HD2400 & HD2600 AGP from sapphire - Page 3 - Overclock.net

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #21 of 47 Old 05-28-2007, 04:28 PM
News Fiend
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 312
Yes!!! An upgrade for my HTPC!!! Didn't think it was ever going to happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Duke go_quote.gif
Where is the Y and Z version... got to add those to fill in the alphabet... whats a few more versions!
Actually, if I was a MB maker, I'd be getting :swearing: and then doh.gif and eek.gif and laugher.gif @ that pile of :turd: concept of marketing.
Cheetos316 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22 of 47 Old 05-28-2007, 04:35 PM
4.0 GHz
 
MGX1016's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: New York City
Posts: 5,556
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malachor View Post
Hey man not everyone here is rich, poor people have feelings too.

But it's still good, they are trying to expand it too a wider market, I don't see the bad in that if you want to sell it to more people.

But you don't none of you own those companies so how should you know if AGP deserves to die.
What the HECK are you talking about? If you have enough money to afford an HD anything card in AGP go and buy a PCI-E MB + Good CPU first, save more before. Then get a good PCIe card. AGP Cards are going to be so bottlenecked by the damn CPU. Unless you get a crappy C2D AGP mobo that will barely oc or stock c lol....

LET AGP DIE. It's just crappy and if you have enough money for these cards you may as well have enough money to get a new cpu + mb.

Quote:
Originally Posted by manolith go_quote.gif
I guess that intel is really serious about competin with itself.
MGX1016 is offline  
post #23 of 47 Old 05-28-2007, 04:49 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
eternaldj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Arcadia, CA
Posts: 2,135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 136
Anyone know the price? o.O

Aumotocnic "An unfortunate member of the overclock.net insomnia club"
eternaldj is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #24 of 47 Old 05-28-2007, 04:50 PM
4.0 GHz
 
MGX1016's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: New York City
Posts: 5,556
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by eternaldj View Post
Anyone know the price? o.O
It's not going to be cheap
MKLAW likes this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by manolith go_quote.gif
I guess that intel is really serious about competin with itself.
MGX1016 is offline  
post #25 of 47 Old 05-28-2007, 07:35 PM
I can change this?? Neat!
 
Choggs396's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,347
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 893
Quote:
Originally Posted by MGX1016 View Post
What the HECK are you talking about? If you have enough money to afford an HD anything card in AGP go and buy a PCI-E MB + Good CPU first, save more before. Then get a good PCIe card. AGP Cards are going to be so bottlenecked by the damn CPU. Unless you get a crappy C2D AGP mobo that will barely oc or stock c lol....

LET AGP DIE. It's just crappy and if you have enough money for these cards you may as well have enough money to get a new cpu + mb.
+1 Rep 4u... I don't care what anyone else says, for the most part the above statement IS true. I have experienced this myself...

I have an AGP system: XP 2500+ / A7N8X-E deluxe mobo / 9600XT / 1GB DDR400 Corsair XMS. I received a VisionTek Radeon X1950Pro AGP 256MB AGP card as a Christmas gift, and said to myself "sweeeet!". Well, turns out it didn't do much compared 3+ year old Radeon 9600XT.

The card was horribly bottlenecked... my MAX frame rate went up a little in some games like HL2/CSS, Doom 3, Quake 4, etc. to around 60-70 FPS in fairly high detail, but the rates were typically around 10-20 most of the time - just like with the 9600XT (max detail also.) So basically I had to set the detail to med-low @ low resolutions just like the old card to make the games playable.

I ended up selling the card on Ebay, and obviously took a price hit being that it was from Best Buy (rip-off city). I felt bad selling a gift from my parents, but it was seriously a waste of money.

Long story short - If you are into newer games, AGP is simply not cost effective. It may cost more to do a complete upgrade or buy a new system, but at least the money is not being wasted.

