Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Kenney

Teh Barrecks, help me choose meh new FX Card

43 posts in this topic

Glad to see this discussion. We haven't done this in a while. For what it's worth Doc has always claimed that most stutters are video card dependent. Specifically the fill rate of VCs are the culprit.

Anybody got any info on fill rate? I don't think I've ever seen a spec for fill rate.

from what i've read this isnt true. stutters are caused by building collision lists 'all at once' when flying over a busy town. when you're at 4km from target you have no need for these collision lists so you don't build them. as you dive down all the sudden X number of units need to be accounted for so bam, they all happen at once. this stutter is governed by raw CPU horsepower and memory bandwidth.

further 'fill rate' is sort of a deprecated terminology. fill rate used to be pixel pipes x clock speed. this used to be very easy to figure out but as of ... i think the 6xxx series nvidia cards this changed with the introduction of stream processors and a redesign of how the render pipelines work. you can still find the fill rate but it takes a lot more work and frankly is largely irrelevant as nobody relies on how many pixel and texture ops they can do per frame anymore as shaders are far more effective at producing better visuals anyway.

'back in the day' all you needed to do was draw pixels and apply one or two textures as fast as possible. now you have those same pixels and same texture ops but can perform shader ops at the same time which is more important to over all performance (where nice visuals are concerned) than raw fill rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
from what i've read this isnt true. stutters are caused by building collision lists 'all at once' when flying over a busy town. when you're at 4km from target you have no need for these collision lists so you don't build them. as you dive down all the sudden X number of units need to be accounted for so bam, they all happen at once. this stutter is governed by raw CPU horsepower and memory bandwidth.

further 'fill rate' is sort of a deprecated terminology. fill rate used to be pixel pipes x clock speed. this used to be very easy to figure out but as of ... i think the 6xxx series nvidia cards this changed with the introduction of stream processors and a redesign of how the render pipelines work. you can still find the fill rate but it takes a lot more work and frankly is largely irrelevant as nobody relies on how many pixel and texture ops they can do per frame anymore as shaders are far more effective at producing better visuals anyway.

'back in the day' all you needed to do was draw pixels and apply one or two textures as fast as possible. now you have those same pixels and same texture ops but can perform shader ops at the same time which is more important to over all performance (where nice visuals are concerned) than raw fill rate.

So would more video RAM help with stutters?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any truth to the ATI scares? I mean I have been Nvidia since my 5200... so I have a bit of a bias towards them. Although AMD makes ATI now and I am partial to AMD... so I am stuck here... someone is gonna have to make my mind up for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't think the collision lists are built/stored in video ram (could be wrong idk). i would think if they were 1gb cards would be immune to stutters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there any truth to the ATI scares? I mean I have been Nvidia since my 5200... so I have a bit of a bias towards them. Although AMD makes ATI now and I am partial to AMD... so I am stuck here... someone is gonna have to make my mind up for me.

there is no scare. the fact is drivers above 9.7 just dont work well/at all in ww2ol. this means any of the new 5xxx series cards dont work well/at all in ww2ol as 9.7 doesnt support them.

there are other games that have some issues with more recent ati drivers too. some minor, some not so minor. most games work fine with ati drivers/hardware though and dont think nvidia is immune to oddities in some applications because they aren't.

the main question is can crs do anything on their end to make the newer ati drivers work or is something flawed in the driver that only ati can fix? its probably a mix of both but crs cant fix anything on ati's end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there any truth to the ATI scares? I mean I have been Nvidia since my 5200... so I have a bit of a bias towards them. Although AMD makes ATI now and I am partial to AMD... so I am stuck here... someone is gonna have to make my mind up for me.

I know tempest had some major FPS issues with his ATI cards. But that may have just been related to crossfire and fraps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know tempest had some major FPS issues with his ATI cards. But that may have just been related to crossfire and fraps.

Crossfire is such a waste of money anyway, unless you are running multi monitors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I run SLI'd 285GTX cards and have no graphical issues with WWIIol nor any other current MMO currently. In fact, I run LoTRO (and Aion when I played it) at their max graphical settings (to include 8xAA) issue free.

I do run a 950 Enermax Silver PSU though. Man... does that PSU beast cause some utility bill consternation... lol!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Kenny first things first.

The GTS250 I don't think is the correct card to get in that price bracket when a 260GTX is only $15.00 more on the same website.

