Or get a 7600 GS - fast, cool, cheap.

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php ... &card2=387

SavageX wrote:Or get a 7600 GS - fast, cool, cheap.

Not out on AGP yet. Due in July. The first passively cooled one in Britain has my name on it.

Or of course you could get the old faithful and best graphics card in the world ever, the 6600GT as Dave has pointed out. But why does it say Ed on it?

Finally i ordered the 6600GT because i think, that it is the better choice.
Thx for your help.

Cya

Ed wrote:Or of course you could get the old faithful and best graphics card in the world ever, the 6600GT as Dave has pointed out. But why does it say Ed on it?

Might be one of the best, but I still prefer the 6800 if you can get your hands on it.

PHREAK wrote:I still prefer the 6800

The 6800 non-GT/Ultra wasn't that great a card. Not bad but not as good as the rest of the 6xxx line. It may be faster than a 6600GT in some tests but there are times when it may be slower. In a gedanken experiment where a single pixel operation must be processed a 6600GT will beat the 6800 due to higher clockspeeds. In fact, the first nVIDIA card to beat the 6600GT in this experiment is the 7800GTX 512 as it was the first nVIDIA card to have a higher clockspeed. This gedanken experiment does not take into account multiple pipelines but they sometimes make no difference.

Also it does not have quite as many video encoding/decoding features as the 6600GT. This is because it was the older NV40 architecture. Even the 6200 has better video features than the 6800 Ultra because of this.

In addition, the 6800 is made on the older 130nm process. The 6600GT is made at 110nm so the chip uses less power (this is important), runs cooler and doesn't need such a big, noisey cooler to cool it. The cards physical dimensions are also smaller. In summary, the 6800 suffers from all of the high end disadvantages. The 6600GT does not.

Some people may argue that you can unlock pipelines on the 6800. You can but it won't help you because the memory forms a bottleneck. It only runs DDR whereas the 6600GT runs DDR3.

Although the two were priced quite similarly and perform quite similarly, only one of them is the best selling graphics card ever. The other wasn't that successful.

Well, 6800 is a great one fo gaming, but try to get one for AGP Bus

Ed wrote:The 6800 non-GT/Ultra wasn't that great a card. Not bad but not as good as the rest of the 6xxx line. It may be faster than a 6600GT in some tests but there are times when it may be slower. In a gedanken experiment where a single pixel operation must be processed a 6600GT will beat the 6800 due to higher clockspeeds. In fact, the first nVIDIA card to beat the 6600GT in this experiment is the 7800GTX 512 as it was the first nVIDIA card to have a higher clockspeed. This gedanken experiment does not take into account multiple pipelines but they sometimes make no difference.

Nexuiz 1.6 uses pixel shaders very heavily on the walls, the average number of operations per pixel per pass is more than 10 (and goes up if you turn on offsetmapping which adds around 8 operations, or reliefmapping which adds around 40 operations, NOTE: these are estimates, I haven't recently checked the number of operations using the nvidia shader performance utility), so higher number of pipelines or higher core clock matters a lot more than memory speed.

Stencil shadows are still core clock/memory bound however, so turning on realtime world lights will benefit more from higher core clock or faster memory than from shader performance.

Ed wrote:Some people may argue that you can unlock pipelines on the 6800. You can but it won't help you because the memory forms a bottleneck. It only runs DDR whereas the 6600GT runs DDR3.

It may help in Nexuiz 1.6.

First of hall, what the heck happened to my post on this thread ? It's just gone without any trace or explanation... It was in no way offensive or inapropriate.

