What are the best vid cards for N4?

Ive finally had enough of my lowly V3 2000. What are the best cards to get without spending too much money? I'd prefer not to spend much, and the geforce2's looks good price wise... what sort of fps are they getting with what cpu? Thanks Luke -=87=-

Creative Blaster Annihilator Ultra geforce 2, 64 meg., is great. Before I had a V5, but it wasn't as fast. Now I can run Opengl. I have all details maxed, 43 cars, 30-60 fps, PIII-1000, 256 ram. James

What resolution is it? Y.Minami "James Larson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Creative Blaster Annihilator Ultra geforce 2, 64 meg., is great. Before Ihad > a V5, but it wasn't as fast. Now I can run Opengl. I have all detailsmaxed, > 43 cars, 30-60 fps, PIII-1000, 256 ram. > > James

....or if you can't afford the Ultra then the GTS, even 32MB, is pretty awesome with N4. "James Larson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Creative Blaster Annihilator Ultra geforce 2, 64 meg., is great. Before Ihad > a V5, but it wasn't as fast. Now I can run Opengl. I have all detailsmaxed, > 43 cars, 30-60 fps, PIII-1000, 256 ram. > > James

**** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com **** Isn't the Hercules GTS Pro kind of in the middle of the GTS and the GTS Ultra? Actually, closer to the Ultra? It's about $100 cheaper than the Ultra as well... -Larry "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:yFgi6.3936$[email hidden]... > ....or if you can't afford the Ultra then the GTS, even 32MB, is pretty > awesome with N4. > > "James Larson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Creative Blaster Annihilator Ultra geforce 2, 64 meg., is great. BeforeI

Quoted text (8 lines)

> had > > a V5, but it wasn't as fast. Now I can run Opengl. I have all details > maxed, > > 43 cars, 30-60 fps, PIII-1000, 256 ram. > > > > James > >

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= *** Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! *** http://www.usenet.com -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

GeForce2 MX ( 32 mb), damn fine card and runs it pretty decent. Set you back about 100 bucks. The Hercules Prophet2 MX is a great one. -- Don Burnette "Luke Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3a88d5fa$0$16389$[email hidden]... > Ive finally had enough of my lowly V3 2000. What are the best cards to get > without spending too much money? I'd prefer not to spend much, and the > geforce2's looks good price wise... what sort of fps are they getting with > what cpu? Thanks > > Luke > -=87=- > > >

Would anyone go with a Radeon 64Mb DDR over the Geforce2GTS 32Mb DDR. The prices are about the same. I would like opinions. Thanks, btgoss "Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Ioli6.276168$[email hidden]... > GeForce2 MX ( 32 mb), damn fine card and runs it pretty decent. Set youback

Quoted text (10 lines)

> about 100 bucks. > The Hercules Prophet2 MX is a great one. > > -- > Don Burnette > > > "Luke Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:3a88d5fa$0$16389$[email hidden]... > > Ive finally had enough of my lowly V3 2000. What are the best cards to

get > > without spending too much money? I'd prefer not to spend much, and the > > geforce2's looks good price wise... what sort of fps are they gettingwith

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > what cpu? Thanks > > > > Luke > > -=87=- > > > > > > > >

On Tue, 13 Feb 2001 21:36:26 -0600, rrevved <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >Since then I have been trying all my sims and games, and >I am VERY happy with the performance, versus my Voodoo5. >You will love it. I had a Geforce2 and went to a V5 instead. I didn't notice much dif on the Geforce2 in frame rate in the games I play. -- Jagg

On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:18:32 -0600, rrevved <[email hidden]> thus spoke:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>Actually, my mind is blown with the framerate difference in >the ones I'm playing: > >ie: Fly! , FS2000, Nascar 4, GPL (D3D), Q3A, X-Plane, SOF, CMR2, MBTR. > >I haven't tried a game yet that doesn't have a significant >difference. Maybe I'm lucky? :) > >Hey, I didn't expect it to be this good, but it seems like it is! >

