Graphics Card Help...

[Willy]

Hay all,

Im in the process of building a new pc and am wanting to run an sli set up. I have a Ge Force 6600GT 256mb.

I was wondering, could i upgrade to a better card and run the two together, should i buy another one the exact same or should i cut my losses sell the card and just buy one card. Suggestions...

By the way my funds arnt any more than £100.

Cheers All

Willy

[Krisboats]

Well SLI is ROUGHLY double the power of your original card, but its not always twice as fast, you might see a 25-45% increase but its still not as much as a new card all together. I reckon if you were to sell your current 6600gt you'd get around £50-60 for it. Leaving you with around £150 quid to spend.

For this price you could either pick up a cheap geforce 7900/7950 or an ati x1800/x1900 but in this price range the ati's beat the 7900's for almost everything. Something like this card would be far faster than your current card spec, even when running in SLI. Plus it leaves you scope to make it a crossfire card in the future.

Should you insistantly want to stick with nvidia though, which some people do despite ATI cards being better for the same price. Something like this would work, but i'd try to stretch an extra £20 or so to get one of these, being leadtek it should overclock quite well too.

Here's some geeks talking about which ones are better, seems two 6600's are less powerful than a 7600gt so a 7900/7950 would be far better. Heres soem more geeks on the subject.

In conclusion, i'd say get a faster single card. Anything over a 7600gt and you'll have a faster rig than if you had SLI.

[Willy]

Just out of interest would i be able to buy an ati, as my motherboard is nVidia specific as far am im aware. Sorry dont quite understand the compatability issues there...

Just to let you know, i know someone in the trade and would be able to get trade price on the card/s.

Cheers for the help

Willy

Edited December 5, 2006 by Willy

[Krisboats]

I dont think it'd be a problem but theres some essay like posts on here explaining it in a bit more detail.

EDIT: At the end of the thread the geezer who sounds like he knows his stuff says for single cards either will work in any PCI-E slot but you can't run crossfire on an SLI board and vica versa, which is exactly what i was under the impression of too.

Edited December 5, 2006 by Krisboats

[poopipe]

first up - the ati vs nvidia debate

ATI drivers are shite so regardless of what the card does on paper the likelyhood of it being better in real life is slim.

IF you're lucky enough to get a good batch of drivers (it's a big if in my experience) then an ATI will probably outperform the equivalent nvidia.

An nvidia card will improve with age because the drivers improve and add features - it is very rare that an update will result in lower performance (unlike my experiences with ATI)

next - what to buy....

I run a pair of 6600GTs in my machine - it equates to roughly the same performance as a 6800GT and at the time I bought them the pair cost £100 less than a single 6800GT.

If you can get a 512mb 7600gt for your £150 I think kris is probably right. If not you'll likely get better performance on current games out of 2 256mb 6600GTs than one 256mb 7600gt.

why? more memory = bigger textures without thrashing , current games don't use a lot of the new features on the 7000 series and until Vista is properly with us they won't start

just a thought...

If you can find a 512mb 6800 ultra for the right money - that would probably give you more grunt than the 7600gt on current games

[munkee]

Since graphics cards are being talked about.. im sorting out (i say i.. andy did all the hard work im just f**king around with it trying to look clever) a new pc spec.

Found out i can use some of my dads parts so ive ended up with a bit of money left over about £60 extra.

Originally had spec'd a GeForce 7900 GS 256mb but ive used the extra money to push up to the 512mb version. Was it worth the extra to push to 512mb? I know f**k all about computers but i figure id rather have a good 256mb card than a low end 512mb so now i dont know whether i should just use the money on something else.

Edited December 5, 2006 by Spacemunkee

[Willy]

Well at the minute from what you 2 guys have just said, I reckon ill stick with the one 6600GT for the time being and then after christmas (money) ill upgrade to a 7950 512mb. If your interested im building this up so I can play Moh:A (Medal Of Honor Airborne) and Cod 3 (when and if they release it on pc).

Big Thank you to all for the help

Willy

[poopipe]

Was it worth the extra to push to 512mb? I know f**k all about computers but i figure id rather have a good 256mb card than a low end 512mb so now i dont know whether i should just use the money on something else.

if I had a choice between a 512mb 6600 (not that they make them) and a 256mb 6800ultra I'd choose the ultra - the performance hike between the 600 and 800 series is massive.

if you're talking lower end cards then more memory is probably the best option cos more memory means bigger textures at better frame rates. if it's only 60 notes you might as well - what else are you going to spend it on ?

