View Full Version : What is the best PCI card please??
JamesDax
10-25-04, 05:01 PM
5700LE or 5600??
All responses appreciated. Thanks.
tristancarton
10-25-04, 05:35 PM
this has come up alot in the past few weeks(perhaps too many people buying cheap dell or compaq computers) i wish i knew the answer on the 5700le.
anyhow here is the best roundup as far as i can find.(5700le is missing and i am unable to find any reviews for it)
http://www.sudhian.com/showdocs.cfm?aid=445
if someone has the pci 5700le please post your cpu and 3dmark 2001 scores.
AthlonXP1800
10-25-04, 05:38 PM
5700LE or 5600??
All responses appreciated. Thanks.
5700LE
Actually 5700 is same version and faster than slower 5600.
5700LE or Radeon 9100...
I used to lean towards ATI as far as PCI was concerned, but to be fair and current, it's worth mentioning that R2xx driver support hasn't been so great lately, while nv's full support for the fx line more ensures bug-free gaming...
AthlonXP1800
10-25-04, 05:47 PM
5700LE or Radeon 9100...
Actually Radeon 9100 is based on the same Radeon 8500 core back in 2001, that 3 years old technology and 5700LE is just only 1 year old now.
tristancarton
10-25-04, 06:00 PM
Actually Radeon 9100 is based on the same Radeon 8500 core back in 2001, that 3 years old technology and 5700LE is just only 1 year old now.
very true. also true that the 5700le has the nv3x directx 9.0 ps 2.0 whereas the radeon 9100 only has directx8.1 and ps 1.4. However i will say the 9100s may be three years old but they are still pretty dang quick.(8500 cores in pci form) i own a pci 64mb visiontek 9100 250/250(default speeds) and it actually can play new games at all low settings and fairly low resolutions. it may be three years old and may not be "super new" but it is still one of the top pci cards available.(perhaps the best) i just wish we had a 5700le in that roundup i posted. i believe the 5700le is clocked lower than the 5600 card in that roundup and that kind of scares me.
rage, you are correct that the 5700 nvidia drivers are better than the radeon 8500/9100 drivers.
Actually Radeon 9100 is based on the same Radeon 8500 core back in 2001, that 3 years old technology and 5700LE is just only 1 year old now.
Still, the Radeon 9100 is the fastest PCI card available. But with the current state of drivers for the R2xx I would say pass. What really matters most when it comes to PCI video cards is the amount of frame buffer the card has.
Highest FPS: Radeon 9100 128mb
Smoothest game play in older games: Geforce FX 5700LE 128mb
Smoothest game play in newer games: BFG Geforce FX 5200 256mb
Most newer games eat a lot of video memory and when a PCI card runs out of video memory it's SOL. It cannot interface with the system ram like an AGP card can. Call of Duty is a good example.
It's a toss up between the 128mb 5700LE and the 256mb 5200.
rage, you are correct that the 5700 nvidia drivers are better than the radeon 8500/9100 drivers.
Yes. I am currently using a Radeon 9000 for my primary gaming card. I have encountered no less than 4 bugs in CS: Source (one of which is a white box around every light source and the box can be seen through walls). It's not the game ether because I did not have thoughs troubles with my 6800GT.
tristancarton
10-25-04, 06:27 PM
Most newer games eat a lot of video memory and when a PCI card runs out of video memory it's SOL. It cannot interface with the system ram like an AGP card can. Call of Duty is a good example.
very very good point.
example: my 64 mb 9100 can run the far cry demo at a constant 35-45 at 1024 with everything on the lowest settings possible. however if i bump it up to medium settings the game runs at 5fps-30.(mostly 5, esp. when you move the mouse around alot) this is due to the slow as crap pci bus and the video memory swapping. this will get ten times worse as games get more detailed.
i will say however the pci 9100 i have runs the cs:source timedemo pretty gosh darn well and should be able to run hl2 well.(hl2 runs amazingly well on 8500 cards)
anzak, are you using the 8.07 beta drivers or the omega drivers based off of them for your 9000. i know i had problems in cs source when i used the betas. i went back to the 4.9s and that fixed the problem. not sure about 4.10 because the 9100 isn't in my secondary pc right now.
XanderF
10-30-04, 06:55 PM
It's a toss up between the 128mb 5700LE and the 256mb 5200.
Ummm...why would it be a tossup between a 128mb 5700LE and a 256mb FX5200?
Why not just get the PCI GeForce FX 5700LE 256mb (http://www.amamax.com/gefx5712ddr1.html)?
Bit pricey, but if your option is ONLY PCI....this card should kick ass!
