Looking for new video card (Help)

[McGooTheWise]

I've been looking at video cards for a while, but I can't really tell what a good one would be. Really I'm wondering if i should go with an 8 series, or just wait till I can get a 9 series. Which is a better choice, you guys tell me. I have a 7600GT right now, and it runs all the Half-Life games on the highest setting for now, but in episode 2 my frame rates drop to 30 when I get into the forest. I just want a nice smooth, good looking game, but I'm not sure what card will give me that.

Please help, and any help is much appreciated.

 

[Escaep]

What are the rest of your specs, and what is your budget?

 

[McGooTheWise]

Memory:
RAM: 3071 Mb

Sound card:
Audio device: SB X-Fi Audio [AF00]

Video Card:
Driver: NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT

Hard Drive:
Total Hard Disk Space: 360

Processor:
Model: Intel Pentium D Core 2 duo 3.60ghz

Hope that helps.

And I'm running Windows XP home edition, if that makes a difference.

Also, my budget is about $300, but I would like to spend less than that, if possible.

OH! I also have a 550 watt power supply.

 

[Sedako]

Assuming you have a PCI-E compliant motherboard (which considering you have a Core 2, you should), I would certainly suggest you pick up a Radeon 4850. This card is incredible for the price, and you'll be able to run anything you throw at it quite well assuming you aren't using a giant 30" display. I have one, and I can play all my games with at least 4xAA and the highest settings possible at 1600x1200 (even Crysis runs decently, but who cares about crysis ).

 

[McGooTheWise]

That's a pretty good card. See, with my card, I can't run any AA in my games (Except GTA:SA, but who cares about that.) so that would be an improvement, but I'm looking more for something that will last. But, maybe, if I can't get a better match I'll get that one, so I have it bookmarked.

 

[Sedako]

The 4850 will surely last. However, if you want something more powerful at the expense of approaching your budget limit, the 4870 is a step up for around $255 after rebate. It may be closer to what you're looking for:

 

[McGooTheWise]

Well, how bout this one? I've been searching around newegg, and I stumbled across this. I really don't know much about cards, so that's why I had to ask.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814145157

There were no user reviews so I'm not in a hurry to buy it, by any means, and I'm planning to look a hell of a lot more, because I'm going to help my friend build his computer, so I'm looking for both of us, but we've both decided we want to run L4D highest and smoothest as possible when it comes out, and still blow other PCs out of the water with out FPS.

So, we're both investing. I like the look of the radeon though.

And, yes, I do have a PCI-E. AGP is for grandpas.

 

[MRG]

Perhaps i'm just Bias, but i'll second the nomination for the HD 4850. This card friggen screams. Your PC is much better than mine, & so far, every game I have thrown at my system, has run smooth as silk with all settings maxed out.

So far tested:
1) Gears Of War
2) Oblivion
3) GRAW2
4) Assassins Creed

-MRG

 

[Sedako]

The 9600GT is closer to the 8800GT in terms of performance, and the already mentioned 4850 outperforms both of them handily. I would suggest that you choose between either the 4850 or the 4870, as there is no card in between their price that beats the 4850.

 

[McGooTheWise]

Alright, I see what you're saying. The Radeon's specs look a little better as well, and I don't need the extra memory.

One more thing, I won't need a more powerful power supply to max this card, will I? I've been worried about that since I got it, because I see all these other computers running at 700watts with smaller things than I have. I put it down to if I don't run more than one card it would be fine, but I guess I'm just paranoid.

 

[Sedako]

Both the 4800s card should run fine on a power supply of around 450W minimum, so long as it has a decent 12V rail that can supply enough current. As long as you have a well known brand, that's usually the case.

 

[McGooTheWise]

Alright. I'm going for the 4850 since it's cheaper. There isn't a single review for it that doesn't give it 5... err... Eggs... either... So that's always a good sign. Thanks for the help.

 

[Sedako]

Just understand that there is a bug present with these cards that makes the fan run at a low speed, causing the temps to run a bit high. There is a pretty easy temporary fix for this until they fix it through drivers: http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1320351

 

[AiM]

I am a bit confused, are you running a 32-bit OS with a 64-bit processor there?

 

[Sedako]

I am a bit confused, are you running a 32-bit OS with a 64-bit processor there?

All of Intel's chips starting at the Core 2s support both 32 and 64 bit OS's. I think some of the pentiums did as well.

 

[CyberPitz]

I'm running a 32 bit OS with 64 bit processor? What's it to ya?

 

[AiM]

All of Intel's chips starting at the Core 2s support both 32 and 64 bit OS's. I think some of the pentiums did as well.

Oh, but wouldn't using a 32-bit OS bottleneck your dual / quad core performance? As I know there's certain programs out there that have dedicated 64 bit exe's which I assume, better utilizes the power from multi-core cpus. I didn't think those same exe's would run under 32 bit OS environment, or maybe I'm wrong.

I'm running a 32 bit OS with 64 bit processor? What's it to ya?

^ Above

 

[McGooTheWise]

Oh, but wouldn't using a 32-bit OS bottleneck your dual / quad core performance? As I know there's certain programs out there that have dedicated 64 bit exe's which I assume, better utilizes the power from multi-core cpus. I didn't think those same exe's would run under 32 bit OS environment, or maybe I'm wrong.

The only problem with that is, however, that all 64bit operatings systems, atm, suck hardcore. :/

 

[Sedako]

Oh, but wouldn't using a 32-bit OS bottleneck your dual / quad core performance? As I know there's certain programs out there that have dedicated 64 bit exe's which I assume, better utilizes the power from multi-core cpus. I didn't think those same exe's would run under 32 bit OS environment, or maybe I'm wrong.

The CPU's performance will not be effected by going from 32-bit to 64-bit. This only time you will ever see a difference is if a program has been written to natively run in 64-bit, and this is because more memory will be available for that program. It does not change how the CPU processes the program. Vista 64-bit's WOW32 allows it to run 32-bit applications on par with Vista 32-bit. Currently, with the lack of native 64-bit programs (especially games in this case), the main reason for running a 64-bit OS is that it will address far more than the 4GB system RAM cap present in 32-bit OS's.

The only problem with that is, however, that all 64bit operatings systems, atm, suck hardcore. :/

While this was certainly true and still is for XP 64-bit, Vista 64-bit is just as stable as Vista 32-bit. This time around, support for Vista 64-bit is excellent, except in the sound card market. I've been running Vista 64-bit since SP1 was leaked, and I've had no problems at all.