I think, therefore I am.
- René Descartes


R.I.P. Syrillian

post-flame-small.gifOverclock.net Professionalism Initiative post-flame-small.gif
Choggs396 is offline  
post #26 of 47 Old 05-28-2007, 07:38 PM
4.0ghz
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 170
Simply because AGP is still sufficient. However, I think they should simply die out there and they should build on PCI-E.
dannyyboii is offline  
post #27 of 47 Old 05-28-2007, 07:41 PM
I'm no longer an Asushole
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Here nor there
Posts: 25,196
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 1299
Quote:
Originally Posted by Choggs396 View Post
+1 Rep 4u... I don't care what anyone else says, for the most part the above statement IS true. I have experienced this myself...

I have an AGP system: XP 2500+ / A7N8X-E deluxe mobo / 9600XT / 1GB DDR400 Corsair XMS. I received a VisionTek Radeon X1950Pro AGP 256MB AGP card as a Christmas gift, and said to myself "sweeeet!". Well, turns out it didn't do much compared 3+ year old Radeon 9600XT.

The card was horribly bottlenecked... my MAX frame rate went up a little in some games like HL2/CSS, Doom 3, Quake 4, etc. to around 60-70 FPS in fairly high detail, but the rates were typically around 10-20 most of the time - just like with the 9600XT (max detail also.) So basically I had to set the detail to med-low @ low resolutions just like the old card to make the games playable.

I ended up selling the card on Ebay, and obviously took a price hit being that it was from Best Buy (rip-off city). I felt bad selling a gift from my parents, but it was seriously a waste of money.

Long story short - If you are into newer games, AGP is simply not cost effective. It may cost more to do a complete upgrade or buy a new system, but at least the money is not being wasted.
What did you expect on a 16" monitor, that's all CPU rendering pretty much.
Do your folks know you sold the card?

Chimp Challenge Championship Team  Chimp Challenge Participant  6 Million+ Folding at Home points 

grunion is offline  
post #28 of 47 Old 05-28-2007, 07:43 PM
4.0 GHz
 
MGX1016's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: New York City
Posts: 5,556
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Choggs396 View Post
+1 Rep 4u... I don't care what anyone else says, for the most part the above statement IS true. I have experienced this myself...

I have an AGP system: XP 2500+ / A7N8X-E deluxe mobo / 9600XT / 1GB DDR400 Corsair XMS. I received a VisionTek Radeon X1950Pro AGP 256MB AGP card as a Christmas gift, and said to myself "sweeeet!". Well, turns out it didn't do much compared 3+ year old Radeon 9600XT.

The card was horribly bottlenecked... my MAX frame rate went up a little in some games like HL2/CSS, Doom 3, Quake 4, etc. to around 60-70 FPS in fairly high detail, but the rates were typically around 10-20 most of the time - just like with the 9600XT (max detail also.) So basically I had to set the detail to med-low @ low resolutions just like the old card to make the games playable.

I ended up selling the card on Ebay, and obviously took a price hit being that it was from Best Buy (rip-off city). I felt bad selling a gift from my parents, but it was seriously a waste of money.

Long story short - If you are into newer games, AGP is simply not cost effective. It may cost more to do a complete upgrade or buy a new system, but at least the money is not being wasted.
Lol ty, even though I never got it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by manolith go_quote.gif
I guess that intel is really serious about competin with itself.
MGX1016 is offline  
post #29 of 47 Old 05-28-2007, 08:07 PM
4.0ghz
 
J3r3my's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 5,423
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by NuclearCrap View Post
No problem.

We should equip ourselves with silenced pistols and go around stores shooting every AGP card.
They multiply faster than you can kill them...theres no stopping them!

J3r3my is offline  
post #30 of 47 Old 05-28-2007, 08:23 PM
I can change this?? Neat!
 
Choggs396's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,347
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 893
Quote:
Originally Posted by grunion View Post
What did you expect on a 16" monitor, that's all CPU rendering pretty much.
Do your folks know you sold the card?
Why would a 16" monitor imply more CPU rendering? A 16" monitor compared to what?

And no, I didn't tell them because I didn't want them to think that they didn't get me a good enough gift for some reason. I can't explain it completely but even though it's a hunk of circuits it's still a sentimental thing to them. Don't ask me why, who knows why anyone's parents think the way they do.

I think, therefore I am.
- René Descartes


R.I.P. Syrillian

post-flame-small.gifOverclock.net Professionalism Initiative post-flame-small.gif
Choggs396 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off