how much ram can i hold? - Page 2

[Coconut Monkey]

Why did it say pro then on the adapter info?

Both cards use the same core - the difference lies in the memory interface, the type of memory used, and the core/memory clockspeeds. Also, you might notice that ATI makes no mention of the 9600SE on their 9600 product pages. ;)

ANyways, is there a good Graphics card for a low budget? Say 160 dollars or less>? Ive been looking at the fx 5900...is that cheap?

I assume we're talking US dollars - try looking for a 9800 Pro or greater, being wary of SE versions and those with 128-bit memory interfaces. A stock 9800 Pro has 8 pixel pipelines (the SE has 4), a 256-bit memory interface, and core/memory clockspeeds of 380/340.

[meow]

thats too expencive though! What about the fx5900?

[meow]

whats really strange though is with my 'sucky'; se, i can run Call of duty maxed out and Command and Conquer Zero hour maxed out. On 3dmark it says it wont run well but its running perfect on highest possible...anyways, i have 160 dollars now and im getting some more maybe 50 to 100 for a holiday we have for my religion. im tryin not to spend all of my money...so any other suggestions?

[Catweazle]

thats too expencive though! What about the fx5900?

Here's my comments about 'good value' display card purchases meow.

http://www.daniweb.com/techtalkforums/post58368.html#post58368

But if that card you have is one you're currently happy with, then why bother? Keep using it until it doesn't do the job for you anymore, and by then there'll most likely be something better, for cheaper. There always is! ;)

[alc6379]

whats really strange though is with my 'sucky'; se, i can run Call of duty maxed out and Command and Conquer Zero hour maxed out. On 3dmark it says it wont run well but its running perfect on highest possible...anyways, i have 160 dollars now and im getting some more maybe 50 to 100 for a holiday we have for my religion. im tryin not to spend all of my money...so any other suggestions?

I've got an FX5700 LE, 128MB of memory, 256bit memory interface. I can run about the same settings as yours, and I can play the games you mentioned maxed out, and I can also do Unreal 2k4 almost maxed out, but Doom 3 still crawls on anything other than medium at 1024x768. Also, I can do Dawn of War (awesome RTS that just came out, BTW) at 1280x768x32 bit color, and still have a really playable game.

I've been told that the FX5700 LE is on par with the ATI Radeon 9600 Pro, so take that for what you will.

[meow]

i run ut2k4 everything maxed flawelsessly. My other specs:2.53 GHZ 512ram 80GB HD .

[meow]

ok, i found geforce fx5900 SE for 180 bucks. Is it good? I heard its better than 9800 pro, is this true?

[Catweazle]

One of the best places to source a cheaper display card upgrade from would be the 'Swap Meet' sections of online Overclocker and Gamer sites. Prices there will DEFINATELY be lower than you'd find on eBay, and there are plenty of people offloading decent cards because they are about to or have recently upgraded to next generation cards. Display cards owned by people in such online communities are generally 'turned over' at a substantially quicker rate than the general purchasing public.

The FX5900SE is a fairly decent card, but definitely not a 'better' performance card than a Radeon 9800 Pro. In performance it would sit between the 9600XT and the 9800 Pro. The FX5900XT is a better card because, although 'Reference specs' has the core clock at 10MHz lower (most clock it at 400MHz anyway, same as SE) the actual graphics processor is the same unit used in the 5950Ultra, and some models have high quality Hynix RAM onboard. Leadtek FX5900XT is the pick of the bunch, and sourcing a secondhand one of those is a damn fine cheap upgrade.

[meow]

heres another wierd thing. On 3dMARK2001, i scored 6134. I thought the average SE was 1000 something?

[Catweazle]

A 3DMark2001 score of about 6000 is actually quite low by today's standards. For a 'good' responsive gaming system you need a card that will score in excess of 12,000, and preferably one which will score 15,000 or better. Even a previous generation Nvidia GeForce4 Ti4200 card will score at about 12,000.

