OK. My soundcard died when I installed Win 2k (apparently the people that bought the company that made it didn't feel like releasing any new drivers) so I've been reduced to the onboard sound card *shudder*. The old one was an MX-300, and served me well. I don't really see the point in a super elite expensive card 'cos my speakers are pretty basic, anyway. Possibly less than $100 (AU).

Video Card. I still don't understand how these things work. There's all sorts of arcane language in the paper. People recommend ATI cards, but which ones? There are seemingly different "brands" such as Asus and Leadtek and Sapphire and Winfast. Is "Radeon" a brand, too? If not, which of these do you suggest? And what model do I get? I recall reading that a 9600 Pro is decent, but for $200 I want to make sure it's gonna last me.

Any ideas and recommendations? Oh, and *please* don't point to any online US-based sellers, because I'll just get upset at how ridiculously cheap things are over there, again...

Buy one of those new TNTs. I hear they're great, especially with a SB 4.1!

The Radeon 9200 was only £60 and you can pick up an SB 5.1 for £20 now, but I dunno how it converts.

Oh, and the 9600 would be a good buy. My friend's got one and it runs stuff easily.

------------------
Yeah, but you know what? This one, this one right here, this was my dream, my wish, and it didn't come true. So I'm takin' it back. I'm takin' 'em all back.

[This message has been edited by - Tony - (edited January 29, 2004).]

Hmm. So will the 9600 run games that are yet to come out (ie, does it have all those fancy acronym features?) What is the difference between the 9200 and 9600?

I believe Jaiph said that the Creative support in Australia is awful, so I'm not too sure about a Soundblaster... Is it a good card?

I think a pound is about three times the AU dollar, but I haven't checked in ages.

Jeff's problem was with speakers that were known to be flawed and defective. It's unlikely that you'll have problems with a Soundblaster. The Audigy2 came out a while ago at US$80, so the Audigy 1 (which is a really good card) shouldn't be too expensive.

------------------
Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here.

[This message has been edited by CygnusX (edited January 29, 2004).]

If you're looking at running upcoming games you'll want at least a 9600 Pro. The mid-range GeForce FX cards are horrible. 9600 Pros are typically like around $140 - $200.. for the 128mb version, which is really the only version you should consider. The 9600 XT is nice, but I personally don't think its much of an improvement over the Pro...

The 9200 is primarily meant as a low-end workstation card if you ask me. Last I checked the 9200 is the only one of the low end Radeons (9000, 9100, 9200) that qualifies as a DX9 part (I think it's the 9200...), but really it doesn't have the horsepower to do DX9 like the 9600 Pro/XT or the 9800 Pro/XT. Its not something I'd consider when looking for a gaming card...

As for a sound card... you might be able to find an original Audigy or an Audigy 2 online for $50-$70... They're both better than a SB Live! 5.1 and such... (The Audigy 2 is especially nice... and Newegg has one for $74) In a pinch a SB Live! 5.1 (which is like... $30-$35) would do...

------------------
I'll admit to Reactor CTF, Duel Abyss, Duel Turbulent, and even the CCCP, but not Sky High! (my first, be kind!) Ok so maybe I will.

[This message has been edited by Gonk (edited January 29, 2004).]

Hey, I can hook you up with some really cheap local places to buy parts, if you're interested

------------------
The Massassi-Map
There is no spoon.

Are they *legal*?

Sure, that'd be good.

Well, in all honesty, the 9200 doesn't technically support DX9.

------------------
Yeah, but you know what? This one, this one right here, this was my dream, my wish, and it didn't come true. So I'm takin' it back. I'm takin' 'em all back.

On Pricewatch, they have all the 3rd party manufacturers selling Radeon cards like Sapphire, Powercolor, etc. Is there any brand that's particularily good? Also how much better is the 9600 256MB Pro to the 128MB Pro. And what's the difference between the regular 9600 model, the Pro, SE, and XT?

[This message has been edited by JASRCC_Uber0010 (edited January 29, 2004).]

Sapphire is really nice, ATI's own has much better warranty than the others, and powercolor is ok (kinda new).

As for the suffixes, it goes like this, from fastest to slowest.

XT
Pro
(None)
SE

XT are the newest out. Pro's and (None)'s are common nowadays, and SE's are starting to make an appearance. SE's are REALLY CHEAP though, so I wouldn't recommend them.

------------------
"The future is not determined by a throw of the dice, but is determined by the conscious decisions of you and me."
I am addicted to ellipses!!! AHHH!!! ...

