stingerhs Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 ^^^^ so, you base your entire decision on a single card that you owned??? since experience does count for something, consider that every computer that i've had that used an ATI card of some kind (yes, even the old Rage cards) had very few problems with anything. i'm not trying to imply that you did something with your card, its just that ATI has been quite reliable for me in the past, even with a couple of driver issues recently with kotor. the reason why i said that speed is the more important factor for me is that i haven't had unsolvable problems from video cards with either nVidia and ATI in the past. and, no, i don't really care about an extra 2 fps. its the 10-15 fps gains that i can get from using a radeon 9700 pro instead of a geforce fx5700. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JinniX Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 In my opinion, Ati Radeon X800. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revan Solo Posted January 12, 2005 Author Share Posted January 12, 2005 Originally posted by InsaneSith you're better off on a more gaming oriented processor, like a pentium. What is the different? I don't understand why a Celeron should not be good enough for gaming. I thought i depends on the power. And 2.8 GHz aren't so bad, or? When I am wrong, can you say me what the different is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishflesh Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Originally posted by stingerhs ^^^^ and, no, i don't really care about an extra 2 fps. its the 10-15 fps gains that i can get from using a radeon 9700 pro instead of a geforce fx5700. well that is not much of a conpersation since the 5700 is for the mass market... still its not 10-15fps... since you only notice that if your a bechmarker and run 100 score better you wont notice anything if you just play a game. but some pepole still think it matters. it all depens on the entire system i ratter be using a asus6800 pro then a readon 9700 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingerhs Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 Originally posted by AckbarNL i ratter be using a asus6800 pro then a readon 9700 umm, so would i. unfortunately, the geforcefx 6800 gt is about $250 more than the radeon 9700 pro, and the 9700 pro is also about a year old, when the 6800 gt is a month old. if you want to do comparisions, use similar cards like i did between the radeon 9700 pro and the geforcefx 5700. in that case, the radeon is better in just about every category. to compare to the geforcefx 6800 gt, use the radeon X800 Pro. in that case, the 6800 is indeed the better card, but only if you use the AGP version. the PCI-E versions are much more even as far as benchmarks go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 Originally posted by Revan Solo What is the different? I don't understand why a Celeron should not be good enough for gaming. I thought i depends on the power. And 2.8 GHz aren't so bad, or? When I am wrong, can you say me what the different is? the celeron works at different speeds, and when doing high endurance activities such as gaming, it will heat up quicker, causing slow down. Celerons were initially built for office and slight home demands, not gaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revan Solo Posted January 14, 2005 Author Share Posted January 14, 2005 But you can play games? I hope it is so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted January 14, 2005 Share Posted January 14, 2005 You can play games, but I wouldn't recommend it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revan Solo Posted January 15, 2005 Author Share Posted January 15, 2005 Originally posted by InsaneSith You can play games, but I wouldn't recommend it. But I still don't understand what would happen with a Celeron. Would my PC chrachs? Or wouldn't it runs good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingerhs Posted January 17, 2005 Share Posted January 17, 2005 it just won't run as well as a pentium or athlon system. as insanesith pointed out, the celeron wasn't designed for gaming. gaming uses a ton of system resources, and your proccessor has to be able to efficiently manage all of those resources. even if you have a 2.8 Ghz celeron, a 2.8 Ghz pentium (or an athlon 2800) will out-perform it because it was designed to be effiecient at handling the system as a whole. the celeron just simply "does the job", and isn't very efficient at handling the resources. your computer won't crash, but your game will run much slower than a pentium or athlon system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revan Solo Posted January 17, 2005 Author Share Posted January 17, 2005 Ok, I have sold my problem. I got a better PC (AMD 64 Athlon, Radeon 9800). Thank you all for advicing me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerAir1587249581 Posted January 17, 2005 Share Posted January 17, 2005 A very wise choice, ATHLON-64 ROCKS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revan Solo Posted January 18, 2005 Author Share Posted January 18, 2005 What is really better? AMD or Intel? You say Athlon rocks, or is it only because ...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingerhs Posted January 18, 2005 Share Posted January 18, 2005 ^^^^ no, its a proven fact that the athlon64 processor pwns the p4, especially in gaming, and especially the athlon64 fx series. this is one area where i do not compromise, at least until intel can release a better core for their processors that will make them better than the athlon64's. *so enters the intel fanboys...* XD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revan Solo Posted January 19, 2005 Author Share Posted January 19, 2005 Can you list me all AMD processors in the right order? I do not know them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted January 19, 2005 Share Posted January 19, 2005 I hate intel processors simply for the fact that I had to learn their architecture last semester and they have a seriously screwy architecture for their boards, and I did horribly on my final because of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.