The 'cut-down' versions of Radeon cards perform at a lower level than that, as they have reduced memory addressing bandwidth and cant perform calculations with enough efficiency as a result. The 'cut down' versions of Nvida FX cards, on the other hand, are usually simply clocked lower, and are closer to their 'big brothers'.

Bur 3DMark2001 id a DirectX8 tool, and most new games are DirectX9. NVidia FX cards are NOT as good as the Radeon 9xxx equivalents for DirectX9 features, because of the way it is implemented.

Also, the 'letter designations for Radeon and NVidia cards are used differently. For Radeons, an 'XT' is an overclocked card. For the NVidia FX an 'XT' is an UNDERclocked card! The FX5900XT is the best of the best with 'budget' lines, because of the components used. It's basically a card that was designed specifically to move excess stocks of 'good' components in preparation for the introduction of the new NVidia 6800 generation of display cards.

[Junior89]

I got a GiG for my comp

[meow]

thats beautiful .....

[meow]

one more thing guys. Compare my dxdiag with this guys:http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?p=598676#post598676
its very different. HE has the se and he has a different chiptype than me. WHat do you think?

[Catweazle]

I think his is a different brand to yours, and that you're both using different device driver versions.

I also think that if that 9600SE is meeting your needs, all is well and good, and you have no need to worry about it until such time as you find yourself unable to play the games you wish to run.

[meow]

nope his is ATI and so is mine. We have the same driver i believe. Look at the chipsets though. They are different, my computer has ABSOULUTELY NO reference to the SE, which is very strange. My chipset says radeon 9600 series while his says radeon 9600 SE AGP.

[Catweazle]

ATi is the brand of the graphics processor. That's what the 'manufacturer' reference is in relation to. Many different display card manufacturers use ATi graphics processors to build display cards from, just as many different manufacturers use NVidia graphics processors to build display cards from. The brand name of the actual card itself does not show up in DXDiag, only the brand name of the graphics processor.

For example, I just ran through the price list of one online store and found 'ATi Radeon' cards manufactured by:

ABit
Asus
Elsa
GeCube
Gigabyte
Hightech
MSI
Powercolour
Sapphire

There are many others as well.

[meow]

how do you explain the different chipsets though? ATI manufactures the same chipsets for all those manufacturers.

[Coconut Monkey]

how do you explain the different chipsets though? ATI manufactures the same chipsets for all those manufacturers.

Different manufacturer implementation at a guess. As I said before, there is no actual 9600SE chip specifically created by ATI. See?

[Catweazle]

I'd think it's different manufacturer implementation as well. Windows utilities need to be able to detect the information to report what a card is, and if a different format has been used to record the information in the card's BIOS then it'll be reported differently. Windows doesn't actually scan the physical component itself to determine what it is, Windows simply ASKS it ;)

By the way, Coconut Monkey, I dug down through some of the links on ATi's site and actually found mention of the 9600SE a bit deeper down. The site clearly demonstrates that the processors themselves for all the 9600 products are the same, and the only differences between the various standards are the speeds at which the processor and video memory are clocked, and the size of the memory interface implemenrted on the card, as can be seen on this comparison chart:

http://www.ati.com/products/radeon9600/radeon9600pro/compare.html

[Coconut Monkey]

By the way, Coconut Monkey, I dug down through some of the links on ATi's site and actually found mention of the 9600SE a bit deeper down. The site clearly demonstrates that the processors themselves for all the 9600 products are the same, and the only differences between the various standards are the speeds at which the processor and video memory are clocked, and the size of the memory interface implemenrted on the card, as can be seen on this comparison chart:

Ahh, so it is an actual chip created by them.

I wonder why they don't mention it in the main product area.....*nudge nudge*, *wink wink*

[Catweazle]

It's all the same chip. The quality varies when they come off the production line, just like any other processor. The 'best' ones get clocked higher on XT cards, the 'worst' ones get clocked lowest on SE cards!