9600 or wait

[Ext User(JB)]

Mac Cool <Mac@2cool.com> wrote in message news:<Xns951170961410MacCool@24.25.9.43>...

> Personally, I wouldn't buy a card now to play Doom3 or HL2 because as
> soon as those games come out there will be a plethora of cards optimized
> for them. Cards you buy today, including the 9800, will be forgotten in
> 6-8 months. If you plan on playing Doom3 & HL2, then I would be tempted
> to wait until Christmas to buy a card.
>
So you would stick with the 5200 and wait for a better card this
winter? The thing is, I do want to get Far Cry, Unreal T04, and a few
other games running fast now. I have a RADEON 8500 and an Athlon
XP1500 system now and played a few missions in Far Cry until I read
somewhere that I was probably missing out on a lot of graphics stuff
(normal mapping, maybe? -- or dynamic lighting?). Anyway, my new Dell
(comes in today I hope) has a 3 GHz P4 and I'm upgrading it to Audigy
2 Platinum surround right away and adding 512 of RAM. What would be
your guess about how much faster the game would run than the 8500?

I do know this -- I tested out Far Cry on a 64-bit system not long ago
with a 9800XT and it was a night and day difference in terms of
effects, speed, and realism.

- JB

[Ext User(Mac Cool)]

jbrandonbb@hotmail.com (JB) said:

> Mac Cool <Mac@2cool.com> wrote in message
>> If you plan on playing Doom3 & HL2, then I
>> would be tempted to wait until Christmas to buy a card.
>>
> So you would stick with the 5200 and wait for a better card this
> winter? The thing is, I do want to get Far Cry, Unreal T04, and a few
> other games running fast now. I have a RADEON 8500 and an Athlon
> XP1500 system now and played a few missions in Far Cry until I read
> somewhere that I was probably missing out on a lot of graphics stuff
> (normal mapping, maybe? -- or dynamic lighting?). Anyway, my new Dell
> (comes in today I hope) has a 3 GHz P4 and I'm upgrading it to Audigy
> 2 Platinum surround right away and adding 512 of RAM. What would be
> your guess about how much faster the game would run than the 8500?

It depends on the game, there are very few benchmarks comparing a 5200
and 8500, but the 8500 is normally a faster card.

Here's what I would do... sell both the 8500 (~$45+) and the 5200 (~$50)
on ebay and buy a used 9500 Pro ~$80-100, there's a bunch on ebay,
should run Far Cry @ 50-60 FPS at 1024x768 with high settings. The 9500
Pro is as fast as a 9600XT and a whole lot cheaper. You break even and
the 9500 Pro should keep you until Christmas, when you'll have a better
perspective on which cards run Doom3 and HL2 the fastest.

Matter o' fact, I might take that advice myself and sell my Ti4200 and
buy a 9500 Pro.

> I do know this -- I tested out Far Cry on a 64-bit system not long
> ago with a 9800XT and it was a night and day difference in terms of
> effects, speed, and realism.

I've done what you're thinking, upgrading in anticipation, more than
once and every time I've been disappointed I didn't wait just a little
while longer. When the new games hit, new cards will come out of the
woodwork and most of them will be faster than what you buy now.
--
Mac Cool

[Ext User(JB)]

Mac Cool <Mac@2cool.com> wrote in message news:<Xns9513E2D562B87MacCool@24.25.9.42>...
> jbrandonbb@hotmail.com (JB) said:
>
> > Mac Cool <Mac@2cool.com> wrote in message

>
> It depends on the game, there are very few benchmarks comparing a 5200
> and 8500, but the 8500 is normally a faster card.
>
> Here's what I would do... sell both the 8500 (~$45+) and the 5200 (~$50)
> on ebay and buy a used 9500 Pro ~$80-100, there's a bunch on ebay,
> should run Far Cry @ 50-60 FPS at 1024x768 with high settings. The 9500

Here's an update -- the 5200 seems pretty slow. I tested Thief 3 on my
old computer (athlon 1500, 512 RAM) with the RADEON 8500 and the new
one (a Dell 8300, 1 GB RAM, 3 GHz) with the 5200. It's downright
choppy on the new computer, which is twice as fast and has twice as
much RAM. I have noticed that the desktop and business apps seem a lot
snappier, though.

Is there a way to tell, incidentally, if I have a Pentium 4H or 4
(without the H)? It seems kind of important for video editing and
such.

