Cheapskate upgrade from 8600GT?
Yousuf Khan
was doing well until I started playing Demigod. Now some higher levels
of Demigod bog down like a mf'er. I turned all details down, and it's
playable again, but I'd like some details back. I assume I'm limited by
GPU power rather than CPU power since turning details down helped.
I don't normally follow all the intricate details of the video card
industry too much, but what's a good low-end powerhouse video card for
me? I can only run a single video card, as I don't have an SLI or X-fire
motherboard, so would a dual-GPU in a card be a good option, if they're
cheap enough?
My preference is something less than $200, preferably closer to the $100
mark. I don't mind if it's a card that's a couple of generations old, it
just has to be more powerful than what I got now. Oh, I'm still running
XP, no plans to upgrade to Vista yet (or ever, I might just skip it
completely).
Yousuf Khan
cyg
"Yousuf Khan" <bbb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:49f69476$1...@news.bnb-lp.com...
>I got a system with a Palit 8600GT w/ 512MB video memory, right now. It was
>doing well until I started playing Demigod. Now some higher levels of
>Demigod bog down like a mf'er. I turned all details down, and it's playable
>again, but I'd like some details back. I assume I'm limited by GPU power
>rather than CPU power since turning details down helped.
Depends on what type of detail. Some will stress the CPU also. It could also
be that both are outdated, but can't be sure since you don't say what CPU
you have.
> I don't normally follow all the intricate details of the video card
> industry too much, but what's a good low-end powerhouse video card for me?
> I can only run a single video card, as I don't have an SLI or X-fire
> motherboard, so would a dual-GPU in a card be a good option, if they're
> cheap enough?
They're not cheap at all.
> My preference is something less than $200, preferably closer to the $100
> mark. I don't mind if it's a card that's a couple of generations old, it
> just has to be more powerful than what I got now. Oh, I'm still running
> XP, no plans to upgrade to Vista yet (or ever, I might just skip it
> completely).
The GeForce 9800 GT has gone under $100, and so has the comparable Radeon HD
4830. You can expect either to deliver 2-3 times the performance of an 8600
GT.
YKhan
> Depends on what type of detail. Some will stress the CPU also. It could also
> be that both are outdated, but can't be sure since you don't say what CPU
> you have.
Well, yeah, in the past I would look at the CPU upgrade too, but I'm
going to avoid the CPU upgrade at the moment as there is some features
of this motherboard that I need which will be difficult to find in
newer motherboards.
> > My preference is something less than $200, preferably closer to the $100
> > mark. I don't mind if it's a card that's a couple of generations old, it
> > just has to be more powerful than what I got now. Oh, I'm still running
> > XP, no plans to upgrade to Vista yet (or ever, I might just skip it
> > completely).
>
> The GeForce 9800 GT has gone under $100, and so has the comparable Radeon HD
> 4830. You can expect either to deliver 2-3 times the performance of an 8600
> GT.
Interesting. Then I'll look for those two.
Yousuf Khan
Bob Knowlden
set from AMD/ATI. 40 nm technology, DDR5 graphics memory (512 MB), and
prices around $110 at www.newegg.com. I tend to prefer nVidia's drivers, but
I believe that they don't have a competitive product at this price point at
the moment.
There's a new review of the card at http://www.guru3d.com/.
"YKhan" <yjk...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fb478c93-9c8a-4e43...@t36g2000prt.googlegroups.com...