New GFX card

  • Thread starter Thread starter GT
  • Start date Start date
G

GT

Would the following card offer significantly better 3D gaming performance
than my current 64MB Radeon 8500?

http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=48527&TabID=1&WorldID=&doy=1m2

Its an ATI Radeon 9250 256MB clocked at core-240MHz and memory 2x200MHz. 4
Pixel shader pipelines.

Secondly, would my motherboard be able to support this card. The card says
it supports AGP 8x, but I recently discovered that my board only does AGP
4x.

My system is Soltek SL75-DRV5 (KT333 chipset) with Athlon 2400+ with 1.5GB
RAM.

Any other GFX suggestions for around the £30-£40 mark.
 
"GT" said:
Would the following card offer significantly better 3D gaming performance
than my current 64MB Radeon 8500?

http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=48527&TabID=1&WorldID=&doy=1m2

Its an ATI Radeon 9250 256MB clocked at core-240MHz and memory 2x200MHz. 4
Pixel shader pipelines.

Secondly, would my motherboard be able to support this card. The card says
it supports AGP 8x, but I recently discovered that my board only does AGP
4x.

My system is Soltek SL75-DRV5 (KT333 chipset) with Athlon 2400+ with 1.5GB
RAM.

Any other GFX suggestions for around the £30-£40 mark.
Click to expand...

The 9250 looks like a step backwards.

http://web.archive.org/web/20050305...ykuly/zestawienie_GPU_2/skala_wydajnosci.html

There are lots of performance charts in here.

http://www.tomshardware.com/site/vgacharts/index.html

While many cards will be compatible from a specification
perspective, I'd still look in Google, for combinations of
KT333 and whatever video card you choose.

http://www.playtool.com/pages/agpcompat/agp.html

For example, looking in Google, a user managed to run a
6600GT AGP on a KT333. But one thing you have to remember, is
that the more sophisticated the GPU, the software has more
rendering options available, and newer options might be
more demanding of CPU performance, and the end result is
the game is slower. Your R8500 would force some modern
games to use an older rendering path, which in fact, due
to its simplicity and lower visual quality, might give
faster game play. This makes upgrading a mine field,
and don't be surprised if you are less than impressed.
(Turning down the quality setting might help.)

The other factor is CPU scaling. A slow processor will
"flatten the curve", and a slow processor plus a fast
video card, is still a slow frame rate. The grey bars
on this graph, shows how a slow processor prevents fast
video cards from showing their stuff.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2003/01/20/vga_charts_ii/page5.html

If you were a proud owner of a 7000VE, no matter what
you bought, there would be an improvement. But with many
of the benchmarking charts using 4000+ processors, it is
hard to judge just what will happen for "mere mortal"
computing boxes.

Paul
 
GT said:
Would the following card offer significantly better 3D gaming performance
than my current 64MB Radeon 8500?

http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=48527&TabID=1&WorldID=&doy=1m2

Its an ATI Radeon 9250 256MB clocked at core-240MHz and memory 2x200MHz. 4
Pixel shader pipelines.

Secondly, would my motherboard be able to support this card. The card says
it supports AGP 8x, but I recently discovered that my board only does AGP
4x.

My system is Soltek SL75-DRV5 (KT333 chipset) with Athlon 2400+ with 1.5GB
RAM.

Any other GFX suggestions for around the £30-£40 mark.
Click to expand...

your 8500 is clocked around 275/275 (if memory serves me correctly) and that
9250 is definitley a step back - it may have 256mb of memory but thats
worthless as you'd never run a new game at high enough settings to use up
that memory. for that money a 9550 or 9500pro is the way to go or maybe a
2nd hand 9700.
http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/prod...2hvd19wcm9kdWN0X292ZXJ2aWV3&product_uid=62208
 
Would the following card offer significantly better 3D gaming performance
than my current 64MB Radeon 8500?

http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=48527&TabID=1&WorldID=&doy=1m2

Its an ATI Radeon 9250 256MB clocked at core-240MHz and memory 2x200MHz. 4
Pixel shader pipelines.
Click to expand...

No, you need at least a mid-level card for a reasonably
better 3D gaming performance level.