The GTX has about a 50% pixel fill increase but slightly less texture fill rate

It also does twice as many Gflops (874 compared to 470)

The 250 has exactly the same spec as a 9800GTX.

The more important point is your looking to put what is a great card into a very average (poor) PC.

I ahve just upgraded my machine from a E8500 Core 2 duo Wolfdale 3.16 ghz which is approxiamtely twice as fast as your current setup

I am running an I7 processor now and if your going to spend money anywhere you may find the processor and mobo is the way forward before a new card. Of course you can buy the card it may well help but you won't get full benefit.

It depends on your circumstances and future buying resources. Might be worth getting a second had 9800GT or similar and save up for a real upgrade or for you getting the card now may be ok if you have the cash soon to get a better rig then re-use the card.

If you can't afford a new rig for a year then maybe not worth spending that as next year better cards will be out and current cards at cheaper prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well Kenny first things first.

The GTS250 I don't think is the correct card to get in that price bracket when a 260GTX is only $15.00 more on the same website.

The GTX has about a 50% pixel fill increase but slightly less texture fill rate

It also does twice as many Gflops (874 compared to 470)

The 250 has exactly the same spec as a 9800GTX.

The more important point is your looking to put what is a great card into a very average (poor) PC.

I ahve just upgraded my machine from a E8500 Core 2 duo Wolfdale 3.16 ghz which is approxiamtely twice as fast as your current setup

I am running an I7 processor now and if your going to spend money anywhere you may find the processor and mobo is the way forward before a new card. Of course you can buy the card it may well help but you won't get full benefit.

It depends on your circumstances and future buying resources. Might be worth getting a second had 9800GT or similar and save up for a real upgrade or for you getting the card now may be ok if you have the cash soon to get a better rig then re-use the card.

If you can't afford a new rig for a year then maybe not worth spending that as next year better cards will be out and current cards at cheaper prices.

Well I don't have the money to drop stupid amounts on a PC. So I either upgrade my FX card or do nothing... I think upgrading my FX card is better than doing nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gtx 260 core 216 189 bucks and it will run this game flawless on max setting with aa set in nvidia control panel..its what i use to play this game..id stay away from ati cards if you only play this game..i have 3 5870's since wwii is not the only game i play its just the only flight sim i play..on windows 7 im able to use my gtx card when i wanna play this game or for physx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I don't have the money to drop stupid amounts on a PC. So I either upgrade my FX card or do nothing... I think upgrading my FX card is better than doing nothing.

Well thats my point you may go spend $250 on a graphics card and get about $70 performance because the rest of your machine holds you back.

Now as the other poster just said $189 for a GTX 260 216 core will smash this game to bits if you have a decent computer.

I still run a 260GTX 192 core and on my old Core 2 Duo E8500 I would get great FPS generally holding at 60, (had to apply vertical sync otherwise sometimes it would get to 200 - 300 at FB's which is too high and caused issues with this game).

A new card will help no doubt but may not help as much as you think. Of course it will be ideal for 1.3.1 which will have better performace but more stuff to draw.

What is your current card ??

You see for example you could upgrade from a 4200 to 600+ for $80 which for pure processing power is about 50% better but may not be huge ingame.

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2905661&Sku=CP1-AM2-6000

This GTX is $169.00 so both options would work for you

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4686858&CatId=3775

Nvidia I ahve had much less issues with and the colurs etc "look" nicer than the only ATI's I ahve tried - their drivers were awful a while abck.

See what other people think but IF you are going to spend $250 then a GTX 260 + a 600+ or 6200 / 6400+ processor upgrade may be the way forward.

Remember you can even knock out your old processor and card for a few dollars on ebay to get a bit of cash back.#

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow nice find, now which out of the two would you suggest?

The system it will be going into is

AMD 4200+ X2 2.2Ghz

3Gigs DDR2 800Mhz

Sound Blaster X-fi

350gb Western Digital HD

Guys Keep in mind the rest of his system. Is his CPU going to bottleneck if he upgrades his vid card much?

nodaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guys Keep in mind the rest of his system. Is his CPU going to bottleneck if he upgrades his vid card much?

nodaker

Exactly what I said. He has $250 and is buying a card or nothing.

My compromise was upgrade the 4000+ to a 6000 or 6200+ for just $80 and buy a 216 core GTX 260 for $159.

Best of both worlds - great card and processor boost.

He already has a 8800.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.