Well, I bought it like some six months ago and the drivers were crap then. But, Fly! runs better on my V5 in glide than it did on the Geforce2 in D3D(less stutters). GPL is capped at 36fps and both cards run it at 36fps. Don't play Q3A. I know it is overall slightly faster, but if you read Papadoc's V5vGF2 article you will see that is not in all cases and it is not by much at all when it is, except in Q3A (both cards run it way above 60fps though). In games that make use of T&L I would expect it to be faster, but even then in a game like CFS2 they say using T&L doesn't make much dif at all. The T&L on the GF2 is weak. That's why I told you the other day in the flight-sim group you should wait for the NV20. Anyway, DeusEx, Unreal Tournament, Freespace2, Jane's F15, LB2 (and others) all run faster/better on a V5 so it is all subjective in the end. -- Jagg

Jagg wrote: <snip> > I know it is overall slightly faster, > but if you read Papadoc's V5vGF2 article you will see that is not in > all cases and it is not by much at all when it is, except in Q3A (both > cards run it way above 60fps though). I thought PapaDoc's V5-GF2 comparison was with a GeForce2 MX & not a GTS. The GTS is a bit faster than the MX. -- Fester

Hi! Have a look at the ATI Radeon LE . This is the value edition of the RADEON. But with a trick in the registry you can unlock the Hyper-Z. Then the only difference to the regular RADEON is the slower RAM. Get the info at http://www.hart-core.de/index.php?width=1024 (news from 12.2) With this hack the RADEON LE is at 32bit graphics much faster than a GeforceMX. -- bye, Wolfgang www.flyingtires.kronthaler.net "Luke Phillips" <[email hidden]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:3a88d5fa$0$16389$[email hidden]... > Ive finally had enough of my lowly V3 2000. What are the best cards to get > without spending too much money? I'd prefer not to spend much, and the > geforce2's looks good price wise... what sort of fps are they getting with > what cpu? Thanks > > Luke > -=87=- > > >

See my msg posted below... -- bye, Wolfgang www.flyingtires.kronthaler.net "btgoss" <[email hidden]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:yqmi6.39160$%[email hidden]... > Would anyone go with a Radeon 64Mb DDR over the Geforce2GTS 32Mb DDR. The > prices are about the same. I would like opinions. > Thanks, > btgoss > > "Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:Ioli6.276168$[email hidden]... > > GeForce2 MX ( 32 mb), damn fine card and runs it pretty decent. Set you > back > > about 100 bucks. > > The Hercules Prophet2 MX is a great one. > > > > -- > > Don Burnette > > > > > > "Luke Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:3a88d5fa$0$16389$[email hidden]... > > > Ive finally had enough of my lowly V3 2000. What are the best cards to > get > > > without spending too much money? I'd prefer not to spend much, and the > > > geforce2's looks good price wise... what sort of fps are they getting > with > > > what cpu? Thanks > > > > > > Luke > > > -=87=- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 12:47:06 GMT, Uncle Fester <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >I thought PapaDoc's V5-GF2 comparison was with a GeForce2 MX & not a >GTS. The GTS is a bit faster than the MX. No. GTS. -- Jagg

On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 10:36:52 -0600, rrevved <[email hidden]> thus spoke:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>On my Leadtek GeF GTS 32mb with the 6.48 drivers from the Leadtek >site, that isn't the case at all. I probably get 50% more framerate in >Fly! vs. Voodoo5. 1024x768x32 FULL visibility and detail. >Even with the Sky! and Terrascene add-on, my framerate is MUCH >improved. > >Fly! never 'stuttered' on my system with the Voodoo5. Maybe you are >thinking about FS2000. > >Here is how it looks. This is Fly! at about 50-60 fps, a few miles >east of Knoxville TN. > >ftp://ftp.mindspring.com/users/rrev/ridgerunner.jpg

Damn, I should have kept that Geforce2! It was that friggin' Papadoc conning us all into buying the V5 saying how much better it is. :-) -- Jagg

Damn Don, we must have identical systems. Did you custom build yours? Agreed, I have the Hercules Prophet 2 MX and everything looks and runs fantastic on it. Todd On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:43:04 GMT, "Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote: >GeForce2 MX ( 32 mb), damn fine card and runs it pretty decent. Set you back >about 100 bucks. >The Hercules Prophet2 MX is a great one.

