As many know I finally got my Samsung monitor a while back, and in a couple months I'm going to pick up a graphics card for my computer. I've been checking out the HD2600XT ATI cards. I probably won't be playing any high end games on the PC, but I am big into HD and even watching HD TV on my computer.
As of right now the 2600xt isn't winning any gaming awards (some say the drivers are that great right now), but I was curious about this...
My monitor runs at 1680 x 1050 resolution, and I'm wonder if the HD2600xt will have an issue running at that resolution. I know it's supported, but I'd hate to pick it up for around $150 and find out it just doesn't work the way I'd like it to.
[
attachment=1019]
Dude, that will work fine. It runs at 800MHz as well so you can cry with happiness at a million miles an hour. It'll kick ass. ATi always comes through with drivers too. And the Catalyst Control center software is top notch.
The only reason why I ask is because thus far it's falling way behind similar Nvidia cards, except in the HD areas. I've had 1 Nvidia card in my life, the original Geforce card...64mb ram
(I think), but since then I've always had ATI products. I just hope the drivers will come through and give this card much more of a kick, because I totally agree, the specs look good.
ATi have always made superior quality cards, as opposed to brutish ones, I'd go for it, It'll play any game at a good quality and it's more than suitable for what you wanna do
First... yes, it should do fine.
second....nVidia.....*cough*8800GTX SLI FTW!*cough*
naw, NVIDIA suck, they do alright, but in comparison to ATi cards, they always fall short.
ATi will release the GTX beater soon. well, I hope so anyway...
and SLi is for fools, there is minimal improvement, and it's easier and cheaper to OC
LOL, call me a fool then..
Intel and nVidia fan....
First... yes, it should do fine.
second....nVidia.....*cough*8800GTX SLI FTW!*cough*
Honestly, I'm not looking for any dual card capability and I don't need some super expensive graphics card. I've honestly grown out of that stage and my penis is more then sufficient so I don't need those types of things to make myself a man (just messin' 
)
I think I'll sit around for a month or so and see what happens to the pricing, and I'll probably stick with the HD2600XT unless something better/at the same price comes out.
If anyone would suggest a specific card around the $150 range let me know.
I'm Intel and ATi,
it saddened me that AMD bought up ATi, things aren't going to be so tight with intel any more ):
Back in the day ATI sucked, but with the release of the Radeon line, they actually started producing good cards with regularly updated drivers. I was one of those guys who preorder the ATI Radeon 9700 Pro when it was the latest and greatest, but the days of shooting for the extreme cards is past. Now I just want something quality that will do what I need, and I don't give a **** if I could spend $200 more to get 10 more frames per second. That sort of thing is just not important to me anymore.
high5
I owned a 9700 PRO, It's been in two PCs and recently died
lol, I hear ya. I'm in the market for a laptop soon. Graphics cards will be not very high on the list.... just enough to run the GIMP and maybe pinball. lmfao... (or whatever game is preloaded on vista nowadays)
high5
I owned a 9700 PRO, It's been in two PCs and recently died
I'm still using the 9700pro on an old computer and a couple months ago the fan died on it, so I took a fan off an old cpu cooler, used some industrial glue, hooked up the power, and now the thing runs cooler then it ever did before.
hehe, my power plug decayed and shorted :/
that's when I upgraded my web dev computer up to c2d
You keep that up and you'll just be a pimp coochie ho to that computer.
I just ordered a x1950PRO myself. Not really into PC games, but I do have a select few I'd like to run at a decent framerate. It also is HDCP compliant, which is a nice perk. It doesn't have native DX10 support, as most cards today still don't either. The catch here was that a DX10 card for the same price ($104 (marked down from $159 on Newegg)), would not have the same performance levels, and at that price range, I bought for today's performance, as when tomorrow rolls around, I'll be buying a new card then in that price range.
Anyway, I'm an Intel processor man, but I switch between nVidia and ATI on my cards. For the last few months, I was running on a GMA 950 (i945 Linux drivers are actually pretty nice though, Intel opensourced them).
ATI is starting to make a comeback, especially with nVidia really botching the 8xxxx series cards lately. ATI usually has the better DirectX support, but usually performs poorly in OpenGL graphics. Not a worry.
As for drivers, honestly, ATI is teh suxz0rz in this area. It took them forever to support OpenGL in Vista, but eventually got there. And Linux support is almost unheard of.
Anyway, I like ATI, I just hope being with AMD doesn't screw them into that CPU/GPU combo crap, or they pull from graphics cards to making "integrated chipset graphics solutions". Because if nVidia gets complete control of the market, the industry will be held back greatly.
sc7
what's the big difference between GDDR4 and GDDR3 does the one just run faster or is capable of faster speeds?
what's the big difference between GDDR4 and GDDR3 does the one just run faster or is capable of faster speeds?
It's got some cool stuff
Check it out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDDR4
It's only available on select cards.
Thanks for the info about the HDD, BTW.
I think the only real thing holding these cards back is there Memory Interface 128-bit.
What would be the big difference between 512 and 256mb ram? I mean I could get a nice card with 256mb GDD4 ram running at 2.2ghz, and the GDDR3 ones that have 512mb ram is running much slower at 1.4ghz.