Sapphire 9700 Pro: Is it worth the upgrade?

Here are my specs: Athlon 2000 XP 512 MB Crucial DDR 266 Geforce 3 Ti500 Turtle Beach Santa Cruz yada, yada, yada I would like to turn everything on at 1600x1200 in N2K3. Will this card be enough? If not, what would be enough? Thanks, Phillip -- "Somebody asked me how fast we went in the corner here, and I have no idea. It's irrelevant. You're just trying to get everything you can out of the race car." - Nascar Champion Bill Elliott

"Phillip Malphrus, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in news:[email hidden]:

Quoted text (15 lines)

> Here are my specs: > > Athlon 2000 XP > 512 MB Crucial DDR 266 > Geforce 3 Ti500 > Turtle Beach Santa Cruz > yada, yada, yada > > I would like to turn everything on at 1600x1200 in N2K3. > Will this card be enough? > If not, what would be enough? > > Thanks, > Phillip >

It certainly won't hurt, but if you want all the features etc..then your cpu is not stout enuf. Even a P4 3.06 could get humbled by the Papyrus graphics. Let's put it this way...you current card is very fast at medium to high resolutions...but when you start reaching for 16x12 screens, the 128bit memory falls short. The ATI's 256bit memory path will more easily handle the higher screen resolutions. THe next ATI part, the 9900pro should be out soon, that 'should' knock the 9700's prices down some. You might want to wait a few more weeks.

that's what I needed to hear, Thanks "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> "Phillip Malphrus, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in > news:[email hidden]: > > > Here are my specs: > > > > Athlon 2000 XP > > 512 MB Crucial DDR 266 > > Geforce 3 Ti500 > > Turtle Beach Santa Cruz > > yada, yada, yada > > > > I would like to turn everything on at 1600x1200 in N2K3. > > Will this card be enough? > > If not, what would be enough? > > > > Thanks, > > Phillip > > > It certainly won't hurt, but if you want all the features etc..then > your cpu is not stout enuf. Even a P4 3.06 could get humbled by the > Papyrus graphics. Let's put it this way...you current card is very fast

at > medium to high resolutions...but when you start reaching for 16x12screens, > the 128bit memory falls short. The ATI's 256bit memory path will more > easily handle the higher screen resolutions. > THe next ATI part, the 9900pro should be out soon, that 'should' knock > the 9700's prices down some. You might want to wait a few more weeks.

I went from GF3 ti 500 with an XP 2100+ to Sapphire 9700 Pro. The leap in fps in all games is astounding,the move up is never in question it has always been the cost for many. If prices will drop when 9900 Pro arrives then wait. AD

"Phillip Malphrus, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> Here are my specs: > > Athlon 2000 XP > 512 MB Crucial DDR 266 > Geforce 3 Ti500 > Turtle Beach Santa Cruz > yada, yada, yada > > I would like to turn everything on at 1600x1200 in N2K3. > Will this card be enough? > If not, what would be enough? > > Thanks, > Phillip >

This is the best resource for comparing cards I find... http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20021218/index.html I tend to kind of 'average out' all the game results to see what real life improvement you might get - so, from GF3 Ti500 to 9700 Pro... ( just remember this isnt with an Athlon 2000 - it's with a P4 3gig - so you probably will have a slightly increased CPU limitation) Aquanox - 58.1 -> 119.4 ( 105% increase) Dungeon Siege - 96 -> 97.7 (1,7% increase - do I hear a "CPU LIMITED" cry?" UT2k3 - 85.4 ->172.6 ( 102% increase) 3DM2k1 - 10233 ->15373 ( 50.2% increase - I dont trust 3dM as a benchmark though) Jedi Knight II 161.5 -> 172.4 ( 6.7% increase) Overall - averages about a 53% increase in graphical grunt. And at �200 - I think the 9700 Pro is a great buy - as long as you trust that ATI have improved their drivers. If I were buying one - I'd get it direct from www.crucial.com - they're an excellent manufacturer - the card is well built, and the price is right! Doug

thanks for the links, the crucial card looks really good. "Doug Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ghs3a.2720$Vx2.261375@wards...

Quoted text (30 lines)

> > "Phillip Malphrus, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Here are my specs: > > > > Athlon 2000 XP > > 512 MB Crucial DDR 266 > > Geforce 3 Ti500 > > Turtle Beach Santa Cruz > > yada, yada, yada > > > > I would like to turn everything on at 1600x1200 in N2K3. > > Will this card be enough? > > If not, what would be enough? > > > > Thanks, > > Phillip > > > > This is the best resource for comparing cards I find... > > http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20021218/index.html > > I tend to kind of 'average out' all the game results to see what real life > improvement you might get - so, from GF3 Ti500 to 9700 Pro... ( just > remember this isnt with an Athlon 2000 - it's with a P4 3gig - so you > probably will have a slightly increased CPU limitation) > > Aquanox - 58.1 -> 119.4 ( 105% increase) > Dungeon Siege - 96 -> 97.7 (1,7% increase - do I hear a "CPU LIMITED"

cry?"

Quoted text (15 lines)

> UT2k3 - 85.4 ->172.6 ( 102% increase) > 3DM2k1 - 10233 ->15373 ( 50.2% increase - I dont trust 3dM as a benchmark > though) > Jedi Knight II 161.5 -> 172.4 ( 6.7% increase) > > Overall - averages about a 53% increase in graphical grunt. > > And at �200 - I think the 9700 Pro is a great buy - as long as you trust > that ATI have improved their drivers. If I were buying one - I'd get it > direct from www.crucial.com - they're an excellent manufacturer - the card > is well built, and the price is right! > > Doug > >