Jagg, I just love my Asus GF2-GTS Pro! Also it works with all my sims and games! Ya` gotta` love it!:o)...Sorry I couldn't resist guyz!! Thom_j. "Jagg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... | On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 10:36:52 -0600, rrevved <[email hidden]> thus | spoke: | Damn, I should have kept that Geforce2! It was that friggin' Papadoc | conning us all into buying the V5 saying how much better it is. :-) | -- | Jagg

On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:08:40 GMT, "Thom j." <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >Jagg, I just love my Asus GF2-GTS Pro! Also it works with all my sims >and games! Ya` gotta` love it!:o)...Sorry I couldn't resist guyz!! >Thom_j. Well, I like my V5's FSAA big time, and I like being able to run my older glide games. But, I will probably get an NV20 when they come out. Should be soon I hope. -- Jagg

For revvedd. The T&L is weak because I don't see anyone saying how much better it makes their games. In fact, I have heard it makes not much dif at all. That's weak. -- Jagg

On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 23:38:01 GMT, [email hidden] (Jagg) wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:08:40 GMT, "Thom j." <[email hidden]> thus >spoke: > >>Jagg, I just love my Asus GF2-GTS Pro! Also it works with all my sims >>and games! Ya` gotta` love it!:o)...Sorry I couldn't resist guyz!! >>Thom_j. > >Well, I like my V5's FSAA big time, and I like being able to run my >older glide games. But, I will probably get an NV20 when they come >out. Should be soon I hope.

Since I'm about to buy a new card - what's a NV20? Perhaps someone has an url for me with some tests of all the latest gfx cards? Andre >Jagg

[email hidden] (Andre Warringa) wrote: > what's a NV20? You been asleep for the last six months? :-) Next generation nVidia card. As usual it's supposed to be The Best Thing Since Sliced Bread. The only certainty though, judging by existing GF2 prices, is it'll be almost as cheap as second hand Ferraris :-> Andrew McP

"Jagg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > For revvedd. The T&L is weak because I don't see anyone saying how > much better it makes their games. In fact, I have heard it makes not > much dif at all. That's weak. You've heard wrong, or you listen to the wrong people The difference between running N4 with T&L HAL and without it is about double the frame rate. At first I didn't enable the T&L HAL i N4 and was wondering why my fps was on par with my ol' V3 2000. Then I realised my mistake, enabled T&L HAL and the frame rate doubled. That's how weak it is ... Hena

Jagg wrote: > > For revvedd. The T&L is weak because I don't see anyone saying how > much better it makes their games. In fact, I have heard it makes not > much dif at all. That's weak. > -- > Jagg That might be true in flight sims as almost none use it to great effect, but the difference in N4 demo on a lowly (?) PIII 450 is large when going from V3 3000 to GeForce MX II; that cannot be just the fillrate difference. In fact, I'll try to turn T&L off in the demo to see how muc the diff actually is. Boy, that c.s.i.p.g.f-s. discussion sure introduced some dogmas that are hard to shake off ;). -Gregor

Hena is right, i found the same thing. -Kankkis- Hena H�kk�nen <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:uD7j6.4$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > "Jagg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > For revvedd. The T&L is weak because I don't see anyone saying how > > much better it makes their games. In fact, I have heard it makes not > > much dif at all. That's weak. > > You've heard wrong, or you listen to the wrong people The difference

between > running N4 with T&L HAL and without it is about double the frame rate. > At first I didn't enable the T&L HAL i N4 and was wondering why my fps was > on par with my ol' V3 2000. Then I realised my mistake, enabled T&L HALand

Quoted text (7 lines)

> the frame rate doubled. > > That's how weak it is ... > > Hena > >

On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:52:06 +0200, "Hena H�kk�nen" <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >You've heard wrong, or you listen to the wrong people The difference between >running N4 with T&L HAL and without it is about double the frame rate. Well, I've been playing flight sims that had T&L capability long before N4 was out and no one has said it makes a big dif in those games. (CFS2, EECH, BoB). >At first I didn't enable the T&L HAL i N4 and was wondering why my fps was >on par with my ol' V3 2000. Then I realised my mistake, enabled T&L HAL and >the frame rate doubled. > >That's how weak it is ... I'll still wait for NV20 before giving up my V5. -- Jagg

On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:02:18 +0100, Gregor Veble <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >That might be true in flight sims as almost none use it to great effect, >but the difference in N4 demo on a lowly (?) PIII 450 is large when >going from V3 3000 to GeForce MX II; that cannot be just the fillrate >difference. In fact, I'll try to turn T&L off in the demo to see how muc >the diff actually is. Yea, some hard numbers would be good to see. >Boy, that c.s.i.p.g.f-s. discussion sure introduced some dogmas that are >hard to shake off ;). 3DFDX, 3DFX, 3DFX.... I've owned both 3DFX cards and Nvidia. (Riva128 and Geforce2). -- Jagg