Well, here is what I said in that post :

LordHavoc wrote:NVIDIA GeForce 7600 series - good
NVIDIA GeForce 6800 series - awesome

Does the rating "good" for the 7600 series apply only to the 7600 GS or does it also apply to the 7600GT ? Because the later wouldn't make much sens. A 7600GT is much more powerfull than a 7600GS (400Mhz vs 560Mhz ! ), and a 7600GT is faster than a 6800 GT, wich is, to my knowledge, the second most powerfull GPU in the 6800 serie, ant the whole serie is rated "awesome". I don't know about the 6800 Ultra vs the 7600 GT, but there is not that much difference between a 6800 GT and a 6800 Ultra.

tChr wrote:Copy the database to the new server.
Set up both servers to work on the same database.
Change DNS
Lose nothing

Sorry dominic, nothing personal, just an accident

Urmel aus dem Eis wrote:

tChr wrote:Copy the database to the new server.
Set up both servers to work on the same database.
Change DNS
Lose nothing

Sorry dominic, nothing personal, just an accident

Well, no offense taken. It's good to know that It was nothing related to what I wrote. Other posts also disapeared on the Nexuiz 2.0 video thread. Not just mine, other people posts too. Also, my avatar just won't work, even if I set it back in my profile. It's 80x80 and less than 10k.

Back to your point, I would prefer to have a 7600GT to a 6800Ultra. Power wise the 7600GT will only just have the edge but it doesn't have any of the nasty highendedness of being big, loud, power hungry and hot.

It is PCI-E only for the moment. Give it a month or two and we may see an AGP one, along with a 7600GS. The GS isn't as fast partly because of the lower clock speed but also because the memory is DDR2, not GDDR3. 1400MHz is a lot more than 900MHz. Galaxy have produced a GDDR3 version though.

We can't be that many months off a Geforce 8. Should be out before Vista because of some overhyped thing that doesn't concern me being a Linux user.

I was talking about the 6800GT of course, and in my experience, multiple pipelines matter a lot more then higher clock speed. Then there is over-clocking as well
While older applications are more clock speed oriented, most newer ones are not and really like the greater physical amount of traffic.
I just read what I wrote and I have no idea if anyone will understand me . it IS 3am though

Ed wrote:Back to your point, I would prefer to have a 7600GT to a 6800Ultra. Power wise the 7600GT will only just have the edge but it doesn't have any of the nasty highendedness of being big, loud, power hungry and hot.

It is PCI-E only for the moment. Give it a month or two and we may see an AGP one, along with a 7600GS. The GS isn't as fast partly because of the lower clock speed but also because the memory is DDR2, not GDDR3. 1400MHz is a lot more than 900MHz. Galaxy have produced a GDDR3 version though.

We can't be that many months off a Geforce 8. Should be out before Vista because of some overhyped thing that doesn't concern me being a Linux user.

I see the first post has been edited to rate the 7600 as awesome. Maybe their should be two rating for the 7600, one for the 7600 GS and one for the 7600 GT. Is the difference big enough to justify that ?
Anyway, I think I will buy a 7600GT for my new rig, only to wait for the GeForce 8. It doesn't cost much and it should still have some resale value when the GF 8 will go out. They are rumored to got out this automn. In the mean time, the 7600GT will still be unspeakably more powerfull than the GeForce 2 Ti that I have been using for FOUR YEARS. I would have taken a 7900, but so many people are having artefacts and lockups issues with those cards, I think I will skip this one in the hope that GF 8 work correctly this time.

Anonymous wrote:I would have taken a 7900, but so many people are having artefacts and lockups issues with those cards

These are mostly related to pre-overclocked cards. A number of manuafacturers have pushed the cards a little too far and they are suffering from heat problems. You can get round this though by having better case cooling or using your computer in a cooler room, this does not mean using air conditioning.

What about ATI Radeaon Xpress 200???
is that bad to use for the overall game performance??

ZMX wrote:What about ATI Radeaon Xpress 200???
is that bad to use for the overall game performance??

yup.

The Radeon Xpress 200, even if it's pretended to be the fastest on board VGA, works with "shared" memory and, unlike it's promised, not suitable for 3D gaming. Even a Radeon R300 (the weakest current Radeon chip) works faster.

Better look for the so called "Mobility Radeon" VGAs.

Can I still play the game in
good performance if I go with low settings??
I'm saying all this because I've not installed
the game yet?

Well from what Urmal said you should have problems with most 3d games.. but at least you can download and test Nexuiz for free
There are some low setting config files included. You can use them by opening the console (shifft-escape) and entering exec low.cfg;vid_restart
the same but normal.cfg makes it use the defaults again.

ZMX wrote:Can I still play the game in
good performance if I go with low settings??
I'm saying all this because I've not installed
the game yet?

Depending on what You expect by "good performance", general performance of Your Laptop (?) and Your tweaking skills. Nevertheless it's worth a try.

Plz dont forget to tell us about yer efforts

Running First test
on ATI Xpress 200!
wish me luck

Don't worry, I can
play Unreal 2003 and Counter-Strike:Source!

It actually wiorks with my Matroix G550.. after low.cfg i run at ~20 FPS @800x600

Test Completed!
//Final_results are in,
the game in normal.cfg is
pretty slow becaus of the
powerfull OpenGL & other
small things that are in the game
makes it very hard for it to run
very fast.
//exec low.cfg
yes, this did make the game goes
insanly fast and is very kick
butt like.
//Last_words
I would like to know what kind of like
engines and graphic programs does this
game run! because my computer runs awsomness
on the Half-life2 & Source games, as well as
Unreal 2003?? It is because of this game does
not use DirectX or D3D???
Still. I like this game and I hope it grows bigger and bigger
in time, hopefully I'll open a demand once this game becomes
really huge I'll protest to try to get this game on Cyber Leagues
of all kinds

The game uses an engine called darkplaces, wich is written by Forest (LordHavoc) Hale, and based upon the quake 1 engine. Note that the engine is heavily modified, and not like a lot of people say, "quake 1". It uses darkplaces

More info about htis can be found of you read the info on www.nexuiz.com

Ed wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would have taken a 7900, but so many people are having artefacts and lockups issues with those cards

These are mostly related to pre-overclocked cards. A number of manuafacturers have pushed the cards a little too far and they are suffering from heat problems. You can get round this though by having better case cooling or using your computer in a cooler room, this does not mean using air conditioning.

Unfortunatly, this is only what was believed in the begining, because there do were other issues with the factory overclocked cards, they would freeze for a few seconds once in a while and then resume "normal" opertation. But the artefacts and complete lockup issues happen with both overclocked and NVIDIA frequencies cards, regardless of the manufacturer. Look at MSI's and ASUS sites, they make non overclocked cards and people are having problems with those too, it may just take more time before they brake. There are many rumors about the source of this problem, and almost all of them incriminate the RAM's voltage regulator on the back on the card. It's overheating, it's just not strong enough for these cards or the factory that manufactures almost all 7900 received a bad batch of regulators.... Some people on eVGA's forum say they have been told by eVGA when trying to do a RMA, to wait because they are working on a solution with NVIDIA and they can't garanty they would send a working card right now.http://www.evga.com/community/messageboard/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16519

Well, for now I'm delaying the purchase of my computer until the problem is officially fixed. I just can't convince my self to buy a 7600GT that would ALREADY be unable to run many games with all effects when I thought for so long I would have a 7900... Not to mention the power requirements of the upcoming DX10 cards are said to be between 130W and 300W just for the card, so I'm not so sure about taking a 7600GT in the mean time just to replace it for a GF 8 later, it would cost me a big power supply in addition to the cost of the card itself ! It's depressing, 4 years ago I bought my GeForce 2 Ti for less than what a 7600GT costs today and it was still capable of runnnig ANY game with foul effects for some time.

LordHavoc wrote:Mac Mini - extraordinarily slow

Mine runs it just fine. =\

ClimHazzard wrote:

LordHavoc wrote:Mac Mini - extraordinarily slow

Mine runs it just fine. =\

ppc or x86 ?

I'd just like to note, that I have a 7600GS (Asus Top Silent model with 550/950 clocks instead of the standard 400/800) and I can't enable all the effects. I can enable everything besides "realtime world lights" which causes framerate drops below 30fps in 1024x768 without AA.
(Linux x86, SDL binary)