Can't make up my mind. Will an X800 Pro do this?

L

lopoetve

Extremely [H]
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Messages
33,899
I want to run my games (Ut2k4, Serious Sam, KOTOR) at 1600x1200, 2xaa, 8xaf. Will the x800 pro do that paired with my system (Athlon64 3200+, 512 (soon 1gb) Corsair XMS3200)?

What do YOU think? None of the reviews I've been browsing through pair that kind of system with the card and that res/aa/af... Most do 1280x1024 with 4xaa.

Bah.

Should I upgrade from my 9800 Pro? (128)

EDIT: NM. Just found what I was looking for. Please delete this .. . .. .. .. ... .. .. .. -. ..
 
Actually I have a quite similar setup and have been running at those settings. The answer is some levels are quite smooth and some are rather choppy. I suppose it takes the XT to get everything smooth.
 
No the XT won't get everything smooth. Some games and types of things going on in the games are CPU dependant. So as a result the graphics card doesn't have total impact on everything going on. Enemy Ai in games for example. This has nothing to do with the graphics cards. That's all CPU.

It largely depends on the game. UT2004 is much nicer to look at and has more poly's and textures than KOTOR. But KOTOR doesn't run as well.

I can run UT2004 on my system at 1600x1200 with 4x AA and 16X AF but it's not as smooth as 1280x1024 with 4X AA and 16x AF. So I choose the later as my resolution of choice.

Same with Painkiller. But both games are very playable at 1600x1200. It's really a matter of personal preference. I don't consider the tradeoff of FPS worth it at 1600x1200 vs. 1280x1024. But in Soldier of Fortune II or alot of other games such as Command and Conquer Generals, I run those at 1600x1200.

In short if you have the money get the X800XT if you really want to run at that resolution. But don't think that the X800Pro can't do it. It's almost and in some cases twice the speed of your 9800Pro. In many games it runs just as well as the X800XT. But again I believe that these games are CPU bottlenecked or otherwise FPS capped.
 
Sir-Fragalot said:
No the XT won't get everything smooth. Some games and types of things going on in the games are CPU dependant. So as a result the graphics card doesn't have total impact on everything going on. Enemy Ai in games for example. This has nothing to do with the graphics cards. That's all CPU.

It largely depends on the game. UT2004 is much nicer to look at and has more poly's and textures than KOTOR. But KOTOR doesn't run as well.

I can run UT2004 on my system at 1600x1200 with 4x AA and 16X AF but it's not as smooth as 1280x1024 with 4X AA and 16x AF. So I choose the later as my resolution of choice.

Same with Painkiller. But both games are very playable at 1600x1200. It's really a matter of personal preference. I don't consider the tradeoff of FPS worth it at 1600x1200 vs. 1280x1024. But in Soldier of Fortune II or alot of other games such as Command and Conquer Generals, I run those at 1600x1200.

In short if you have the money get the X800XT if you really want to run at that resolution. But don't think that the X800Pro can't do it. It's almost and in some cases twice the speed of your 9800Pro. In many games it runs just as well as the X800XT. But again I believe that these games are CPU bottlenecked or otherwise FPS capped.
Click to expand...


open up that cpu then....hehe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top