On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:02:18 +0100, Gregor Veble Yea, some hard numbers would be good to see. 3DFDX, 3DFX, 3DFX.... I've owned both 3DFX cards and Nvidia. (Riva128 and Geforce2). -- Jagg

"Jagg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:52:06 +0200, "Hena H�kk�nen" > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > > >You've heard wrong, or you listen to the wrong people The differencebetween > >running N4 with T&L HAL and without it is about double the frame rate. > > Well, I've been playing flight sims that had T&L capability long > before N4 was out and no one has said it makes a big dif in those > games. (CFS2, EECH, BoB). > But it makes a big difference in N4. With a GF256, the settings I use give about 25-30fps in "regular" D3D and about 45-50fps in T&L D3D, which is pretty close to what I get in OGL after installing those 7.52drivers. I would expect bigger increases from the GF2's. Jerry Morelock

On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 18:03:32 -0500, "chainbreaker" <[email hidden]> thus spoke:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>But it makes a big difference in N4. With a GF256, the settings I use give >about 25-30fps in "regular" D3D and about 45-50fps in T&L D3D, which is >pretty close to what I get in OGL after installing those 7.52drivers. I >would expect bigger increases from the GF2's. > > >Jerry Morelock > >

Yea, I would have to admit that is pretty impressive. But, I went from a Geforce2 to a V5 so I will wait for the NV20 now. -- Jagg

"Jagg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 18:03:32 -0500, "chainbreaker" > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > > >But it makes a big difference in N4. With a GF256, the settings I usegive

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >about 25-30fps in "regular" D3D and about 45-50fps in T&L D3D, which is > >pretty close to what I get in OGL after installing those 7.52drivers. I > >would expect bigger increases from the GF2's. > > > > > >Jerry Morelock > > > > > > Yea, I would have to admit that is pretty impressive. But, I went from > a Geforce2 to a V5 so I will wait for the NV20 now. > -- > Jagg

I remember when you switched. I started to do that myself, but I'd just bought this machine that had a GF256 in it and decided to skip the V5/GF2's altogether. I've been waiting for the NV20/GF3 as well, but if it's really going to cost 600USD when it's released at the end of the month (supposedly), I'll be waiting a while longer. For me to pay that much for a vid card, it'll have to give a damned good massage, too . . . at the very least. :-) Jerry Morelock

On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 23:29:07 -0500, "chainbreaker" <[email hidden]> thus spoke:

Quoted text (11 lines)

>I remember when you switched. I started to do that myself, but I'd just >bought this machine that had a GF256 in it and decided to skip the V5/GF2's >altogether. I've been waiting for the NV20/GF3 as well, but if it's really >going to cost 600USD when it's released at the end of the month >(supposedly), I'll be waiting a while longer. For me to pay that much for a >vid card, it'll have to give a damned good massage, too . . . at the very >least. :-) > >Jerry Morelock > >

I won't pay that much either. Maybe buy a Geforce2 when the NV20 is released. At least it should cause the price to drop on the Geforce2 when it is released. But, then again, maybe not. -- Jagg

Hi, here are my results. Specs: PIII 450 clocked at 518 128MB RAM Hercules 3D Prophet MX II, clock speed 185MHz, memory speed 190MHz SB PCI64v The test was done at 1024x768x32 resolution, with all options at maximum. I turned off the steering wheel as at speeds close to 0 there is some erratic FF behaviour which wiggles the wheel only slightly, but the FPS doesn't stabilize for it. I used the internal framerate counter of the N4 demo. The only number I used was the framerate in the pitlane at the start of the testing session at Dover, without any input, and waiting about 10 secs so the FPS stabilized. Here are the results: Direct3D - 23 FPS Direct3D (T&L) - 36 FPS OpenGL - 36 FPS All results are obtained with the accuracy +-1FPS, as there are still some oscillations in the counter going on, but no higher than 1 after it stabilizes. -Gregor Jagg wrote:

Quoted text (23 lines)

> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:02:18 +0100, Gregor Veble > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > > >> That might be true in flight sims as almost none use it to great effect, >> but the difference in N4 demo on a lowly (?) PIII 450 is large when >> going from V3 3000 to GeForce MX II; that cannot be just the fillrate >> difference. In fact, I'll try to turn T&L off in the demo to see how muc >> the diff actually is. > > > Yea, some hard numbers would be good to see. > > >> Boy, that c.s.i.p.g.f-s. discussion sure introduced some dogmas that are >> hard to shake off ;). > > > 3DFDX, 3DFX, 3DFX.... I've owned both 3DFX cards and Nvidia. (Riva128 > and Geforce2). > -- > Jagg

-- _______________________________________ remove the caps in the address to reply _______________________________________

.> I won't pay that much either. Maybe buy a Geforce2 when the NV20 is > released. At least it should cause the price to drop on the Geforce2 > when it is released. But, then again, maybe not. > -- > Jagg The garden variety might drop some, but if the GF3 is going to be priced at 600, I don't look for the Pro or Ultra GF2s to drop much, if any. Jerry Morelock

On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 14:14:37 +0100, Gregor Veble <[email hidden]> thus spoke:

Quoted text (30 lines)

>Hi, > >here are my results. > >Specs: > >PIII 450 clocked at 518 >128MB RAM >Hercules 3D Prophet MX II, clock speed 185MHz, memory speed 190MHz >SB PCI64v > >The test was done at 1024x768x32 resolution, with all options at >maximum. I turned off the steering wheel as at speeds close to 0 there >is some erratic FF behaviour which wiggles the wheel only slightly, but >the FPS doesn't stabilize for it. I used the internal framerate counter >of the N4 demo. The only number I used was the framerate in the pitlane >at the start of the testing session at Dover, without any input, and >waiting about 10 secs so the FPS stabilized. > >Here are the results: > >Direct3D - 23 FPS >Direct3D (T&L) - 36 FPS >OpenGL - 36 FPS > >All results are obtained with the accuracy +-1FPS, as there are still >some oscillations in the counter going on, but no higher than 1 after it >stabilizes. > >-Gregor

Thx Gregor. Pretty good increase I must say. Do you have CFS2? Maybe you can do a similar test in that game too. -- Jagg

On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 08:35:18 -0500, "chainbreaker" <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >The garden variety might drop some, but if the GF3 is going to be priced at >600, I don't look for the Pro or Ultra GF2s to drop much, if any. > >Jerry Morelock > > Why not? I'm sure people would rather have an NV20 than an Ultra. The Ultra's are only marginally faster than the regular Geforce2 until you get into really high res and 32bit colour. -- Jagg

> Why not? I'm sure people would rather have an NV20 than an Ultra. The > Ultra's are only marginally faster than the regular Geforce2 until you > get into really high res and 32bit colour. > -- > Jagg Well, for the very high end GF2s I look for the supply to dry up before the price has a chance to drop very much. Jerry Morelock

Isn't it time to call someone a pussy or something? :-) -- [email hidden] "Jagg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sat, 17 Feb 2001 14:14:37 +0100, Gregor Veble > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > >Hi, > > > >here are my results. > > > >Specs: > > > >PIII 450 clocked at 518 > >128MB RAM > >Hercules 3D Prophet MX II, clock speed 185MHz, memory speed 190MHz > >SB PCI64v > > > >The test was done at 1024x768x32 resolution, with all options at > >maximum. I turned off the steering wheel as at speeds close to 0 there > >is some erratic FF behaviour which wiggles the wheel only slightly, but > >the FPS doesn't stabilize for it. I used the internal framerate counter > >of the N4 demo. The only number I used was the framerate in the pitlane > >at the start of the testing session at Dover, without any input, and > >waiting about 10 secs so the FPS stabilized. > > > >Here are the results: > > > >Direct3D - 23 FPS > >Direct3D (T&L) - 36 FPS > >OpenGL - 36 FPS > > > >All results are obtained with the accuracy +-1FPS, as there are still > >some oscillations in the counter going on, but no higher than 1 after it > >stabilizes. > > > >-Gregor > > Thx Gregor. Pretty good increase I must say. Do you have CFS2? Maybe > you can do a similar test in that game too. > -- > Jagg

On Sun, 18 Feb 2001 08:12:19 -0600, "Greg Cisko" <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >Isn't it time to call someone a pussy or something? > >:-) > OK, you're a pussy. :-) -- Jagg