I wouldn't go with the 9600 pro, not for upcoming games. I don't think you'll need the 256 version of any card, but of course it wouldn't hurt. Personally, I say 9700 pro, though I believe that's 256, which stands about 200-250. How much overall are you looking to spend??

------------------
There is no signature

Matthew, whilst I'd definitely recommend avoiding Creative speakers if you live in Australia, I'm extremely happy with my Audigy 2 so it might be worth the risk for one of their soundcards.

You can get an Audigy ES for $100 at EYO.com.au.

For a video card I'd recommend putting in a bit extra money for a 128mb 9600 XT for $240 (again quoting this price fromEYO.com.au). It should last a fair while....and really it's the best option in that price range, big step up in price for the next level :-/

------------------
Cantina Cloud | BCF | The Massassian 1 & 2 | Gonkmeg
Corrupting the kiddies since '97

The 9700 Pro's come in 128 and 256MB versions. I know, because I have the former

------------------
"The future is not determined by a throw of the dice, but is determined by the conscious decisions of you and me."
I am addicted to ellipses!!! AHHH!!! ...

No, I buy all my computer parts from 15 year old girls

------------------
The Massassi-Map
There is no spoon.

Hmm. The Green Guide (paper with ads for computer places) shows a Creative Audigy "SE" for $90. Reckon that's just a spelling mistake for "ES"?

That site certainly seems cheaper than the stores here, though, as it was $295 for the 9600 XT...

I wasn't looking to spend *all* that much, though I suppose in the order of AU$350 wouldn't be too far off. But then, I need to *get* the money. I *knew* shouldn't have gone on that shopping spree yesterday. Accursed cheap games and CDs and books!

Hmm. What's the "G" or "Extreme" after the "9600 XT" mean? They seem to be more expensive...

This will probably doom what little standing I may have here, but I'd like to add another sound card contender: the Turtle Beach Santa Cruz. I've had mine since Christmas, and I've got to tell you it beats the crap outa my friend's Audigy. Very, very, very good card. Good support, good control software, and good drivers, though installation can be a pain sometimes. And did I mention how great the sound is? Besides that, bunches of US stores are selling the white box for less than US$50.

http://www.turtle-beach.com/site/products/santacruz/producthome.asp

Just my 2 cents.

------------------
Cynic (sin'ik) n. One of a sect of ancient Greek philosophers who held that virtue is the ultimate goal of life, their doctrine gradually coming to symbolize insolent self-righteousness.

Drink So-Be, and play longer!

[This message has been edited by TheTwistedSpasm (edited January 29, 2004).]

So is the 9600 128MB Pro good for upcoming games? Also, which card would be better the 9600 128MB Pro, or the regular 9600 256MB?

The Radeon 9500(now discontinued) was the MINIMUM for full DX9 support. I hear that it will be about two years before the next version of DX will be out. Also, the "Pro" series it probably the least for good performance.

Reading various comments about performance with dubiously acquired Alphas of Doom3, I would say that, with a decent proccessor (2Ghz or better), a 9600 Pro would be fine; just don't expect to jack up the resolution past 640x480... NOBODY will be able to have both >40 fps and >640x480 within the next year... Asuming Doom3 gets released at that time.

As for HL2, 9600 Pro would easily be in the comfort zone, especially since the engine will be specifically geared toward the Radeon, with its innate specialization with Direct 3D.

[edit]
As for brand, There are two main CARD SERIES:
The Radeon, and
The GeForce.

The Radeon is patented by ATI, and the GeForce is owned by NVidia. There are plenty of companies that also purchase the base chipsets/proccessors from those two companies, and make their own versions. In most cases, such as Saphire and Powercolor, the performance is somewhat worse, while the price may be slightly better.

If you're looking for good performance, I'd primarily reccomend ATI and NVidia themselves. Hercules also tends to make cards that seemed to be souped-up from the standard version, so you might want to look into that. Be warned, however: Hercules cards tend to be even more expensive than their 1st-party counterparts.
[/edit]
[edit]
To answer your question, it would depend on what you're playing, with what settings: The "Pro" is easily more powerful, but if you happen to load up 250MB of textures, it will be more bogged down than a "standard" 256MB card. I don't think even Doom3, with its 100% use of bumpmaps, will need a whole 256MB of texture memory, thus making the 128MB Pro a better choice. However, custom maps tend to be less careful about curtailing the amount of textures used, so you should also consider that as well.
[/edit]

------------------
Nes digs around in the trash can.
Nes finds a hamburger!
Nes puts the hamburger in his backpack.