[munkee]

if I had a choice between a 512mb 6600 (not that they make them) and a 256mb 6800ultra I'd choose the ultra - the performance hike between the 600 and 800 series is massive.

if you're talking lower end cards then more memory is probably the best option cos more memory means bigger textures at better frame rates. if it's only 60 notes you might as well - what else are you going to spend it on ?

[attachmentid=8539]

Well this is the current possible spec so far. Im lookin to spend around £600 dont care if its like £40 over if its gonna give me a better system (not just a ah well you have the money mase well spend it). Going to be using a lot of cad and source

Edited December 5, 2006 by Spacemunkee

[Willy]

just a thought...

If you can find a 512mb 6800 ultra for the right money - that would probably give you more grunt than the 7600gt on current games

Just fount one going on ebay, may watch it... How much should i be spending and would a 7950 be a safer buy for the future etc?

Cheers

Willy

[Krisboats]

[attachmentid=8539]

Well this is the current possible spec so far. Im lookin to spend around £600 dont care if its like £40 over if its gonna give me a better system (not just a ah well you have the money mase well spend it). Going to be using a lot of cad and source

How about an extra £30-35? Better graphics card

As far as i'm aware the GS only has 20 pipelines and the 7950GT has 24, meaning lots more performance. Still has the 512mb of graphics ram too to keep poopipe happy lol.

That spec is exactly the same as what i'm looking to get with my christmas money/any money left over that i set aside for other peoples presents.

Only real difference is i'm going for one of these motherboards instead because aparantly the MSI one isn't very good with overclocking the CPU we're both after. I think you can expect speeds of around 2.2-2.4 Ghz with the MSI and around 2.8-3.2 with the Gigabyte one.

Depends what you're after really though.

[anzo]

That RAM won't work. Get the Samsung PC2-5300U (2x1GB) its a little more expensive that the G Skill, about £200, but it works well.

I bought that same RAM for my system (GigaByte motherboard (DS3), E6600 Core 2 ect) and it wouldnt work at all. Save the hassle and get the Samsung.

Also - The Thermal Paste isnt needed. CPU comes with some on which is adiquate so as long as you don't f**k it up when installing it, you should be fine But if you do feck it up, it can be bought from any computer shop, usually a lot cheaper than that!

Edited December 5, 2006 by anzo

[poopipe]

How about an extra £30-35? Better graphics card

ooo.

the GS is the AGP version isn't it ?

that particular example would be PCI express.

couldn't be bothered to read the spec so make sure you get the right one

oh, and a 7950 is badass - you'll get a couple of years out of it no trouble

Edited December 5, 2006 by poopipe

[munkee]

hmmm i was actually thinking of overclocking the cpu a little.. gotta start somewhere nothing major but from what i have read the 1.86 can get some pretty decent gains.

Ill adjust the spec now and post a new one up see what everyone thinks

Cant find the ram anzo where abouts can i get it? overclockers and ccl dont have it, or is there an alternative so i can just order from one place.

[Krisboats]

Looks like an alright spec now

[munkee]

Cheap as chips so far as well.. compared to how much my laptop cost.. but sadly it gets too hot now for cad to run smooth

One last thing.. found out just that case at home wont work according to my mate wrong size or sum shit.. anyone recommend anything? Sommat with fans included.. saves me noncing around buying shit.

Edited December 5, 2006 by Spacemunkee

[poopipe]

Cheap as chips so far as well.. compared to how much my laptop cost.. but sadly it gets too hot now for cad to run smooth

One last thing.. found out just that case at home wont work according to my mate wrong size or sum shit.. anyone recommend anything? Sommat with fans included.. saves me noncing around buying shit.

definitely a bigger power supply

400w isn't anything like enough power with that graphics card - go for 600W with an SLI sticker to be safe

you'd probably get away with 500 if you only have the one hard drive and not too many components but I wouldn't trust it.

[stav]

hmmm if i was you i would pop onto a proper computing website for a wider amount of feedback, what monitor are you going to be running this all on? as if you aren't running it on anything bigger then a 19" TFT then a 512mb compared to a 256 is not going to make any difference in what you can actually see compared to how much extra you paid for it. Secondly ATI drivers arent that bad at all but if you use OMEGA drivers instead then you'll be open to alot more options.

i would surrgest going on bit-tech.net website and all the guys and gals on there spend far too much time with computers and have a great collective knowledge.