[email hidden] (Jagg) wrote: >Well, I've been playing flight sims that had T&L capability long >before N4 was out and no one has said it makes a big dif in those >games. (CFS2, EECH, BoB). Apples and oranges. T&L will work well in some games, not in others. It depends where the bottleneck is. In N4, the T&L works extremely well. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

I guess your not who I thought you were. Sorry. -- [email hidden] "Jagg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 18 Feb 2001 08:12:19 -0600, "Greg Cisko" <[email hidden]> > thus spoke: > > >Isn't it time to call someone a pussy or something? > > > >:-) > > > > OK, you're a pussy. :-) > -- > Jagg

I guess your not who I thought you were. Sorry. -- > thus spoke: > >Isn't it time to call someone a *** or something? > >:-) > OK, you're a ***. :-) > -- > Jagg

Uhhhh.. isn't that like a $400-500 video card??? To make a $40 game just barely playable? What's wrong with this picture :) On 13 Feb 2001 10:37:47 GMT, [email hidden] (James Larson) wrote: >Creative Blaster Annihilator Ultra geforce 2, 64 meg., is great. Before I had >a V5, but it wasn't as fast. Now I can run Opengl. I have all details maxed, >43 cars, 30-60 fps, PIII-1000, 256 ram. > >James -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

I've never seen an ATI card yet that I've been impressed with, as far as overall quality is concerned, but that's just my opinion :) Too many driver updates are required just to bring it up to workable in a lot of cases and by the time it finally works with everything it's obsolete :) On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 02:53:18 GMT, "btgoss" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (33 lines)

>Would anyone go with a Radeon 64Mb DDR over the Geforce2GTS 32Mb DDR. The >prices are about the same. I would like opinions. >Thanks, >btgoss > >"Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:Ioli6.276168$[email hidden]... >> GeForce2 MX ( 32 mb), damn fine card and runs it pretty decent. Set you >back >> about 100 bucks. >> The Hercules Prophet2 MX is a great one. >> >> -- >> Don Burnette >> >> >> "Luke Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:3a88d5fa$0$16389$[email hidden]... >> > Ive finally had enough of my lowly V3 2000. What are the best cards to >get >> > without spending too much money? I'd prefer not to spend much, and the >> > geforce2's looks good price wise... what sort of fps are they getting >with >> > what cpu? Thanks >> > >> > Luke >> > -=87=- >> > >> > >> > >> >> >

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

"hobbit" <nospam@here> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Uhhhh.. isn't that like a $400-500 video card??? Your choice I'd prefer to spend $80.00 for my GeForce2 MX.

The 32mb GeForce2 MX card can be had for around 100 bucks, and will do nicely. Technology does move on. -- Don Burnette D Burnette in N4 Some people do nothing wrong. The problem is, they do nothing. And THAT is wrong. "hobbit" <nospam@here> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Uhhhh.. isn't that like a $400-500 video card??? To make a $40 game > just barely playable? What's wrong with this picture :) > > On 13 Feb 2001 10:37:47 GMT, [email hidden] (James Larson) > wrote: > > >Creative Blaster Annihilator Ultra geforce 2, 64 meg., is great. Before I had > >a V5, but it wasn't as fast. Now I can run Opengl. I have all details maxed, > >43 cars, 30-60 fps, PIII-1000, 256 ram. > > > >James > > > > -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- > http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! > -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

>Hardly. About half that amount. Maybe you should quit McDonalds & get >a real job that pays. Well since you seem so well set maybe you can buy us all a new card. Thanks in advance

I'll take a Gforce 3! "Daddyo618" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > >Hardly. About half that amount. Maybe you should quit McDonalds & get > >a real job that pays. > > Well since you seem so well set maybe you can buy us all a new card.Thanks in > advance

I've been waiting for this one....A Geforce 3 will not Substantially improve your frame-rates...N4...as far as I know...has no hooks in the code to take advantage of any of the GF3's extra horsepower. What it will look like to N4 is a slightly faster GF2. Yes it will be somewhat faster(first indications on quake is less than 10%) but to really shine N4 would have to have a graphic patch.. dave henrie "Vintook" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xb2s6.5338$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> I'll take a Gforce 3! > > "Daddyo618" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > >Hardly. About half that amount. Maybe you should quit McDonalds & get > > >a real job that pays. > > > > Well since you seem so well set maybe you can buy us all a new card. > Thanks in > > advance > >