- JB

[Ext User(JB)]

Mac Cool <Mac@2cool.com> wrote in message news:<Xns9513E2D562B87MacCool@24.25.9.42>...
> jbrandonbb@hotmail.com (JB) said:
>
> > Mac Cool <Mac@2cool.com> wrote in message

>
> It depends on the game, there are very few benchmarks comparing a 5200
> and 8500, but the 8500 is normally a faster card.
>
> Here's what I would do... sell both the 8500 (~$45+) and the 5200 (~$50)
> on ebay and buy a used 9500 Pro ~$80-100, there's a bunch on ebay,
> should run Far Cry @ 50-60 FPS at 1024x768 with high settings. The 9500

Here's an update -- the 5200 seems pretty slow. I tested Thief 3 on my
old computer (athlon 1500, 512 RAM) with the RADEON 8500 and the new
one (a Dell 8300, 1 GB RAM, 3 GHz) with the 5200. It's downright
choppy on the new computer, which is twice as fast and has twice as
much RAM. I have noticed that the desktop and business apps seem a lot
snappier, though.

Is there a way to tell, incidentally, if I have a Pentium 4H or 4
(without the H)? It seems kind of important for video editing and
such.

- JB

[Ext User(Mac Cool)]

jbrandonbb@hotmail.com (JB) said:

>> It depends on the game, there are very few benchmarks comparing a
>> 5200 and 8500, but the 8500 is normally a faster card.
>>
>> Here's what I would do... sell both the 8500 (~$45+) and the 5200
>> (~$50) on ebay and buy a used 9500 Pro ~$80-100, there's a bunch on
>> ebay, should run Far Cry @ 50-60 FPS at 1024x768 with high settings.
>> The 9500
>
> Here's an update -- the 5200 seems pretty slow. I tested Thief 3 on
> my old computer (athlon 1500, 512 RAM) with the RADEON 8500 and the
> new one (a Dell 8300, 1 GB RAM, 3 GHz) with the 5200. It's downright
> choppy on the new computer, which is twice as fast and has twice as
> much RAM.

Try putting the 8500 in your new system since it is a faster card. What
do you think of my 9500 Pro suggestion? Or are you going whole hog with
a 9800?

> Is there a way to tell, incidentally, if I have a Pentium 4H or 4
> (without the H)? It seems kind of important for video editing and
> such.

Don't know, sorry.
--
Mac Cool

[Ext User(Mac Cool)]

jbrandonbb@hotmail.com (JB) said:

>> It depends on the game, there are very few benchmarks comparing a
>> 5200 and 8500, but the 8500 is normally a faster card.
>>
>> Here's what I would do... sell both the 8500 (~$45+) and the 5200
>> (~$50) on ebay and buy a used 9500 Pro ~$80-100, there's a bunch on
>> ebay, should run Far Cry @ 50-60 FPS at 1024x768 with high settings.
>> The 9500
>
> Here's an update -- the 5200 seems pretty slow. I tested Thief 3 on
> my old computer (athlon 1500, 512 RAM) with the RADEON 8500 and the
> new one (a Dell 8300, 1 GB RAM, 3 GHz) with the 5200. It's downright
> choppy on the new computer, which is twice as fast and has twice as
> much RAM.

Try putting the 8500 in your new system since it is a faster card. What
do you think of my 9500 Pro suggestion? Or are you going whole hog with
a 9800?

> Is there a way to tell, incidentally, if I have a Pentium 4H or 4
> (without the H)? It seems kind of important for video editing and
> such.

Don't know, sorry.
--
Mac Cool

[Ext User(JB)]

Mac Cool <Mac@2cool.com> wrote in message news:<Xns9519D9CE07B62MacCool@24.25.9.42>...
> jbrandonbb@hotmail.com (JB) said:
>

>
> Try putting the 8500 in your new system since it is a faster card. What
> do you think of my 9500 Pro suggestion? Or are you going whole hog with
> a 9800?

I don't know, it's tough -- on Tom's I see that a 9500 128 is actually
slower than my card in Call of Duty. The 9500 Pro is 87, my card is
67, so that's a big leap. But then I look at something like the 9700
Pro at 121 and realize that's almost twice as fast. My *real problem,
though, is that I want to see graphics like Riddick for Xbox -- normal
mapping, dynamic lighting. I see it with the 5200 card no problem --
Thief on my new Dell looks completely different. The 8500 DX8 card is
a major step back, the polygons look like something I was playing in
1999 when I got my first 3DFX card (not really). I doubt I will go
9800 -- a 121 to 131 difference doesn't seem as substantial to me.
Anyway, for now I'm going with a compromise -- the 5200 with DX9
features, but at 800 x 600 and maybe with some detail turned down. I
just don't want to go back the DX8 when 9 is one of the main reasons I
upgraded. And to be honest, I'll probably end up playing more Xbox
until the fall when I see these new games on the shelf and upgrade
then.

And I figured out how to see if I have hyperthreading -- my system
reports two processors.

- JB

[Ext User(JB)]

Mac Cool <Mac@2cool.com> wrote in message news:<Xns9519D9CE07B62MacCool@24.25.9.42>...
> jbrandonbb@hotmail.com (JB) said:
>

>
> Try putting the 8500 in your new system since it is a faster card. What
> do you think of my 9500 Pro suggestion? Or are you going whole hog with
> a 9800?