Stav

EDIT: i would go for a ATI X1950 Pro 256mb if i was you http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct....rodid=GX-067-HT reviews and price are wikid

Edited December 5, 2006 by stav

[poopipe]

as if you aren't running it on anything bigger then a 19" TFT then a 512mb compared to a 256 is not going to make any difference in what you can actually see compared to how much extra you paid for it.

what?

any card with more than 32mb can display decent resolutions in 2d.

more memory means more textures and geometry can be stored on the card so there's less memory thrashing which translates to more solid framerates when doing 3d.

If you're doing CAD you absolutely must have lots of graphics memory and as much memory bandwidth as you can afford - which is why the 7950 is a good card for those that haven't got £1800 to spend on a Quadro.

[munkee]

what?

any card with more than 32mb can display decent resolutions in 2d.

more memory means more textures and geometry can be stored on the card so there's less memory thrashing which translates to more solid framerates when doing 3d.

If you're doing CAD you absolutely must have lots of graphics memory and as much memory bandwidth as you can afford - which is why the 7950 is a good card for those that haven't got £1800 to spend on a Quadro.

Yeap been doing a f**k load of cad, at the minute designing houses with over 100 layers... the rendering is what is taking the f**king piss and general orbiting. Laptop gets so hot its starts doing crazy shit like snapping to imaginary places etc. Have to resort to wire view which of course is a complete maze when your trying to find one edge.

Any recommendations for power units? something quiet would be nice ( running 2 hard drives 160gb and a ...350? or 325 i forget what it is now for keeping my cad back ups on)

Edited December 5, 2006 by Spacemunkee

[stav]

what?

any card with more than 32mb can display decent resolutions in 2d.

more memory means more textures and geometry can be stored on the card so there's less memory thrashing which translates to more solid framerates when doing 3d.

If you're doing CAD you absolutely must have lots of graphics memory and as much memory bandwidth as you can afford - which is why the 7950 is a good card for those that haven't got £1800 to spend on a Quadro.

hmmmm well thats lovely but to be realistic its actually makes no difference in computer games unless runing on a big ass monitor, is this rig being made for games or CAD work as it has not been stated and seeing you were considering SLI then i belived your were building a gaming rig.

[munkee]

[attachmentid=8539]

Well this is the current possible spec so far. Im lookin to spend around £600 dont care if its like £40 over if its gonna give me a better system (not just a ah well you have the money mase well spend it). Going to be using a lot of cad and source

Both, want it to do all my everyday shit.. then to be able to use it as my cad beast when im doing all my graphics design shit for uni/work

[stav]

i thought this tread was for WILLY nevermind lol

[Willy]

LOL Stav theres many people in here helping each other!

Still cant decide, hold out and just wait until i have the money for a 7950 or cut my losses and just buy a 6800 512mb ultra...

Willy

[poopipe]

hmmmm well thats lovely but to be realistic its actually makes no difference in computer games unless runing on a big ass monitor,

that's just wrong.

at its most simplistic if you have more memory you can fit more textures on the card and the game will run faster - doubling the memory is the difference between running at half detail textures and full detail.

Doom3 requires 512mb on your card to turn everything up to top detail and a pair of 512mb cards to run it at a respectable frame rate with all the spangles turned on.

to be less simplistic. rendering the final picture is only a tiny part of the overall resource usage - i can't be arsed to work the exact numbers out but it's just under 4mb per frame at 1024x768 with triple buffering we can call it 12mb.

Textures, antialiasing, texture filtering, pixel shaders, geometry, and even physics are dealt with on modern graphics cards and they all eat up memory.

If you can't fit everything into memory then the machine has to use your RAM - the swapping in and out of data is a lot slower than processing it in the graphics memory on the card which causes performance to drop and frame rates to become erratic.

Currently textures take up more space than anything else - an uncompressed 1024x1024 pixel image is roughly 4mb - you wont fit many of them in 256 mb. Obviously the textures are compressed in the card memory but when you consider that these days in your average FPS there'll be 3-4 layers of image per shader (diffuse, normal, specular and detail maps plus any pixel shader effects like hair), 3-4 shaders per player and hundreds of multilayer textures in the environment you run out of memory pretty damn quickly.

obviously there's a practical limit where getting more memory won't help but it definitely isn't in the realms of 256-512mb - somewhere around the 2gb mark is more like it although it won't be long before that becomes normal