Blimey!
Well I've owned both cards, and unfortunatley the v5 went back after about a week.
At present I have the creative geforce2
V5
Good image quality
Drivers are getting there at last (some good options to play with)
LOD Bias is a good tweak in the options
Good fsaa
Cheaper than a GTS
Run all your old glide games
UT runs well
Seems to be quite scalable with cpu speed
Card is not good if you want to overclock ( 50/50 whether you get a card that can handle a higher bus speed)
Not the fastest card on the planet (but nearly)
Need a half decent psu
Its a long card (physically)
Geforce2 (GTS)
Good image quality
Good drivers (Enough beta drivers about to suite your needs)
fsaa not as good as v5
Most costly card at moment
Fastest card around at the moment
Runs Q3 very well
A lot less troublesome than its pedecessor
Good for system overclocking, as most GTS cards can handle a high fsb
People have had good results overclocking the card itself
I personally like the GTS as it suites my needs: fast,overclocks,stable,runs q3 well, and it works in my system
BTW don't pay attention to people quoting 3dmark results, as this is very geforce biased.Pay attention to a mixed bag of in-game benchmarks to get a clearer picture.
Prepare for battle
Xp1800
Soltek DRV5
Corsair PC2700 cas2
GF4 Ti4400
Santa Cruz
Barracuda IV
Hollywood+
Iiyama Pro450
BladeRunner
What System Have You Got And What FPS Do You Get In Unreal Tourney In 1280x1024x32 With Every Thing On Full And Min FPS On 0 As Some People Have Told Me That The GTS Doesn't Run It Very Well? Also What FPS Do You get In Demo 001 In Quake3 Max Settings 1280x1024x32. Just Curious!
And on the 3dfx side look up the 3dfx voodoo5 news group, lots of advise there.
Or go to 3dfxgamers.com to see how people get along with their cards in the forums.
Speechless eh....
AthlonOverclocker
You only have a 17" monitor do you really need to run in that res.
Don't know about other people but I play in either 800x600 or 1024x768 with all my bells and whistles going, on a 19".
I don't think I could cope with going up a res only to lose fps.I seem to get used to running at high fps's if only to cope with the parts of a game that produce big lags.
But with keeping all the eye-candy on
[This message has been edited by Gasman (edited 07-02-2000).]
Xp1800
Soltek DRV5
Corsair PC2700 cas2
GF4 Ti4400
Santa Cruz
Barracuda IV
Hollywood+
Iiyama Pro450
Once again Gasman mirrors my thoughts on the subject .
I usually run Q3 at 1024 x 768 32 colour and full everything else.
I don't hold much use in the demo fps results other than for benchmarking.
If you enable the in game Fps then mine usually hovers around the 120 - 140 with peaks over 200 and dips (when a lot of players are exploding in front of you) or about 45 ish.
I'm with Gasman on this as I don't want to see any slow down even in busy scenes.
None of this really matters as long as it plays smooth and looks good.
I'm not that much into UT and the fps mean very little with this game engine. I found the best compromise on my system is 1600 x 1200 in 16c using the high res textures and the 4.13 patch. But that's just my preferance for smooth gameplay. 32c makes very little difference in UT.
[This message has been edited by BladeRunner (edited 07-02-2000).]
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks