• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

£500 but what card(s)

m3mph1s

m3mph1s

m3mph1s

Associate
Joined
12 Jan 2006
Posts
7
Right guys.. I need some opinions...
Which would be a good choice for better fps wise for HL2/ CS:S

A few of my specs:
Amd 64 3500 @ 2.5ghz
2gb G.Skill 3200
6800 Ultra Pci-ex

I usually play css at 800*600 on my 19" Optronic LCD monitor and want to be able to push the res a bit in CS:S without crippling my fps.

Ive got £500 to spend as of the 24th of April..
I want an X-fi Soundcard the rest will be spent graphics wise.. any suggestions?

Im bemused with options.. x1900xtx, 7900 GTX ... 2x x1800's...? what to do?
 
Or a 7900 GTX.

A far better card than the x1900 imo in terms of design :)

also your monitor native res is only 12x10 so a 7900 gt would be good choice.

Plus they overclock fantastically
 
Last edited:
easyrider said:
The x1900 xtx is not faster than the 7900 GTX so I don't understand your point? :confused:
Click to expand...


They trade the "fastest" crown depending on the game, however if he plays oblivion then the x1900 is the proper choice for speed and IQ.
 
With the CPU at 2.5Ghz it really doesn't matter whether you go for a 1900xtx or a 7900gtx - the cpu will limit both of them anyway.

There isn't much between the two in any case, it's really down to a game to game basis.
 
Gerard said:
They trade the "fastest" crown depending on the game, however if he plays oblivion then the x1900 is the proper choice for speed and IQ.
Click to expand...


It is not wise to base a £350 purchase of a gfx card based on the performance in one game.

We all know its swings and roundabouts with the 7900GTX being faster in some games and the x1900xtx in others.
 
I can't beleive you have been playing CSS and HL2 in 800x600 on a 6800ultra....
My X800XL can hold steady high framerates (around 100 in CSS) on full settings in 1280x1024.
What res does your monitor support, because if it isn't that high there is no point in spending £500 on graphics.
 
x1900xtx is what i would go for not only because it is cheaper (allowing possibly a fatality x-fi at a stretch - havent worked it out but may be possible) but it is a better card performance wise if you ask me; but no doubt ill get the easyrider fanboy down my back for saying that.

Also i have a 7800gt and a mate has a x1800xt 512mb version and i have to say that his general image quality is superior to mine. may not be the case with the 7900 and x1900 series but i dont know. ati have always been praised for image quality.

regardless, any 7800; 7900; x1800; x1900 series card that you purchase youll be able to play css with aa, af and in some maps hdr at the optimum resolution for a 19".

You could purchase a 7600gt XXX edition which is fairly cheap, yet a fantastic card which would allow you to play CS:S with pretty much everything enabled and save your cash for the next generation of cards which is what id be tempted to do.

You're choice.
 
!n$oMniA said:
x1900xtx is what i would go for not only because it is cheaper (allowing possibly a fatality x-fi at a stretch - havent worked it out but may be possible) but it is a better card performance wise if you ask me; but no doubt ill get the easyrider fanboy down my back for saying that.
Click to expand...

LMAO :p

I'm no fanboy at all but i will comment on the merits of a paticular card over another.

The fact thay you state the x1900xtx is,as you put it,

"a better card performance wise if you ask me"

Holds no water whatsoever and reeks of fanboyism.

Why?

Tell me why its a better performer than the 7900GTX?

They both perform on par and cost around the same yet one is noiser hotter and uses significantly more power.

If the top card was the x1900xtx I would have one in my pc.

Unfortunately its not so I don't. ;)

I dont care who makes the fastest cards at all.

But the 7900GTX has more going for it in the area's I have mentioned.

FACT

And I have a silent system so the choice was not the badge i'm afraid.

Also I'm just curious why you would suggest a 7600GT?

when he clearly has the budget for a top end card?

I never understand this wait mentality either.

why should he wait?

wait for what?

the next gen cards?

why?

Live for the now and enjoy using your pc :)
 
Last edited:
Lets not get started on the "your a fanboy" argument again, :p that little phrase goes round the graphics forum more times than I can remember.

To the original poster, if i was you mate I would buy a X1900XTX and then you would still have enough for a sound card, more than half of the reviews I have read say its just slightly a better card than the 7900GTX plus it should be a little cheaper also.
 
The 7900gtx has more going for it because it runs cooler and (supposodly) quieter. Thats such a convincing argument its amazing.

And last i checked the noise is entirely subjective, also gibbo has posted up new models coming in stock which run cooler and quieter, so i guess your point is now moot.
 
How is the image quality on the new 7900 series?
Because if it hasn't improved over the older cards I'd take ATI any day, even though the cards and hotter, noiser and larger.
 
Agr3sive said:
more than half of the reviews I have read say its just slightly a better card than the 7900GTX plus it should be a little cheaper also.
Click to expand...


and what do the other half of the reviews say?lol :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom