Re:I totally understand what the author of this article is saying. Far too many benchmark articles don't use hardware configurations realistic to that of the audience. Using the ultra uber rig to test out the lastest video card is fine and dandy for discovering peak performance and hardware=>hardware comparison, but does little for real world situations in determining if a video card/ram/cpu upgrade will help out an 'average' system.
I don't know if this will help… but I did find a good article over at Xbit labs that tests 16 video cards on a relatively average rig (Athlon 64 4000+ 2.4ghz, 1GB PC3200, Audigy2 ZS, other standard stuff).
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/2005-17gpu.html
Was good for me.. since my rig is very similar (A64 3000 at 2.4 ghz… 2GB RAM, Audigy 2zs… etc…)
Re:Thanks for the bump, Captain Obvious. It's just called a "suggestion" and it's amazing but things often work out better when they're taken.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
[quote]
Originally posted by: guy
If you want to propose a reasonable idea, which I think your concept is, why screw it up by turning your own proposal into another AMD vs Intel debate ?
That's exactly why the heck I said NOT to get into that. It's too much wasted rehashed debate.
__________________________________________________ ________________________
You don't have the authority to control the posts of other people and it is inappropriate to post your opinons and ask people not to respond to them.
For some reason you decided to include your negative opinion about Intel as compared to AMD, it's crazy to expect no one would respond.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
If you want to propose a reasonable idea, which I think your concept is, why screw it up by turning your own proposal into another AMD vs Intel debate ?
That's exactly why the heck I said NOT to get into that. It's too much wasted rehashed debate.
guy – of course you wouldn't do it. None of us would. Incredibly few of us even have all the necessary parts. The request is clearly for the people who run the site and do reviews already and have access to a lot more hardware than we do.
Re:While I wouldnt personally do such a review I should be able to give some anecdotal evidence as to which upgrades help out. I'm currently on a 2000+ with a 9800pro and my asrock dual + 3500+ venice should be showing up today. With my current setup FEAR ran fine with some lower settings, I did have to turn textures down to low to handle outdoor scenes. Other than that I could run the game on medium textures with most settings on low or medium without dipping below 40fps. My roommate already on a 3400+ (754) just is going from a 9800 pro to a 6800gt.
I totally agree with this, tomshardware tried something like this that was very encompassing, unfortunately from what I remember they didnt do new tests they took some old results using
drivers that ranged quite a bit.
Re:I have a Athlon 64 3200+ system, and a P4 Northwood 3.2 system, they perform almost identically in games, with a slight edge to the P4.
So as far as I'm concerned the prevailing view that A64 systems are vastly superior for gaming is wrong. At least in the low to mid priced range.
If you want to propose a reasonable idea, which I think your concept is, why screw it up by turning your own proposal into another AMD vs Intel debate ?
Re:I never said what people are playing on, I said what gamers are upgrading to, which is by a vast majority AMD A64-based systems. If as you say, you don't need a high-end processor, that's all the more reason to go AMD since their cheaper processors are comparatively even better deals. An A64 3000+ should run much cheaper than a comparatively performing Intel chip.
This is why I said don't even waste your breath. Welcome to the forums, though.
Also, thus far BF2 is the only game that shows significant improvement from adding a second GB of memory. See the FiringSquad links in my last post, where one mentions adding a second GB showed practically no improvement in FEAR, etc.
Re:Originally posted by: guyAdding an Intel system would just create a lot more work for the reviewer for little actual public benefit.
You should not turn this thread into a debate about why they should waste time with an Intel test rig.
You're kidding me right? A quick check of the steam survey (http://steampowered.com/status/survey/html) shows quite a bit of actual public benefit, don't you think?
Processor Vendor
AuthenticAMD 399,377 47.77 % ################################################
CentaurHauls 73 0.01 %
CyrixInstead 3 0.00 %
GenuineIntel 436,638 52.22 % ################################################## ##
GenuineTMx86 4 0.00 %
Virtual CPU 4 0.00 %
More and more the cpu's becoming mad overkill with today's games focused on wiz-bang graphics. If budget's a concern, any AMD64 @ 2.0Ghz or P4 @ 3.0Ghz will do fine in today's modern games. If you're lookin' for more peformance, buy a better heatsink and clock it up 20%.
FWIW, I've played Battlefield 2 with a 4.0p4 and 1GB@ddr500 of ram on a 6800GT. Then I played it on a 3.0p4 and 2GB@ddr400 of ram on a 6800GT. A 25% slower cpu, a 20% slower ram speed, but the extra gig of ram made a HUGE difference. The stuttering witnessed in the first setup absolutely marred the gameplay experience. What I'm getting at here's the cpu's decreasing role in 3d gaming.
Re:guy: Why send anyone parts when Anandtech already has parts?
guy: Yup, that's what I run currently – 9800Pro and AXP 2500+ o/c'd to around 2700+ speeds. I only have a 17" LCD right now (no need for a bigger one with this system) yet I can't imagine playing ANY game in less than 1024x these days. In 1024x, sure I can play FEAR and COD2 demos – if I turn off shadows and lower the graphics settings a bit.
I am really curious though, when I buy my next system, which will most likely be an A64 3200+, what is the cheapest GPU that will play the games in 1280x with AA/AF or 1600x smoothly (on a 19"-20" LCD) even in firefights and other graphically intense settings.
Can I get away with a 6800GT or X800XL, or do I really have to jump up to a 7800GT now while they're still new and pretty expensive? Will a 7800GT really give me a large increase in performance on a system powered by a 3200+ chip? These questions and more would be answered by a review that uses mid-to-high-end hardware instead of only ever ultra-high-end parts.
Btw, this is the sort of review I'm looking for:
http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2005/10/24/fear/5.html
and this:
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/fear_cpu_performance/
and this:
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/fear_performance_mainstream/
Re:I'm still playing games on my 9800Pro and Athelon XP. It would be nice to see some benchmarks relate to my system for once, but I've found pretty much every game I've bought is playable on my machine with setting changes.
The biggest problem I've run into recently was purchasing a 2005FPW. Normally, I'd run new games at 800×600, but now I'm forced to 1280×720 if I want the game to look 'correct' on the new monitor. This made it rough for me to get decent frame rates in Quake4, but I still managed perfectly fine.
Re:Send me all that hardware and I'll review anything you like
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Hehe I think for the Athlon XPs (which are on AGP boards), once you get above a 9800Pro or 6800GT there's not much else you could buy GPU-wise for the board anyway.
In fact I think most of the buyers in the market are upgrading from XP systems. (I am.)
I upgraded to a sempron 64 (didnt have $$ for A64) and while i can't run 4xFSAA and 16xAF, i ran FEAR pretty well at 800×600 on a 9800 NP
Re:Hehe I think for the Athlon XPs (which are on AGP boards), once you get above a 9800Pro or 6800GT there's not much else you could buy GPU-wise for the board anyway.
In fact I think most of the buyers in the market are upgrading from XP systems. (I am.)
Re:I completely agree with you.
though i would personally like to see AthlonXP benchies as well, but I realize that's unreasonable
Re:Fair enough. Not asking for Athlon XP benchmarks though, just benches from MID-RANGE current gen parts. Not old parts, just mid-range of the latest generation of processors. For AMD that is the Athlon 64 Venice core and the dual-core 4×00+ series chips. That is what most gamers buy.
There's no reason they can't build a reasonable rig and test several commonly purchased $250-350 video cards in it to see how they run the latest games. The X800XL, X850XT PE, 6800GT/Ultra, and 7800GT are all in that price range and are the most commonly purchased cards for that price range. Wouldn't it be nice to see how they're going to perform in your rig before you spend the money to upgrade to a 7800GT you really might not actually get much benefit from in your rig until down the road when you also upgrade your CPU (by which time the 7800GT will be much cheaper)?
What about those of us building such a rig today, who want to know what GPU to go with without overspending? I don't want to buy a 7800GT for a 3200+ Venice system if I really won't see enough performance benefit over a 6800GT until/unless I also increase CPU speed. But we don't know these numbers because Anandtech hasn't bothered to test those cards in such a machine, so we don't know ACTUAL percentage gains and differences between the cards when playing the latest games on a rig like that.
Also, yes, I don't have a high postcount or old reg date, but that's going to be the case when I never bothered with the forums here for the first five and a half years I read the site. Oh well.
Re:I do agree with you about all the benchmarking being done on most of the hardware sites. They usually use uber setups whether they're benching a 6600gt or a 7800gtx. When I'm still using an Athlon xp rig I have to wonder how much crappier my 6600gt will run in games on my rig compared to an Athlon 64/FX setup or something similar. I don't believe that will ever change though. Most people won't want to read benches being done on an old athlon xp rig on major sites like this one.
Also, your really asking a lot from the AT community. Most people don't want to set their equipment at stock setting and do a good hours worth of benchmarking. For the most part, the benches your looking for have already been posted in the various game threads by users already. Also consider that you, like myself, don't have 5,000+ posts so it isn't easy to get the whole AT community to heed your call.
0 Comments.