9600Pro or 9800Pro ???

[Fat_Bob]

Ive just got the money to buy myself the ATI radeon 9800Pro.. when i see a lot of posts saying that my specs will be a bottleneck for the 9800Pro...

Amd Athlon 1700+ (1.46Ghz)
512mb Sdram
55Gb seagate
Mobo : K7S5A

So i wonder..
Should i get the 9800Pro and ignore the fact that my comp may bee a bottlenecker, or should i take my money and by myself a 9600Pro now or even wait and bye That ASUS 9600XT (which seems very good with cooling and all...)

Response is appreciated...

 

[nw909]

I have no clue but wtf is wrong with your avatar?

 

[TheRook]

your cpu wont really bottleneck it too badly... people are obsessed with saying a 1.47 gig cpu is shit... but it will do fine... your cpu really will only be used for physics and things... but you can always upgrade teh cpu and mem before hl2 comes out

the 9800pro is a great beast

@TheRook

 

[dawdler]

Something will always be a bottleneck. But thinking you might soon want to upgrade the entire computer (well, maybe not soon, but sooner than you would upgrade a 2.5ghz) I would actually advise a cheaper 9600Pro and save the money to get a better computer later
But that's just how I think, not sure everyone would agree...

 

[Fat_Bob]

I have that idea to dawdler... i mean, X-mas is soon coming right =)
*horrible laughf*

 

[Aknot]

Or using dawdlers advice get the best video card now and do a mobo/chip upgrade in the future. The 9800 (esp a 256 ver.) SHOULD last for 3 years. I do not see any games that are coming that will tax that card. course I could be wrong.

 

[Fat_Bob]

Yeah.. maybe your right.. well, im a little confused about it now...
damn...

 

[Aknot]

Originally posted by Fat_Bob
Yeah.. maybe your right.. well, im a little confused about it now...
damn...

I hear ya. I usually NEVER buy top of the line. I buy what was "hot" a year or two ago. This is the first time I am going to "shoot the wad" so to speak and have $400 for a video card. BUT will wait till the last minute to buy.

 

[dawdler]

I instead wait a long time, I went from a Geforce256 DDR to a 9700 Pro (and I didnt get it when it was hot from the oven, I got it in january/february, if you can believe it I was actually waiting for the FX to come out).

The thing with buying a new card now and expect it to last 3 years *might* be a very very wrong assumption. Cause when the next year rolls around, we will see a new generation. The BX (or was it BT, cant remember ) form factor will require a totally new computer, you'll probably want the 64bits processors which should speed up things quite a bit (especially when the programs come), and on top of this is the PCI Express that will require a new graphics card, ie the Loki or NV40.

My beleif is that now is a really bad time to upgrade. But its hard to see... In 6 months or so it should be more obvious which is (was) right

And of course, I could be completely wrong

 

[Aknot]

Im basing my assumptions on the games that are coming out. Not hardware. HW has (in the last 6 to 8 years) always been a head of the software. So unless we are expecting a Source killer within the next 3 years I feel the 9800 256 will last. What games are there that people are waiting on? D3, HL2 and DNF. Anything else in the pipes that I am aware of is a little behind those 3 (2) titles with regards to taxing a VC. Add to system specs etc. and so fourth we are probably both wrong and both right.

 

[dawdler]

Far Cry, Stalker, a dozen others... But true, we dont know the extent of it. But just imagine it, 8-9 months ago the R300 was on top of the world. Nothing could rival it in wannabe DX8.5 games (those that had one DX9 shader or so). It rocked with AA/AF at highly superior speed. Even the FX rocks in those game at very high speeds. Then HL2 comes along, and suddenly everything is nearing a crawl on anything but the top of the line... Actually, HL2 wasnt even the first. The last 6 months all cards have been pulled down to a crawl by modern games.

A new game could be even worse, and easily be out in 6 months (it isnt announced yet). Remember, we are only seeing the dawn of DX9. Not the epitome.

 

[Aknot]

Far Cry.... delayed... Stalker have not heard of. Far cry though looking nice has some "low" system specs at least a month or so they did.

"thank you for your interest in our technology CryENGINE. The lowest PC configuration to enjoy the capability of CryENGINE is:
Pentium P3, 733 MHz, Geforce 3 or similar, 256 MB RAM.

If you need furhter information, please get back to me."

Course key word being lowest. Got a link for Stalker?

 

[Aknot]

I guess I also do not "crank" settings. So maybe I am a little biased in my "thought" process. Very few games make me go "wow" need a new video card/proc/mobo. HL2 is the first. Well actually DNF was the one I was waiting for but we know how that ended up.

 

[TheRook]

Originally posted by Aknot
Far Cry.... delayed... Stalker have not heard of. Far cry though looking nice has some "low" system specs at least a month or so they did.

"thank you for your interest in our technology CryENGINE. The lowest PC configuration to enjoy the capability of CryENGINE is:
Pentium P3, 733 MHz, Geforce 3 or similar, 256 MB RAM.

If you need furhter information, please get back to me."

Course key word being lowest. Got a link for Stalker?

HL2's engine needs a less powerful gcard on its minimum spec...

so its not "low" enough

therook

 

[Aknot]

Also just got word back from Avni of Far Cry:

"Hi Jim,
Everything is on track. That is just rumors.
Thanks,"

Not delayed. Vicious rumors!