5700 LE has only 4 pixel piplines. AT 250Mhz it will be no better than 5200 (also 4 piplines at 250Mhzs). BFG's PCI 5200 se is at 270 and comes with 256mb of Vram.
the 5700 LE may be able to OC to higher clock speeds than 5200se.
So bottom line you must OC the 5700Le to see any real performance over 5200. The 5600 (also 4 piplines) is clocked at 325. So by default the 5600 owns the 5700LE. And it will be an even better overclocker.
the only thing the 5700 LE has over 5200 and 5600 is more vertex processors and piplines, but that is not going to do jack when rendering high quality textures and lighting which is the real cause for low frame rates in games.
coldpower27
10-30-04, 08:28 PM
The 5700 LE maybe clocked at only 250MHZ, but it also contains the color compression, and Intellisample technology, of it's bigger brothers unlike the FX 5200.
The FX 5700 LE, also get the benefits of having 3 Vertex Shaders and Ultra Shadow technology. I would say the FX 5700 LE 256MB, is one of the best cards available for PCI form, the Radeon 9100 is good, though is hindered by the poor driver support, and lack of DX9.
Daneel Olivaw
10-30-04, 10:18 PM
5700 LE has only 4 pixel piplines. AT 250Mhz it will be no better than 5200 (also 4 piplines at 250Mhzs). BFG's PCI 5200 se is at 270 and comes with 256mb of Vram.
the 5700 LE may be able to OC to higher clock speeds than 5200se.
So bottom line you must OC the 5700Le to see any real performance over 5200. The 5600 (also 4 piplines) is clocked at 325. So by default the 5600 owns the 5700LE. And it will be an even better overclocker.
the only thing the 5700 LE has over 5200 and 5600 is more vertex processors and piplines, but that is not going to do jack when rendering high quality textures and lighting which is the real cause for low frame rates in games.
I'm not sure about the details but the 5700 is closer to a 4x1 while the 5200 is closer to a 2x2. I owned a 5700nu (AGP) for a while, and it performed exactly like a ti4200, which is not bad IMO. And a 5700 core clock can go real high, I think I was running close to 500MHz.
Baracade980
11-09-04, 06:53 PM
Actually, I'm having the same issue guys. I'd also like to know what graphics card for pci would be good. I'm planning on getting some higher end games (HL2) and which one would you say can run the new stuff the best. Thanks.
tristancarton
11-10-04, 12:00 AM
Just grab the card xanderf put up in his post. It is most likely the fastest out nowadays.
Actually, I'm having the same issue guys. I'd also like to know what graphics card for pci would be good. I'm planning on getting some higher end games (HL2) and which one would you say can run the new stuff the best. Thanks.
No PCI card can handle todays games such as Half Life 2 and Doom 3. The PCI bus is just to slow. I would recommend buying a cheap motherboard and an AGP card like he Radeon 9600 pro.
tristancarton
11-10-04, 02:46 AM
No PCI card can handle todays games such as Half Life 2 and Doom 3. The PCI bus is just to slow. I would recommend buying a cheap motherboard and an AGP card like he Radeon 9600 pro.
while I totally agree with your assessment of buying a cheap agp motherboard and an agp card, your statement is not entirely true. i ran benchmarks with my athlon 2600 and 64mb pci radeon 9100 for bklevan(other guy in pci thread wanting to know about pci cards) to let him know it ran games.
benchmarks from my session:
cs source (engine hl2 runs on) test benchmark: 800x600 everything on high 16x anistropic filtering, 48 fps
far cry island demo (runs very well)
1024x768 everything on low runs 36-48 fps. Still looks decent. Running everything on medium causes texture swapping and cuts frame rates down to 5fps at times.
doom3 timedemo(barely playable, pretty sure due to texture swapping all of the time)
640x480 everything on as low i get 33 fps
so yes games are playable. just not at high res/detail. in addition i would guess having a 256mb 5700le card may also help with some of the texture swapping I was seeing which cut down my 9100s fps.
link to rage3d forum from a month ago where i originally posted the testing i did for bklevan
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33785711
Baracade980
11-10-04, 07:27 PM
Unfortunately, switching out the motherboard is not an option... I already looked into it. And don't say buy a new machine either.
However, if it'll run that stuff decently like you guys say, I'll be happy with it. In any case, I think it'll be better than the integrated intel graphics I currently have (and if thats not true, whats up with that?) Also, I read somewhere that the GeForce FX5700 series is the cheepest bare for the recomended requirements of HL2... course that could be false, but it wont stop me from playing it :)
BTW- thanks for the link.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.