• 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.

Cheap card for WOW

fizzy

fizzy

fizzy

Associate
Joined
16 Jan 2003
Posts
1,236
Location
by my pc. :D
Hi,

I need to upgrade a gfx card on a machine that currently has a geforce 6600 256mb card installed. Not really used that much for games, mainly videos/office stuff, but the one game that is used on it is World Of Warcraft.

Using a monitor with a res of 1920x1200 (ws), and the gfx is struggling a bit with wow - had to reduce the settings right down at that res (prefer to keep the res native rather than lower res with fancy effects).

Was considering getting an ati 2600XT, mainly for the HD video acceleration aspects - but would this be able to run WOW at 1920x1200 with all the detail options on max etc?

Thanks.
 
Ok - so perhaps I should rephrase this - how close in performance is the 2600XT to the 1950pro?
 
fizzy said:
Hi,

I need to upgrade a gfx card on a machine that currently has a geforce 6600 256mb card installed. Not really used that much for games, mainly videos/office stuff, but the one game that is used on it is World Of Warcraft.

Using a monitor with a res of 1920x1200 (ws), and the gfx is struggling a bit with wow - had to reduce the settings right down at that res (prefer to keep the res native rather than lower res with fancy effects).

Was considering getting an ati 2600XT, mainly for the HD video acceleration aspects - but would this be able to run WOW at 1920x1200 with all the detail options on max etc?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

i would honesty say i think 1 2600xt may run it ok at that res i can't be 100% i tryed it at 1680x1050 and it ran fine.. i know 2 2600xt would run it perfectly at 1920x1200.
 
well my x1900xt runs it maxed out at 1680 with everything on, and decent fps most of the time (with AA/AF maxed too), so i guess a X1950pro might be up your street if you leave AA/AF lowered.
Really busy/intensive places like *those* Karazhan Stairs and Shattrath are the only places I really feel the fps droop.

Average fps is about 50-60 with triple buffering on, lowest it drops is about 25 (in raids), so still playable.
 
Hmm... decisions. Do I go for the 2600pro with 512mb, the 2600XT with 256mb (ddr3) or the 2600xt with 256mb (ddr4)? Doesn't seem to be any option for a 2600XT with 512mb though?
 
Alexrose1uk said:
well my x1900xt runs it maxed out at 1680 with everything on, and decent fps most of the time (with AA/AF maxed too), so i guess a X1950pro might be up your street if you leave AA/AF lowered.
Really busy/intensive places like *those* Karazhan Stairs and Shattrath are the only places I really feel the fps droop.

Average fps is about 50-60 with triple buffering on, lowest it drops is about 25 (in raids), so still playable.
Click to expand...

Ah a fellow X1900Xt chap - i get EXACTLY that FPS in those areas. However i usually get 65-120 in all other areas.
 
fizzy said:
Hmm... decisions. Do I go for the 2600pro with 512mb, the 2600XT with 256mb (ddr3) or the 2600xt with 256mb (ddr4)? Doesn't seem to be any option for a 2600XT with 512mb though?
Click to expand...

I would definitely get a 2600XT, & the if you have the funds, i think the GDDR4 card with those very high clocks would be the card of choice.
 
fizzy said:
Hmm... decisions. Do I go for the 2600pro with 512mb, the 2600XT with 256mb (ddr3) or the 2600xt with 256mb (ddr4)? Doesn't seem to be any option for a 2600XT with 512mb though?
Click to expand...
get the 2600xt ddr3 because its a much smaller card and theres not much differents from the ddr4 version only about 3-5 fps extra..
theres no 2600xt 512mb yet.. but the 2600 shares system memory also so don't worry about that..
the 2600pro isn't good for gaming..
 
Last edited:
ACESHIGH said:
I would definitely get a 2600XT, & the if you have the funds, i think the GDDR4 card with those very high clocks would be the card of choice.
Click to expand...
it doesn't make much different with just 1 card because it only about 3-5 fps extra but with 2 cards i get around 10-15 fps extra... also it depends on the space in his case because the ddr4 version card are very long.
 
Last edited:
gareth170 said:
it doesn't make much different with just 1 card because it only about 3-5 fps extra but with 2 cards i get around 10-15 fps extra... also it depends on the space in his case because the ddr4 version card are very long.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the help guys - I've ordered a 2600XT DDR3 version, as the system its going in only has one pcie connection so no chance of crossfire etc, and as stated its only a couple fps difference.

Also bought a bit more memory which should also helps things generally too.

Was tempted to bye a blue ray drive while I was at it, but managed to resist.... maybe later... ;)
 
fastwunz said:
oooooo dont you want to turn that shizzle off?
Click to expand...

Never understood people who turn it off. Vsync has very little ill effect on the minimum FPS, but it eliminates tearing caused by updating the display while the monitor is mid refresh.

When your screen cant display more than 60fps, there's not much to be gained in having the computer work harder... It increases CPU workload, heat, and causes visual glitches as well. Only advantage of turning off VSync is... a bigger number on fraps, or ingame frames/second display :)

Wow on my PC, Geforce 7900GTX is max FPS 60, min FPS ooh 55 or so in shattrath or at raids. Turning off Vsync max FPS is 250, but min is unchanged, and I get tearing when turning fast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom