Possible overkill...

[rabdatrox]

On another forum i was reading a guy has .2ghz more then me(1.9) and same RAM(512) and had a p4(same as me). Apparently these people on this particular forum thought the fx5900nu was overkill on his system. If this is true then it definitely(spelling?) would be on my system. It would be awesome to get some feedback. Thanks. Also, if i were to get a less powerful card, i want good bang for the buck and something that could really be maximized on my system. Thanks for your help guys im not good at this stuff, a little new.:rolleyes:

[LtBlue14]

i disagree
hardly any games out there need more than 1.7ghz to perform well
people like to think their 3ghz is necessary to have a top of the line video card, but i disagree. i think you should go for it

[Yuriman]

Lets put it this way: a 1600+ w/9800 is faster than a 2500+ w/9500.

[rabdatrox]

Are you sure...I didnt even build my pc though, it is certainly not a gaming rig by any means...or anything close for that matter. Its from gateway just put in more RAM and a sound card...I was wondering if a 9600 or ti4200 or something would get me similar results for a lot less money on my system...

[rabdatrox]

Also what if i got a 5700nu...Would that have full DX9 support?

[Mr. Chambers]

Originally posted by rabdatrox
Also what if i got a 5700nu...Would that have full DX9 support?

i'd stay away from 5700 chipsets. if you're going to go nvidia, get a 5900 chipset, or go ATI. how much do you have to spend, would be the logical question? i dont think a good video card would be "overkill" in your situation.

[seamadan000]

the 5700 has DX9, but it won't set any speed records running the stuff. If I were you I would get a 5700ultra or any 5900 or 9700. The 5700ultra is as fast as the ATI equivilants.

[Falcon-K]

i would probably just spring forth the extra few dollars and grab a 9700 pro for around 200 and even 9800 pro's are around 240+ range, and if u want nvidia spend the extra few bucks and get a 5900nu instead of the 5700.

[Tebore]

Well what that person is saying is the 5900 would be bottle necked by his system. It's true you won't notice too much of a difference in a game between 2ghz 400bus P4 and a 3.2EE 800bus P4. But the card is bottlenecked by the first chip and not as much or at all by the second chip.

[Th0r]

Its all about Bandwidth and how much information the CPU can calculate in which determines the bottleneck....

The performance difference will not be noticeable, but a CPU upgrade in about a year will probaly be needed..

Personaly, i want to see these Presscots in action...

[snyper1982]

its a bottleneck until you start running high res. with aa/af, then most of the bottle neck is relieved.

[shiltz]

the 5900 would be overkill for that system, your computer would be the bottle neck, when I had my 5900U in my dual athlon MP2000+ @ 1800Mhz with 512mb of ram it all my games still ran bad and it only got about 1000 points on 3Dmarks01 over my geforce 4 TI4400, only thing I really gained was I could crank the FSAA and AF up without slowing the framerate anymore, but the system was the bottle neck, the same card in my P4 is way faster.

[rabdatrox]

Ehh...I dont want to dump 200 bucks. Maybe ill just get the R9600pro/xt

[SpaceyWilly]

Upgrading from an mx440, a 9600pro will be like night and day. Especially when you crank up the image quality. A 5900 wouldn't be overkill though, since it would be faster than the 9600, but anything is an improvement over that MX.

[rabdatrox]

So overall the 5900 would be best w/o dropping $175+? If so ill just get that in a week or so.

[LtBlue14]

yeah
where can you get a 5900 for < $175 though?
if it's online, did you check the place out at www.resellerratings.com?

[rabdatrox]

http://www.gameve.com/gve/store/productdetails.aspx?sku=VC-BFG-002

169 shipped

:)