A popular choice is Geforce 6600GT, available for about $120
after rebates often.

I'd have to completely disagree with Paul, there is no
chance at all that it would run same speed, let alone slower
than your present card at any remotely modern game operating
with a fair amount of textures, 3D, etc (typical game).
I've been down that road, tried playing modern games on a
lark with Radeon 8500, Geforce 3, Integrated GF4MX (nForce2
IGP overclocked) and they're nowhere near as fast on even a
system a little less endowed than a XP2400 w/1.5GB memory.

Secondly, would my motherboard be able to support this card. The card says
it supports AGP 8x, but I recently discovered that my board only does AGP
4x.
Click to expand...

yes, your board will run it in 4X mode which is fine.

Didn't you ask this question previously?

My system is Soltek SL75-DRV5 (KT333 chipset) with Athlon 2400+ with 1.5GB
RAM.

Any other GFX suggestions for around the £30-£40 mark.
Click to expand...

There is nothing worth the bother at that price-point.
The key to getting a video upgrade is you have to spend a
certain amount just to get above that "entry-level" hump.
That hump is around $50 USD, but just a few dozen $ more and
you barely get anything but more memory. Point being, the
next few dozen dollars is a gain performance advance in your
case, a 600GT is likely at least 2-3X faster than Radeon
9250, making quite a few games playable, though you still
won't be able to crank up all the eye candy and play at
1600x1200, as that's why the $300, $500, $700 cards exist.


The absolute slowest card I'd even consider in your place
would be a Geforce FX5700 (not LE, regular or GT version
instead) or Radeon 9600XT. While it's a gamble, if you need
to make this cost the least amount possible you might try
ebay or some online forums' for-sale sections or at least
keep an eye out for sales/discounts/rebates/etc, as the
price of lower-end cards can change quite a bit.

Neither of the above cards are going to be all that great
though, generally speaking you'd be limited to 1024x768
resolution, only median detail levels and limited ansio
filtering or FSAA. A deal on a 6600GT is your best bet.
 
kony said:
No, you need at least a mid-level card for a reasonably
better 3D gaming performance level.

A popular choice is Geforce 6600GT, available for about $120
after rebates often.

I'd have to completely disagree with Paul, there is no
chance at all that it would run same speed, let alone slower
than your present card at any remotely modern game operating
with a fair amount of textures, 3D, etc (typical game).
I've been down that road, tried playing modern games on a
lark with Radeon 8500, Geforce 3, Integrated GF4MX (nForce2
IGP overclocked) and they're nowhere near as fast on even a
system a little less endowed than a XP2400 w/1.5GB memory.



yes, your board will run it in 4X mode which is fine.

Didn't you ask this question previously?



There is nothing worth the bother at that price-point.
The key to getting a video upgrade is you have to spend a
certain amount just to get above that "entry-level" hump.
That hump is around $50 USD, but just a few dozen $ more and
you barely get anything but more memory. Point being, the
next few dozen dollars is a gain performance advance in your
case, a 600GT is likely at least 2-3X faster than Radeon
9250, making quite a few games playable, though you still
won't be able to crank up all the eye candy and play at
1600x1200, as that's why the $300, $500, $700 cards exist.


The absolute slowest card I'd even consider in your place
would be a Geforce FX5700 (not LE, regular or GT version
instead) or Radeon 9600XT. While it's a gamble, if you need
to make this cost the least amount possible you might try
ebay or some online forums' for-sale sections or at least
keep an eye out for sales/discounts/rebates/etc, as the
price of lower-end cards can change quite a bit.

Neither of the above cards are going to be all that great
though, generally speaking you'd be limited to 1024x768
resolution, only median detail levels and limited ansio
filtering or FSAA. A deal on a 6600GT is your best bet.
Click to expand...

Thanks Kony. As thorough as ever! I did ask stuff recently about AGP speed,
but I didn't know about backwards compatability. I think I'll hang on a few
months until the next generation of fast bank-busting cards are released and
go for a deal on a 6600GT - I had my eye on one of those anyway, but can't
afford it at the moment!
 
Back
Top