[This message has been edited by nottheking (edited January 30, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by nottheking (edited January 30, 2004).]

I know a store that has Audigy 1 for $85, 128mb 9600XT for $263, and 256mb 9600XT for $305.

It's in the Eastern suburbs, too.

------------------
The Massassi-Map
There is no spoon.

That's nuts! Wasn't the original Doom 3 demo only running on a GeForce3? How can a 9600 Pro barely cut it? Also, I'm getting a new processor, but my mobo won't support higher than a Athlon 2100 GHz, is that good enough for upcoming stuff?

Pricewatch has them for $150 & $170.

[This message has been edited by JASRCC_Uber0010 (edited January 30, 2004).]

Some of the screenies may have been taken on a machine using a GeForce3, but if you pay attention to some of the screenshots, they happen to have the framerate displayed as a watermark: it is typically arround 10fps, if that. I think the machine used by Idto render the videos was a lot more powerfull... Know how much money Id has at it's disposal, I wouldn't be surprised if they used a multi-proccessor machine. Also, If I remember correctly, at the time of Id unveiling Doom3 in 2001, the GeForce3 was among the best cards; I don't remember if the GeForce4 or Radeon 8x00 was out yet.

To answer your question, I will presume you are talking about using a Radeon 9600 Pro, with 128 MB DDR RAM, your Athlon is an Athlon XP at 2100Mhz (not an XP2100+, which really is something like 1700Mhz), and you have a decent ammount of RAM (at least 256MB). Here's how I estimate you will do on some of the more anticipated games to come. I assmue, for the sake of performance, you'll be using a 640x480x32bb resolution, with all of the standard features, maximum texture/model detail, yadda yadda yadda...

Unreal Tournament 2004: Rather Good. Should be able to crank up the resolution to what most people expect out of modern 3D games, and still get at least 50fps.

Half-Life 2: Good. At 640x..., 60fps is a high probability. May have to cut down on anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering, though.

Doom3: Okay. You should most likely need to cut some things down. John Carmack's most recent statements exclude the possibility of lowering the lighting detail, as that would severly detract from the thrill factor. I would reccomend 640x480 (or lower!), and you MAY get 60 fps.

Please remember that these are just MY estimates... I could be entirely wrong... especially if the leakings from Valve and Id result in them enhancing the source code further.

As I am an honest person, I do not possess, or have even tried to find, an illegal "leaked" demo for either HL2 or Doom3. Thus, my judgement is very likely to be accurate, and I cannot be held liable for any poor/great framerates you may get, or any computer crashes you may recieve.

------------------
Nes digs around in the trash can.
Nes finds a hamburger!
Nes puts the hamburger in his backpack.

[This message has been edited by nottheking (edited January 30, 2004).]

Actually it's a 2100XP which is the 1700MHz thing, unfortunately like I said, my motherboard can't support a higher processor, so I'm screwed in that sense. Thanks for your opinions on those games though.

Thanks for all the information in your post allowing me to locate and then shop at said store!





But that's not Australian dollars, is it? Thanks for everyone posting about how much cheaper everything in the US is, but I expressly mentioned in the OP that it does me no good...

nottheking, that was an alpha. You have no idea how the retail game will run. None at all.

------------------
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.

I'll give you a clue! It's somewhere in Malvern...


------------------
The Massassi-Map
There is no spoon.

Malvern!? Ugh!

Don't by a Radeon 9600XT/Pro whatever 256mb version. They run 4ns ram, and you don't want that. No, not even if it's cheaper than the 128mb version. Just trust me on this one... it'll be slower, much slower.

You want a 9600XT, the... Geocube or something Extreme edition is suppose to be decent. Do some research, umm... go to the graphics card section on http://www.atomicmpc.com.au/forums.asp for help from an Australian site...

Oh, and http://www.msy.com.au is your friend. Cheapest shop around.

Edit: I've got a Geforce 3 ti200 man... sell to ya cheap cheap... overclocked to 265Mhz on the core, and 500MHz on the ram... 128mb version... mmm...

[This message has been edited by BuuBox (edited January 31, 2004).]

http://www.atomicmpc.com.au/forums.asp?s=2&c=7&t=4096

Love me...

Well, I'd like to say that this is the first time I've been propositioned by a guy for sex over the internet, but sadly even this is an experience sadly relegated to being just another commonplace event in the life of Matthew.

(Thanks for the thread, though. I'll give it a look.)

http://www.msy.com.au

Without a doubt, the cheapest PC parts store I have ever seen in Melbourne.

------------------
The Massassi-Map
There is no spoon.

I wouldn't recommend the 9600 Pro 256mb, the core on that card just doesn't have the memory bandwith to even touch the extra 128mb...

The 9600XT is debateable as well, if you ask me... But then again I don't own one so...

As for performance in stuff like Doom 3...

You REALLY cannot use the alpha as a benchmark. That thing was so early that it is NOWHERE near final representation of performance. At all. Carmack mentioned this. I'd imagine a 9600 pro 128mb would be more than capable of running the game at something like 1024x768, and maybe with 2xAA and 2xAF or something on there... I'm not sure about the capabilities of the 9600 Pro, but whoever said that its impossible to get 40+ fps at a resolution greater than 640x480 is basing their info on an alpha which ran better than that on my old GeForce 3 and they're probably just paranoid.

HL2... recall that Valve listed the 9600 Pro as the best value:cost ratio card in their benchmarks. (Keep in mind that Valve has lied about stuff like scripting in the game, but from what I hear of people with the leaked HL2 stuff and a 9600 Pro, it runs quite well.)

Also, I just saw a link to a $229 OEM Sapphire 9800 Pro 128mb in stock at newegg..... although you're in Aussieland and they don't ship internationally... DAMN.

------------------
I'll admit to Reactor CTF, Duel Abyss, Duel Turbulent, and even the CCCP, but not Sky High! (my first, be kind!) Ok so maybe I will.

[This message has been edited by Gonk (edited January 31, 2004).]

You can get the 9600XT for cheaper at EYO.

------------------
Cantina Cloud | BCF | The Massassian 1 & 2 | Gonkmeg
Corrupting the kiddies since '97

Yeh. The 9600XT is a good card at a reasonable price.

It's 15%-20% slower in most benchmark tests than the 9800 series, but about 50% lower in price. (around $200USD, though I've seen it on sale for less (~£104))

------------------
GhostOfYoda - General doer of stuff.

Ahem:

I am not basing my assumptions on the actual leaked Doom3 Alpha/HL2 Beta... I make my guesses by looking through information posted by around a hundred people who have tried it. I then modified my my guess based on predictions of what differences there will be between the Alpha and the finished game.

I believe that the finished game will get a better framerate than the Alpha, as the majority of the features probably have yet to be optimized. However, I predict that much of the difference caused by these optimizations will be offset by features that have yet to be added. I draw this assumption from the statement (found in multiple different publications) that Carmack started with the complete Q3A engine, and re-worked it bit-by-bit. Also, the Alpha (If I remember correctly) is almost 2 years old. I doubt that it would be possible for Carmack to have completed making the new features for the game, or else we would probably be playing it now (Most of the resource making could be accomplished during the engine construction, and I highly doubt that map making and engine optimization would take more than a year). As a result, there are proably things left out that we won't notice until we compare the Alpha to the finished game.

Also, I would like to point out that this is a new engine we're talking about, not simply another game made with the well-worn Q3A engine. My JK machine averages only 40 fps in areas that aren't simple - and it uses a Radeon 7000, which wasn't availible until 2000/2001, and what the JK system check calls a "533 Mhz Proccessor". Perhaps Unreal games might have run at 60 when they first came out, but Epic has never seemed to try to have the most advanced engine on the market.

Lastly, I would mention that I made a typo in the post I quote. I apologize if that means you misunderstood me. It should have been "very UNlikely", not "very likely".

------------------
Nes digs around in the trash can.
Nes finds a hamburger!
Nes puts the hamburger in his backpack.

This could not be further from the truth. Sapphire cards are notoriously low-quality, and in many cases simply do not work. Their support is atrocious. Avoid them like the plague.

I found a 128 9600XT by "GeXCube" (which are apparently fairly good) for $249 at a place in Melbourne:

http://www.acetechcomputers.com.au/osCommerce/product_info.php?cPath=28&products_id=590

That's a bit more expensive than the one Jaiph posted ($8?), but it's actually in Melbourne so I won't have to mail order it or whatever. Might give them a visit tomorrow and see what I can do.

Thanks for the help, everyone!

(Audigys were the soundcard of choice?)

Just curious, on Pricewatch the 9800 128MB and the 9600XT 128MB are listed at about the same price. Which would be the better card overall?

The XT.

Sine, can you back that up?

------------------
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.

So would Powercolor be better? Or is there any other brands that are good? I know Hercules is good, but way to expensive. I know inno3D is good, but they only make nVidia cards.