• 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.

Point in graphics cards?

mattyj1085

mattyj1085

mattyj1085

Associate
Joined
27 Feb 2006
Posts
1,750
Location
Normanton
At the moment i have an 8800GT, I only really got it to play crysis in high settings and cod 4 in highest without slow downs (and the fact it seemed like a mid range, good value card at the time). Grid plays perfect in 1440x900 highest with 8xAA.

What is the point in all these HD4870 etc that are presumably loads better? Is it just so people can play crysis in 2048x1400 with 32xQAA or are there a whole load of graphics demanding games around the corner?

I must admit crysis in very high with aa does turn into a slug but thats probably down to me 'only' having 2gb ram and a 2.8ghz dual core athlon
 
Just down to higher resolutions really. Try running any of your games above 1440x900 with the same AA setting and the framerate soon starts to dip :p
 
Dont worry about crysis, the game engine is pretty poor IMO..

The newer cards are faster with features, when the new features get used is anyones guess.

if your happy with what you have there is no reason to change.
 
Don't wanna make this another Crysis argument but I disagree the engine is poor, the amount of stuff its rendering at one time is way higher than anything else.
 
HarryPainful said:
The developers said themselves that its garbage... there was a thread somewhere linkning to an article about it.
Click to expand...

So its just a way to swindle (or stupid) people for their money? I think one or 2 cards should be made that everyone sticks too then developers make games for just these 2 cards.

Though this is as likely to happen as tax on fuel is cut to lower costs of food and everything else
 
because anything but 1680-1050 my screens native res looks pretty bad and awkward samsung 226bw
 
Last edited:
mattyj1085 said:
At the moment i have an 8800GT, I only really got it to play crysis in high settings and cod 4 in highest without slow downs (and the fact it seemed like a mid range, good value card at the time). Grid plays perfect in 1440x900 highest with 8xAA.

What is the point in all these HD4870 etc that are presumably loads better? Is it just so people can play crysis in 2048x1400 with 32xQAA or are there a whole load of graphics demanding games around the corner?

I must admit crysis in very high with aa does turn into a slug but thats probably down to me 'only' having 2gb ram and a 2.8ghz dual core athlon
Click to expand...

1440x900 is a pretty small res these days. People are wanting bigger and bigger screens (24" - 1920x1200), the bigger the res the bigger the demand on the card. IIRC there's roughly 40% more load on the GPU between 1280x1024 and 1920x1200
 
Craig321 said:
IIRC there's roughly 40% more load on the GPU between 1280x1024 and 1920x1200
Click to expand...

More than that really;

At 1920*1200 you have 2.304M pixels to render, whereas at 1280*1024 you have 1.311M pixels. That's an increase of 76%. Yes there are some other overheads for the GPU, such as geometry setup, but the most part of the work (especially these days) is pixel shading and post-process effects like AA, both of which scale with the number of on-screen pixels.

Anyway, to answer the question of the OP - large screens at native resolution with consistently high framerates are the name of the game. The latest generation of GPUs provides that in a way that the previous generation did not.
 
I would upgrade my 8800GT when theres new games out that actually warrant a new card. Im mostly playing gmes from 2004-2007. Mostly Steam based, which are cpu dependant. CSS/tf2/bf2 *** cod4 looks good, but is really boring. Cant wait for some good SP action with farcry 2, then i may buy another card if the 8800GT is struggling.
 
i agree i run a 24" screen native res on my hd2900xt. and without aa ( or 2xaa which is all that is nessasry at such a high res ) a newer card is not really needed, its just nice to have :P buyin for the sake of buying....
 
mattyj1085 said:
I think one or 2 cards should be made that everyone sticks too then developers make games for just these 2 cards.

Though this is as likely to happen as tax on fuel is cut to lower costs of food and everything else
Click to expand...

wow you're living in the wrong era, communist russia would have been you're dream huh? ;) choice for the lose.

Dr_Fartypants said:
Anyway, to answer the question of the OP - large screens at native resolution with consistently high framerates are the name of the game. The latest generation of GPUs provides that in a way that the previous generation did not.
Click to expand...

and thanks to ATI at a price most can afford - what's not to love about that? :)
 
mattyj1085 said:
Isnt that what happens with consoles? Why arnt consoles designed with hundreds of different graphics cards, driver sets etc
Click to expand...

they're 2 different markets.

consoles are designed for the mass market - for the ppl who just want a gaming station and not have to mess around with drivers/hardware etc.

pc market is generally for the more tech savvy users who have the choice in changing components should they wish to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom