
well what kind of hardware do you have? I'd love to help you out....
-
Well, atm I've got other priorities I'm afraid, too much to do and not enough cash :( If I had the money I'd probs be interested, but right now I'm afraid I'm right out of the buying stuff loop :(
-
IMO 6 months should be -100 dollars off the original price
That's pretty accurate for PCIE video cards, if they were originally more than $250 or so. However, many of the former high end AGP cards have disappeared from retail channels and there are still lots of people with AGP boards who will pay extra for those (and on ebay, they frequently get into a bidding war and go more than a little overboard). The price of mine fell from $400 to $320 after 18 months.
I suppose it was the same deal with the AXP 3200. It's still the fastest Socket A processor out there and there are lots of people who still have socket A boards, so mine sold for $180, a little over two years after I bought it for $200. (never mind that you can get a much faster A64 3000 and a 754 motherboard for less money; the uninformed people on ebay are wonderful :D)
-
You're complaining at 1024x768 giving you eyesores?? WTF is wrong with 1024x768? It's much better than what my GeForce4 Ti4200 running in PCI mode can offer, that game in 800x600 with everything disabled. I am not complaining, I don't see why everything has to be 1600x1200 with you people. Jeez, that card is not that old. maybe 9 months, and you're getting rid of it because you can't have the highest possible resolution? Here's a hint: Turn down the bloody FSAA and AF, so the card doesn't have to work so frikkin hard.
Christ.
-
Well, atm I've got other priorities I'm afraid, too much to do and not enough cash :( If I had the money I'd probs be interested, but right now I'm afraid I'm right out of the buying stuff loop :(
I feel you're pain dude. Are you still camping at the Geforce4MX hotel, same as me ? :no:
-
You're complaining at 1024x768 giving you eyesores?? WTF is wrong with 1024x768? It's much better than what my GeForce4 Ti4200 running in PCI mode can offer, that game in 800x600 with everything disabled. I am not complaining, I don't see why everything has to be 1600x1200 with you people. Jeez, that card is not that old. maybe 9 months, and you're getting rid of it because you can't have the highest possible resolution? Here's a hint: Turn down the bloody FSAA and AF, so the card doesn't have to work so frikkin hard.
Christ.
Hey Mr. Smart guy!!! I already did that you moron! jeeze...
I dont have a problem with 1024x768... Its 1024x786 in X3 ONLY! I play NFS: Most Wanted in that, I used to play tribes Vengeance in that, and I play Freespace 2 in that... Dont go ragging off just becasue you have a crap video card... I used to be there too... stuck with my SIS Onboard (that was about 2 or 3 years ago, but hey i was stuck with it)..
EDIT: Oh... I just remembered. if you were so smart, you would have realized that YOU CANNOT PLAY X3 BELOW 1024x768!!
-
I agree with Scuddie on this (suprisingly). IF it's giving you honest-to-god headaches or making your eyes sore, check to see what refresh rate your monitor is running at, that is if you're not running an LCD. Bumping up the Hz to the max for that resolution will usually fix eyestrain problems. I'm being dead serious here, and not trying to poke fun at your situation. Since you're using ATI's questionable software, look for a program called Reforce. That little treat will autodetect max hertz ratings for your card and monitor combo, and make sure they are automatically applied whenever you want to run something at a given resolution.
Games @ 85Hz @ 1024X768 are just fine.
I run everything I own in 1024X768 anyway, (9800XT, I run FEAR & Q4 in it just fine) and I honestly don't see why in the hell you would NEED to run something higher than that unless you just want to gloat and/or show off. If you're looking for topped-out 60FPS in every single situation with 8X or higher AA and 16X AF, and all that jive running the latest games, you're gonna have to get into a duallie 7800 setup with the absolutely lowest latency system ram, and hard disks faster than raptors.
Besides, no one's ragging on you. It's the honest-to-God truth, turn down the AA and AF. Does anyone remember when Deus Ex came out, and those who were fortuate enough to have a Voodoo 2 based or higher card would get silky-smooth framerates, and everyone else who had the Riva TNT and Geforces had framerates in the tank? Not in the tank, in the damn toilet! Think of it this way. Perhaps the game is simply so advanced that current hardware gets pushed quite hard. The next line of hardware will be able to render this without breaking a sweat.
And then again, you get what you pay for. Since you didn't buy dual 7800's, dont expect dual 7800 performance.
-
IMO 6 months should be -100 dollars off the original price
that seems a little overkill on price chopping....
just think: there is a reason they arent selling this model anymore
and also think: 6 months worth of (presumably) heavy gaming usage
additionally: does it have any of its original packaging or cables?
if u want a quality card just bite the bullet and get the solo BFG 7800GT I have. It can run anything (max AA) i give it and scored a 5000 on 3dmark06 so it is more than a decent card. If you get an XfX you will likely be in the same situation you are right now as the performance will be about the same. Dont let frequencies fool you! look more towards reviews and benchmarks when you are looking for good shopping advice. XFX has known to be a little shifty (they run hot, ddr failures etc.) so dont risk making the same mistake you did last time again this time. just get a good card that you know is alright from the getgo, then you can stick with it and dont have to worry about swapping it out every 6 months.
-
People swap out their cards every 6 months? And here I was with my GF2 that i had for 2 years, and the R9600Xt that replaced it for the next lord knows how long.
-
I run everything I own in 1024X768 anyway, (9800XT, I run FEAR & Q4 in it just fine) and I honestly don't see why in the hell you would NEED to run something higher than that unless you just want to gloat and/or show off. If you're looking for topped-out 60FPS in every single situation with 8X or higher AA and 16X AF, and all that jive running the latest games, you're gonna have to get into a duallie 7800 setup with the absolutely lowest latency system ram, and hard disks faster than raptors.
The 7800s are all you need (except FEAR, where you can forget about AA on any system). I can get that with value memory and an old PATA hard drive, since faster components there hardly impact the framerate at all. Although to be honest, 1024x768 does look like crap, in just about any game. I don't know why it would give eyesores unless it's being interpolated on an LCD, but if I find that I am having to use that without AA regularly to get the framerates I want, I upgrade. Everyone has different expectations with these things.
For the refresh rates, the best thing is to create a custom monitor inf driver with all the 60hz modes (and possibly 75hz ones as well) taken out, so Windows doesn't recognize them as valid modes. I find that there is always some application that doesn't work with those refresh rate utilities for whatever reason, and this is easy to do and overrides the refresh rates at the driver level.
if u want a quality card just bite the bullet and get the solo BFG 7800GT I have. It can run anything (max AA) i give it and scored a 5000 on 3dmark06 so it is more than a decent card. If you get an XfX you will likely be in the same situation you are right now as the performance will be about the same. Dont let frequencies fool you! look more towards reviews and benchmarks when you are looking for good shopping advice. XFX has known to be a little shifty (they run hot, ddr failures etc.) so dont risk making the same mistake you did last time again this time. just get a good card that you know is alright from the getgo, then you can stick with it and dont have to worry about swapping it out every 6 months.
The EVGA 516 is a better choice than either of them. It is significantly faster out of the box, has a quieter and more effective GTX copper cooler and is also cheaper in most cases. Although I'd get something better at this point if you're planning to keep it for over a year and play modern games a lot. The X1900XT is a great high end card right now, although you would be better off waiting a month and seeing what the 7900 line brings.
-
i have a radeon (HIS) X850xt lurking on my AGP motherboard, definitely a great little card.
-
CP5670.. psst.. I was overexagerating.. ;7
7800's, hell, even a single, or even the X1900 (I think... I've given up on ATI) would be all you'd need. If you're running an LCD monitor, I will agree with you that games look like crap due to the monitor running out of it's native resolution. If it's on a tube though, I honestly cannot agree. Sure, higher resolution = cleaner looking graphics, but I'll stick by my statement of this software being one or two hardware cycles ahead of it's time, and selling a videocard that's more than capable of doing the job over one game is trivial. It happened with Deus Ex, and it happened with Doom 3 when it first came out before the patching, for ATI users, and it's happening with FEAR. The only games I've seen render beautifully out of the box with lower end hardware have been Unreal Tournament 2003/4, and a lot of the indie game engines such as Cauldron and GRIN's motors.
-
CP5670.. psst.. I was overexagerating.. ;7
7800's, hell, even a single, or even the X1900 (I think... I've given up on ATI) would be all you'd need. If you're running an LCD monitor, I will agree with you that games look like crap due to the monitor running out of it's native resolution. If it's on a tube though, I honestly cannot agree. Sure, higher resolution = cleaner looking graphics, but I'll stick by my statement of this software being one or two hardware cycles ahead of it's time, and selling a videocard that's more than capable of doing the job over one game is trivial. It happened with Deus Ex, and it happened with Doom 3 when it first came out before the patching, for ATI users, and it's happening with FEAR. The only games I've seen render beautifully out of the box with lower end hardware have been Unreal Tournament 2003/4, and a lot of the indie game engines such as Cauldron and GRIN's motors.
this is where CRT's have LCD's beat, look, if you're like me and have a cavity in your desk meant for a CRT monitor(and don't go to lan parties for that matter), then grab a 22" diamondview or something, if not, go nuts with an LCD, both have their pros and cons of course, but lately, i noticed that when i got my new CRT monitor, the LCD's at the local school here started to look a little crappy due to their low native resolution. LCD's, are , tho, really easy on the eyes, and don't cause all that much in the way of eyestrain, sometimes with CRT monitors, their refresh rates are set too low and they flicker, mind you, they still haven't got a way to get LCD's to show "true black" yet like the CRT's do. it's basically all up to how much you want to spend.. on the upside, with the new cards out and with SLI or Crossfire, you can not only have dual monitor setups, but quad monitor setups. particularly with that dual chipped 7800gtx from asus in SLI mode (yes, they have SLI'd it).
-
I don't see why everyone pumps the AA and res. 800x600 with No AA and no AF does fine for me, but my system can't go much higher than that, lol. Sure, there are some jaggies, but im too immersed to care...
-
Texture clarity, visual quality. Are you seriously gonna tell me that if you COULD pump it up and have decent framerates, you wouldn't?
-
No. 800x600 and no AA/AF own anything.
/sarcasm off.
But ATM, it's just too much of a FPS loss for me. I do do it in jedi outcast though, and it's prettyful :).
-
I'm still running my good ol' 17" Sony Trinitron I purchased over 8 years ago. I've taken great care of it over the years and it's hasn't failed me yet. Unfortunately, I'm probably going to have to buy a 19" Samsung MagicBright cause I can NOT find a brand new-decently priced Apeture grille monitor out anywhere, a 19" that is. I honestly couldnt' do with at 22, 19 would be perfect for me. The 19" MB monitors are quite good for a shadow-mask style monitor. Apeture grille monitor tubes though are the best. I missed out on my chance to get the 19" Diamondtrons before they were replaced with the shadow-mask models. Total garbage.. But yes, this is where CRT's shine over LCD's. Freedom of resolution, unless you have a ****ty Viewsonic A90 model apeture grille which goes fuzzier than hell at anything over 1024X768.
-
7800's, hell, even a single, or even the X1900 (I think... I've given up on ATI) would be all you'd need. If you're running an LCD monitor, I will agree with you that games look like crap due to the monitor running out of it's native resolution. If it's on a tube though, I honestly cannot agree. Sure, higher resolution = cleaner looking graphics, but I'll stick by my statement of this software being one or two hardware cycles ahead of it's time, and selling a videocard that's more than capable of doing the job over one game is trivial. It happened with Deus Ex, and it happened with Doom 3 when it first came out before the patching, for ATI users, and it's happening with FEAR. The only games I've seen render beautifully out of the box with lower end hardware have been Unreal Tournament 2003/4, and a lot of the indie game engines such as Cauldron and GRIN's motors.
It's true that there are games with system requirements (not necessarily graphical quality) ahead of their time, but if possible I would rather play them now than wait a year. I think it's also worth upgrading just to be able to play older games at high settings. What I generally like to do is play a game around when it comes out and then go through it again a year or two later at much higher settings on some newer hardware.
