Jump to content
Ghost Recon.net Forums

X800GTO, X1600PRO or X1600XT?


Recommended Posts

Have you read the other threads where Bo has outlined what types of machines can run GRAW on high settings?

Also, have you tried that thread that reads your system specs and gives you a pass/fail scale and to what degree?

Link to post
Share on other sites

lol i'm not even going to say what i was about to say.

____________________________________________

o/t it'll run @ medium settings, only cards that will run graw @ high will be the

1900 XTX (512 mb vers.) & 7900GTX

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am not mistaken there is a list of GFX cards in that thread that is recommended for running GR:AW.

If I have a few minutes, I'll try to find you a link.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Should run good then :D

Bo said that the card to run the this game at the highest resolutions at max settings doesn't exist yet. He added that if you are buying a videocard today, you're going to want one of the 512MB vidcards, either the ATI 1900 series or NVidia 7900GTX.

The 1600 will run the game, sure, but NOT on max settings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

F.E.A.R. is the most demanding game out right now. I suspect that GR:AW will be comparable in its demands. If you're buying a card now, and you want to estimate how well it might run the best of upcoming games, a decent strategy is to look at benchmarks for F.E.A.R..

I know this is not incredibly accurate, and I know they would also need to consider the rest of their system against the benchmark's testbed, but I trust it more for GR:AW--vidcard estimation than the link to that system--game compatibility page. Look at it this way: if GR:AW is more demanding than F.E.A.R., you did the best you could by estimating against the most demanding game available. If GR:AW is less demanding, then you helped yourself with future apps.

Keep in mind that you're going to want more than 30f/s for playability, but if you want it look its best and be perfectly fluid, you're going to want over 60f/s.

Anyway, from benchmarks at Anandtech:

@ Anandtech.com -- F.E.A.R 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 with high-end cards

@ Anandtech.com -- F.E.A.R 1024x768 and 1280x1024 with mid-range cards

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi ,just wondering if i may be able to have settings turned all the way up or not?

System:

CPU = Pentium D 805 Dual Core 64 bit 2 x 2.66 GHz

Ram = 1GB DDR2 533MHz

GFX = SAPPHIRE ATI RADEON X1600 PRO 256MB

??

You might wanna get another gigabyte of ram.

PS: will run like cr4p, like Atari graphics, but without colors, it´s gonna svck big time on your PC :blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi ,just wondering if i may be able to have settings turned all the way up or not?

System:

CPU = Pentium D 805 Dual Core 64 bit 2 x 2.66 GHz

Ram = 1GB DDR2 533MHz

GFX = SAPPHIRE ATI RADEON X1600 PRO 256MB

??

You might wanna get another gigabyte of ram.

PS: will run like cr4p, like Atari graphics, but without colors, it´s gonna svck big time on your PC :blink:

are you downright retarded?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi ,just wondering if i may be able to have settings turned all the way up or not?

System:

CPU = Pentium D 805 Dual Core 64 bit 2 x 2.66 GHz

Ram = 1GB DDR2 533MHz

GFX = SAPPHIRE ATI RADEON X1600 PRO 256MB

??

You might wanna get another gigabyte of ram.

PS: will run like cr4p, like Atari graphics, but without colors, it´s gonna svck big time on your PC :blink:

are you downright retarded?

Remmember, not using your brain helps to keep it young for a longer time, so be retarded like me.

PS: Speaking seriously now another GB of ram would be nice for his PC

Edited by 3rdMillhouse
Link to post
Share on other sites
Oblivion blows FEAR away on computer stress, actually.

Okay, almost identical testbeds, and --

1280mtshdr.gif

11157.png

So 54 and 52 for Oblivion vs. 59 and 61 for F.E.A.R.. There's going to be a difference in HDR for the Oblivion vs. AA for F.E.A.R., but I don't know what that impact is.

Anyway, I don't know if I'd say "blows F.E.A.R. away" though you are obviously correct -- Oblivion is more taxing than F.E.A.R.. :thumbsup: So use Oblivion if you like. If your potential card is on it, it's likely a better estimator for the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
So would the 512mb version of the card i said above be better?

Sure, Wabby, but how much?

Look, you're asking if a $130 entry-level gaming card will run max settings on a game that the devs said you needed $500 high-end enhusiast card to even get close to max settings. The answer is simple -- NO. You won't be running max settings with a card in the entrey-level price range.

I can't even find reviews of the 1600pro card, but the earlier link to midrange cards benchmarked on F.E.A.R. had the X1600XT, and

@ 1280x1024 -- 23f/s (unplayable)

@ 1024x768 -- 33 f/s(playable, but not smooth and will stutter)

Keep in mind, that's the 1600XT which is better than the 1600pro you're asking about. The 1600pro is not meant to play new games maxed out; it's meant to allow people to play current games at medium to low resolutions with medium to low settings.

Also, if I remember correctly, you were getting a 17 or 19 inch LCD. If that's the case, that means your LCD's native resolution is 1280x1024 and you NEED to play games at 1280x1024 for the games to look right.

If that's the case, that means that at an absolute, bare minimum you want a 7600GT at the $180 pricepoint, which will run F.E.A.R. @ 1280x1024 at a barely playable 31 f/s, but more likely you want a 7900GT at the $300 pricepoint, which will run F.E.A.R. at 41 f/s at that resolution.

If you can't swallow $300 for a vidcard, and most people understandably can't, then go for the $180 7600GT. It's your best option. If you can't swallow the $180, save until you can. I wouldn't go for less than that.

Keep in mind that this is all estimation based off of one of the most demanding games out right now and an assumption that GR:AW will be similar in its demands. GR:AW may be more demanding. GR:AW may be a little less demanding. We don't know yet. And anyone who is thinking of upgrading would be better off waiting for the demo (at least) to be released before actually upgrading. :yes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
So would the 512mb version of the card i said above be better?

Sure, Wabby, but how much?

Look, you're asking if a $130 entry-level gaming card will run max settings on a game that the devs said you needed $500 high-end enhusiast card to even get close to max settings. The answer is simple -- NO. You won't be running max settings with a card in the entrey-level price range.

I can't even find reviews of the 1600pro card, but the earlier link to midrange cards benchmarked on F.E.A.R. had the X1600XT, and

@ 1280x1024 -- 23f/s (unplayable)

@ 1024x768 -- 33 f/s(playable, but not smooth and will stutter)

Keep in mind, that's the 1600XT which is better than the 1600pro you're asking about. The 1600pro is not meant to play new games maxed out; it's meant to allow people to play current games at medium to low resolutions with medium to low settings.

Also, if I remember correctly, you were getting a 17 or 19 inch LCD. If that's the case, that means your LCD's native resolution is 1280x1024 and you NEED to play games at 1280x1024 for the games to look right.

If that's the case, that means that at an absolute, bare minimum you want a 7600GT at the $180 pricepoint, which will run F.E.A.R. @ 1280x1024 at a barely playable 31 f/s, but more likely you want a 7900GT at the $300 pricepoint, which will run F.E.A.R. at 41 f/s at that resolution.

If you can't swallow $300 for a vidcard, and most people understandably can't, then go for the $180 7600GT. It's your best option. If you can't swallow the $180, save until you can. I wouldn't go for less than that.

Keep in mind that this is all estimation based off of one of the most demanding games out right now and an assumption that GR:AW will be similar in its demands. GR:AW may be more demanding. GR:AW may be a little less demanding. We don't know yet. And anyone who is thinking of upgrading would be better off waiting for the demo (at least) to be released before actually upgrading. :yes:

Well, i have £200 to play with, but that needs to get me a DVD+-rw aswell. . .

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to ubi forums, the card i was going to buy is in the HIGH END section :S

HIGH-END These cards a more than enough, and definitely should play GRAW with good settings

* Radeon X1600pro

* Radeon X800

* GeForce 6800 (AGP version)

* Radeon X800GTO (256MB version)

* Radeon X1600XT

* GeForce 6800GS

* Radeon X800pro

* GeForce 6800GS (PCI-express version)

* GeForce 6800GT

* Radeon X800XL

* GeForce 6800ultra

* Radeon X800XT

* Radeon X800XT

* Radeon X850XT

* GeForce 7800GS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is the better of the two?

The X800GTO im looking at is 256MB Sapphire one.

The X1600PRO im looking at is 512MB Sapphire one.

The X1600XT im looking at is 256MB Sapphire one.

Any pro's/con's of each?

New to PC gaming, so not knowledgable on cards etc yet!!

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...