I don't know, it's tough -- on Tom's I see that a 9500 128 is actually
slower than my card in Call of Duty. The 9500 Pro is 87, my card is
67, so that's a big leap. But then I look at something like the 9700
Pro at 121 and realize that's almost twice as fast. My *real problem,
though, is that I want to see graphics like Riddick for Xbox -- normal
mapping, dynamic lighting. I see it with the 5200 card no problem --
Thief on my new Dell looks completely different. The 8500 DX8 card is
a major step back, the polygons look like something I was playing in
1999 when I got my first 3DFX card (not really). I doubt I will go
9800 -- a 121 to 131 difference doesn't seem as substantial to me.
Anyway, for now I'm going with a compromise -- the 5200 with DX9
features, but at 800 x 600 and maybe with some detail turned down. I
just don't want to go back the DX8 when 9 is one of the main reasons I
upgraded. And to be honest, I'll probably end up playing more Xbox
until the fall when I see these new games on the shelf and upgrade
then.

And I figured out how to see if I have hyperthreading -- my system
reports two processors.

- JB

[Ext User(JB)]

Mac Cool <Mac@2cool.com> wrote in message news:<Xns9513E2D562B87MacCool@24.25.9.42>...
> jbrandonbb@hotmail.com (JB) said:
>
> > Mac Cool <Mac@2cool.com> wrote in message

>
> It depends on the game, there are very few benchmarks comparing a 5200
> and 8500, but the 8500 is normally a faster card.
>
> Here's what I would do... sell both the 8500 (~$45+) and the 5200 (~$50)
> on ebay and buy a used 9500 Pro ~$80-100, there's a bunch on ebay,
> should run Far Cry @ 50-60 FPS at 1024x768 with high settings. The 9500

Here's an update -- the 5200 seems pretty slow. I tested Thief 3 on my
old computer (athlon 1500, 512 RAM) with the RADEON 8500 and the new
one (a Dell 8300, 1 GB RAM, 3 GHz) with the 5200. It's downright
choppy on the new computer, which is twice as fast and has twice as
much RAM. I have noticed that the desktop and business apps seem a lot
snappier, though.

Is there a way to tell, incidentally, if I have a Pentium 4H or 4
(without the H)? It seems kind of important for video editing and
such.

- JB

[Ext User(Mac Cool)]

jbrandonbb@hotmail.com (JB) said:

>> It depends on the game, there are very few benchmarks comparing a
>> 5200 and 8500, but the 8500 is normally a faster card.
>>
>> Here's what I would do... sell both the 8500 (~$45+) and the 5200
>> (~$50) on ebay and buy a used 9500 Pro ~$80-100, there's a bunch on
>> ebay, should run Far Cry @ 50-60 FPS at 1024x768 with high settings.
>> The 9500
>
> Here's an update -- the 5200 seems pretty slow. I tested Thief 3 on
> my old computer (athlon 1500, 512 RAM) with the RADEON 8500 and the
> new one (a Dell 8300, 1 GB RAM, 3 GHz) with the 5200. It's downright
> choppy on the new computer, which is twice as fast and has twice as
> much RAM.

Try putting the 8500 in your new system since it is a faster card. What
do you think of my 9500 Pro suggestion? Or are you going whole hog with
a 9800?

> Is there a way to tell, incidentally, if I have a Pentium 4H or 4
> (without the H)? It seems kind of important for video editing and
> such.

Don't know, sorry.
--
Mac Cool

[Ext User(JB)]

Mac Cool <Mac@2cool.com> wrote in message news:<Xns9519D9CE07B62MacCool@24.25.9.42>...
> jbrandonbb@hotmail.com (JB) said:
>

>
> Try putting the 8500 in your new system since it is a faster card. What
> do you think of my 9500 Pro suggestion? Or are you going whole hog with
> a 9800?

I don't know, it's tough -- on Tom's I see that a 9500 128 is actually
slower than my card in Call of Duty. The 9500 Pro is 87, my card is
67, so that's a big leap. But then I look at something like the 9700
Pro at 121 and realize that's almost twice as fast. My *real problem,
though, is that I want to see graphics like Riddick for Xbox -- normal
mapping, dynamic lighting. I see it with the 5200 card no problem --
Thief on my new Dell looks completely different. The 8500 DX8 card is
a major step back, the polygons look like something I was playing in
1999 when I got my first 3DFX card (not really). I doubt I will go
9800 -- a 121 to 131 difference doesn't seem as substantial to me.
Anyway, for now I'm going with a compromise -- the 5200 with DX9
features, but at 800 x 600 and maybe with some detail turned down. I
just don't want to go back the DX8 when 9 is one of the main reasons I
upgraded. And to be honest, I'll probably end up playing more Xbox
until the fall when I see these new games on the shelf and upgrade
then.

And I figured out how to see if I have hyperthreading -- my system
reports two processors.

- JB