I'm used to 2048x1536 in almost everything and when a game uses 1024x768 (FSO occasionally starts up like this by accident due to the launcher resolution bug), it really sticks out and looks pretty nasty to me in comparison. I use low resolutions mainly in old DOS-era games that don't support anything higher, where 320x240 and 640x480 look strangely appropriate. :D
this is where CRT's have LCD's beat, look, if you're like me and have a cavity in your desk meant for a CRT monitor(and don't go to lan parties for that matter), then grab a 22" diamondview or something, if not, go nuts with an LCD, both have their pros and cons of course, but lately, i noticed that when i got my new CRT monitor, the LCD's at the local school here started to look a little crappy due to their low native resolution. LCD's, are , tho, really easy on the eyes, and don't cause all that much in the way of eyestrain, sometimes with CRT monitors, their refresh rates are set too low and they flicker, mind you, they still haven't got a way to get LCD's to show "true black" yet like the CRT's do. it's basically all up to how much you want to spend.. on the upside, with the new cards out and with SLI or Crossfire, you can not only have dual monitor setups, but quad monitor setups. particularly with that dual chipped 7800gtx from asus in SLI mode (yes, they have SLI'd it).
The 22" Superbright Diamondtrons are awesome. :yes: You can't do any better than a 2070SB or one of its clones. And yeah, the lack of real blacks on consumer LCDs is the main reason I don't like them. You can't really notice it in the daytime but I play games almost exclusively at night in a dark room and the poor contrast sticks out badly in dark games. I actually find LCDs to have more eyestrain as well due to their excessive brightness and screen door effects in Windows, but that's probably because I would use them in the dark a lot. CRTs are okay for me as long as the refresh rates are at least 100hz in windows and 85hz in games. There are LCDs out there with good image quality, but they are geared towards the professional graphics market and the prices are through the roof, well over $5000 in many cases.
That Asus card is really just a novelty item though. It costs $820 or something (compared to $520 for an equivalent pair of reference GTs) and you have to use Asus's own drivers with it, which reportedly crash a lot and are incompatible with various current games. Also, SLI doesn't work with multiple monitors; you can enable/disable SLI quickly for multiple monitors in windows, but it won't work in games, although it doesn't really matter to me.
II'm still running my good ol' 17" Sony Trinitron I purchased over 8 years ago. I've taken great care of it over the years and it's hasn't failed me yet. Unfortunately, I'm probably going to have to buy a 19" Samsung MagicBright cause I can NOT find a brand new-decently priced Apeture grille monitor out anywhere, a 19" that is. I honestly couldnt' do with at 22, 19 would be perfect for me. The 19" MB monitors are quite good for a shadow-mask style monitor. Apeture grille monitor tubes though are the best. I missed out on my chance to get the 19" Diamondtrons before they were replaced with the shadow-mask models. Total garbage.. But yes, this is where CRT's shine over LCD's. Freedom of resolution, unless you have a ****ty Viewsonic A90 model apeture grille which goes fuzzier than hell at anything over 1024X768.
The 19" Mitsubishi 930SB was unfortunately discontinued quite early on and is very hard to find, although you can occasionally find the 22" version (which is arguably the best monitor out there) off ebay. And yeah, the cheap shadow masks you can get these days are crap compared to the old high end aperture grills, especially the final generation extended brightness ones.
The 24" widescreen Sony FW900 is probably the best deal in CRTs right now; despite being a somewhat older monitor, you simply can't beat the bang for the buck at the prices it goes for on ebay, and the widescreen is a great feature for games that work with it.
-
Well I do have a 17 inch CRT monitor.. the model is a Mitsubishi PrecisePoint 8705P...
I have my refresh rate at 75 mhz... I put that value into the windows display settings AND the directx override...
I am NOT, in any way, expecting Dual 7800 performance..
My point in post was not to bash 1024x768.... All i said was taht X3 looked like crap in 1024x768... that resolution looks fine in other games....
I have NO intentions of trying to gloat or show off my computer....
Can I please stop getting yelled at? That would be nice...
As for the video card, well I'll see what I can do with it... If i cant sell it, I'll just wait till I build a new computer for myself...