Pre-AM2 Mid-Range Buyers' Guide, May 2006
by Jarred Walton on May 9, 2006 6:30 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
Video Recommendations
Both platforms use PCI-E graphics, naturally, so at least we don't have to worry about that aspect of choosing a graphics card. Beyond that, there are a wide variety of graphics cards that are all suitable recommendations, especially depending on individual needs. If you don't care at all about gaming performance, we would still stick with a GPU that costs somewhere in the $125 range. On the low end, the Radeon X1600 and GeForce 7600 products are reasonable choices. We spent slightly more money in order to get more performance. |
| Click to enlarge |
Graphics Recommendation: EVGA GeForce 7600GT CO 256MB (580/1500)
Price: $184 shipped (Retail)
For only a few dollars more than the stock 7600 GT, the EVGA 7600 GT is factory overclocked (from the default 560/1400 clock speeds). The price difference is small enough and EVGA's warranty policy is so much better than average that we feel it's a good choice. If you can't find the EVGA card in stock where you live, just about any 7600 GT should be acceptable. The performance offered is slightly better than the old 6800 GT cards overall, due to architectural enhancements. That said, there are certainly games out there (Oblivion and F.E.A.R. for example) where you will still have to turn down the detail levels in order to get acceptable frame rates. If gaming is your only passion, you might consider one of the following upgrades - and you can always cut the cost of the processor if you're trying to stay within a budget, as most games will still be GPU limited at high resolutions.
If you prefer ATI cards, for a bit more money (about $200) you can go with the X1800 GTO. In benchmarks, the GTO trades places with the 7600 GT, and both are 12 pipeline cards. Priced at around $290, you can find the 7900 GT cards. Maximum performance (with factory overclocked models) is about 50% to 75% higher than the 7600 GT, so performance scales almost linearly with price. At just over $300, you can now find X1800 XT cards on sale. They don't have all of the architectural improvements of the X1900 series, but you do get 512MB of RAM which is starting to become useful in a few games. We would say it remains a reasonable alternative to the 7900 GT, and in games like Oblivion the X1800 XT comes out on top. Going beyond the $300 range, cards like the X1900 XT/XTX and 7900 GTX are available, but that's definitely moving out of the realm of midrange components.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
56 Comments
View All Comments
ZJB298 - Wednesday, May 17, 2006 - link
K, so I'm a huge newb, but what's the point of getting or switching to X16 over X8 if there is no performance impact? Is there likely to be more of a performance impact for a gamer or a higher-end graphics card than for a normal user?Basically, is it worth it for me to go searching for another, more expensive motherboard with X16 slots over X8 slots?
JarredWalton - Saturday, May 20, 2006 - link
In my opinion, NO! Dual X16 is just a lot of marketing hype. The board that sport it might benchmark faster at times (by 5% or so), but 5% can be had through BIOS optimizations.Crassus - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
Thanks for a new Buyer's Guide. I wondered when the next one would come for quite some time. It maybe not necessary to bring them as often as when they started, but right now I think they're spaced a wee bit too far apart.It's always a very helpful read and I use it not only as a recommendation of what to buy, but also as an indication of where the industry stands at this time, i.e. what the standard is for any given component. Keep up the good work and (maybe) update them a little more often again.
sabrewulf - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
"Plenty of people are still running old socket 478, 462, and 754 systems, and they're perfectly happy with the level of performance and they have. The latest and greatest computer games almost certainly wouldn't run on those older systems without drastically reducing the graphics quality"754 + PCI-E = perfectly capable of running with maximum eye-candy.
LoneWolf15 - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
And the percentage of Socket 754 mainboards with PCI-E is?Socket 754 performance is decent, but it's truly a dead-end. For hard-core gamers, I'd urge them to get out while they can sell their parts for reasonable cost, much like I'd have said to Socket 423 owners when the P4 switched to 478.
JarredWalton - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
Notice the "OLD" socket 754 part? Obviously, newer 754 PCIe boards are okay. LOL I still do a ton of work on my 754 + 6800GT system, though.sabrewulf - Friday, May 12, 2006 - link
Sorry I guess I didn't notice that word. I'm mostly just speaking up for people like my brother who last year wanted to upgrade his graphics card, but already has a 2.4 ghz 754 chip and couldn't afford a new video card AND an equivalent 939 CPU at the same time, so he got a cheap solid 754 PCI-E board instead. Works great for him, and with AM2 right around the corner, it looks like an even smarter purchase since he can pretty much skip 939 altogether.LoneWolf15 - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
The thought of Socket AM2 didn't excite me, but not just because of the lack of performance. So I think this Upgrade Guide makes a lot of sense (well, at least if you don't need to do a mainboard upgrade at present time).Just the thought of having to completely reload Windows XP was enough to cause me (a month ago) to decide it was better to upgrade to 2GB of DDR and go from a Winchester 3000+ to an Athlon 64 X2 3800+, with no mainboard swap required. My MSI Neo 4 Platinum has been a good board. I plan on getting one year more at the very least out of it before I consider the new platform. I'm sure AM2 is the best option for anyone who still has an Athlon XP (unless they don't wish to save by not swapping out RAM) and that waiting for new Intel hardware is the best solution for anyone who currently has a Socket 478 system or earlier, but now that I have a system board I'm completely happy with, it's really hard to justify an upgrade that would require me to gut the OS...I no longer have that kind of time on a regular basis.
APKasten - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
I find it really hard to believe that 1GB of PC3200, even at low latencies, is worth almost $200. I can get 2 GB at higher latency (4-4-4-7) for about $150! Is the performance boost really worth that much money for just 1 GB? I was always under the impression that more RAM was better than having extra low latency RAM.I took AnandTech's recommendation to get the OCZ EL 512MB (2x256MB) Kit (2.5-3-2-6?) a few years ago. I replaced that with a GeIL 1 GB (2x512MB) kit at 4-4-4-7 last year and I have since had much better performance from my system. That was the only thing I changed on my box. So I guess my real question is, wouldn't 2 GB at higher latencies be better than 1 GB at lower latencies, bang-for-buck-wise?
APKasten - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
Holy crap. Nevermind...I just realized that it was a 2GB kit you were talking about in the article.Sorry. *rolls eyes*