Graphics Card for Colin McRae 3 and NFS
#11
Posted 07 February 2004 - 09:43 AM
totally different product, one is DirectX8.0 card and the other is
DirectX9.0 card. If you have enough money to spend then just go for
anything better than FX5600, otherwise just get the GF4Ti card, eventhough
it only support DirectX8.0 but its definitely run faster then FX5200 sub
par DirectX9.0 performance.
#12
Posted 07 February 2004 - 03:41 PM
bit. the rest was fine. but i guess the lag is cause by my slow
precessor. overclock to 933. ram only 256. sd somemore.
Just make sure the graphic card's memory are 128 bit. see the pieces of
memory used. if it was 4 piece then it is 128. if 8 piece it is 64 bit
only.
#13
Posted 07 February 2004 - 11:45 PM
must. I did read a review from magazine testing many brands of FX series
card.
One manufacturer use 64-bit instead of 128-bit on Fx5600 card in order to
bring down the price. However the tested result is it run even slower that
GF4Ti 4200.
#14
Posted 08 February 2004 - 02:44 PM
bits.
#15
Posted 08 February 2004 - 04:21 PM
won't usually get you faster. The bottleneck is actual on the memory bus
width, not the actual memory size itself(while it does affect the actual
performance to certain extend). You can have 1G of memory in your trustee
GF2/GF3 but it still won't be able to out perform any GF4 card. And yes
128bit memory bus is definitely a plus now a day if you want to really
enhance your gaming experience. Remember FX5800? It lacked behind
ATI9800, why? Cause Nvidia made a mistake by putting in 128bit memory bus
instead of ATI 256bit. Now they came back by putting 256bit memory bus
into their latest product namely FX5950, only now they start to closing
in the gap with ATI.
#16
Posted 08 February 2004 - 05:00 PM
64MB DDR(128 bit). Playing my friend's RalliSport Challenge and wow!
Graphics is
amazing!! Well, maybe I'm used to el cheapo graphics card last time... [:O)
]
Will be getting hold of a NFSU soon!!
#17
Posted 09 February 2004 - 12:38 AM
samlsc : anything you buy would be better than what you have now, just
remember to stay away from crippled versions, e.g. MX series from nVidia
and SE's from ATI
#18
Posted 12 February 2004 - 10:32 PM
you got the 128bit and 128 MB all wrong.
Of couse I know most of the middle to high end graphic card has at least
64MB (megabyte) RAM to 256 MB (MegaByte) RAM.
However for the same capacity of RAM (e.g. 64MB, 128MB) the still have
some differences. One is the number of bit.
So what we are discussing is about the number of bit used by the RAM.
For example a card with 128MB (megabyte) may be constructed using 64-Bit
memory Arcitecture OR 128-Bit memory Arcitecture.
So, If your card is using 128MB with 64-Bit Arcitecture then your card
will be slower than the one using 128-bit.
#19
Posted 12 February 2004 - 10:38 PM
You got a good choice. Actually, your card is a bit faster (1-3 frame per
second) when compare to MSI GF4TI4200 128 MB (The one I used). Asking why,
It use faster memory (Hey don't mix up with XX-bit arcitecture), now is
the clock for the RAM.
By the way, where u buy it. All GF4TI series card are obsolete in Ipoh
liao.
#20
Posted 15 February 2004 - 11:26 AM
How much for Graphic card that using PCI slot,my computer only got
PCI slot,no AGP..currently running on P3 866,256mb sdram,Nvidia TNT 32mb
pro,running on XP pro,I think my graphic card is lower one...can I
upgrade it to higher one...what the higher for PCI slot one...expensive
or not?Please help...because I want to play this NFS Underground and CC
General...tq.