X850xt

Z

zbo2408

New Member


I have an Emachines (please save wisemarks and insults because this computer came with some top notch equipment, is easily upgradable, and was only a few hundred bucks).
AMDAhtlong 64 3500+ 2.2Ghz processor
512KB L2 Cache
2000 MHz FSB
200GB 7200 RPM Hard Drive
1024MB DDR SDRAM Dual Channle
ATI Radeon X700Pro PCIE-16 Slot
It has Windows MCE2005.
It played Half Life 2 and Counter Striek Source and DoD Source no prob excellent framerates with everything maxed.

I bought Call of Duty 2 maxed everything out and get HOORIBLE frame rates.
Even with everything turned down the framerates aren't that good.
I made sure all of my drivers were up to date and same thing.

I can get an X850XT for 169 bucks. But I will need a new PS also. because the card needs a connection to the PS but my current PS can't do that.

Will this card last for a couple of generation of games? Can you help me find a PS emachines told me just to make sure its ATX... Can any one help me?
 
The X700 Pro is not the problem. Try running it with the basic drivers instead of the Catalyst Control Center. On older model AGP cards issues came up where you could download the Control Panel that ran these games without issues. That was last seen with 5.11 update. Have you tried turning off any antiliasing and reducing textures to see that helped? It's also possible you had a bad install where something didn't go on right.
 
If Call of Duty was the only game you ran that would be tried just for that. But since HALF LIFE 2 as well as Counter Strike are Source games that pound on memory as well as video and run good I don't see the need for swapping cards. But these games will demand the latest if you run just the basic drivers for the card. I would try a reinstall of CofD2 to confirm or rule out a problem with the initial installation to see if that is the cause. I know it can be a nuisance to reinstall due to the time involved. But the other games should have also seen problems with a card going bad.
 
no, the x700pro would definitely be a problem if you maxed call of duty 2's settings. another problem might be the ram... 1gb might not be enough for the quality, though i've only proved to myself that this is true for quake 4...

either way, get a 7600gt. its much preferred over the x850xt.. its got newer versions of everything.
they do perform very similarly though. my guess is that the 7600gt would last longer though because its on a 90nm process and it runs cooler.
http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics.html?modelx=33&model1=302&model2=286&chart=92
check it out the x700pro gets an average of 2fps in COD2 maxed settings... and with lower settings average of 19fps lol
 
Last edited:
I ought to go ahead an mention that I will only put ATI in this computer. I know they are not hands down the best, but this is just something that I am set in my ways and with the mobo being ATI/AMD and me having problems with NVIDIA in the past I am sticking with ATI for this comp.
I am relativley sure this x700 can't handle this game with everything maxed out. I can lower settings and the framerates are Decent not great and not enjoyable to play. But it doesn't look that great with everything down/off.

I uninstalled everything ATI on my comp went and downloaded the drivers installed them and still the same.
 
Encore4More said:
no the x850xt had 16 pixel pipelines
but ur an Nvidia fanboy... so i won't bother arguing... :P
Click to expand...
yes but if u have seen a side by side comparison that is the only thing it has over the 7600 and wow that aint much anyway and the 7600 has 3.0 pixel shaders to and i could go on so
 
Well you could look into the X1300 or even the latest X1900 XT cards to run ATI if not to go one step further with SLI. But that is also when the costs climb. Increasing memory to a pair of 1gb performance dimms is another thought since some of the games love ram.
 
ya if u realy do want to stay ati u should look into both those options is its because ur canadia im am to but many people i know stay with ati because it is canadian and they wana suport canadian economie me i preferably dont care yes the high end ati does out perform the high end nvidia but the mid range ati and nvidia like the x850 is the direct oponent of the 7600 gt and the 7600 gt out performs it they say if ur gooing high end get ati if ur going mid range go nvidia
 
I have the X700 pro and the frame rates aren't bad at all. With res at 1024x768, textures on high, dx9 on, everything else pretty much on high, with AA off, and I average around 20-40 FPS. If you really want it to be smooth, just turn DX7 mode on, and the framerate should be over 60 easily. I can even test it out. Make sure your catalyst drivers are up to date.

Edit: Just tested DX7 mode with everything else max, and it stayed over 60, and 70 too in lots of areas.
 
Last edited:
fade2green514 said:
no, the x700pro would definitely be a problem if you maxed call of duty 2's settings. another problem might be the ram... 1gb might not be enough for the quality, though i've only proved to myself that this is true for quake 4... lol
Click to expand...

This part I am in full agreement with after finding that to be the case when running some older games as well as HALF LIFE 2. Some of the games that have come out in the last year or so provide the more intense levels of graphics for the realism. That puts a big demand on memory along with other resources like graphics acceleration. You could try knocking the acceleration down a knotch to see if that helps. That's an old tip from game support sites.
 
Encore4More said:
no the x850xt had 16 pixel pipelines
but ur an Nvidia fanboy... so i won't bother arguing... :P
Click to expand...
Check your facts before you start calling someone a fanboy. The 7600GT easily holds its own against (and is generally better than) an X850XT:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/03/21/bfg_7600_gt_oc_ati_x1800gto/8.html
The Above Site said:
The BFG 7600 GT OC hits £150 and clearly beats out the performance of the GeForce 6800 GS and Radeon X850XT cards in that price range. At £170, the ATI Radeon X1800GTO appears to be straying a little close to the £200-gets-a-7800 GT mark.
Click to expand...

Additionally, the 7600GT is cheaper, quieter, cooler, less power-hungry, and uses a single-slot cooling. If you can post reviews showing the X850XT to be better, i'd love to see them.

Well you could look into the X1300 or even the latest X1900 XT cards to run ATI if not to go one step further with SLI. But that is also when the costs climb. Increasing memory to a pair of 1gb performance dimms is another thought since some of the games love ram.
Click to expand...
The X1300 wouldn't really be much of an upgrade. An X1800XT or X1900XT would be a good choice, although more expensive.

I am relativley sure this x700 can't handle this game with everything maxed out. I can lower settings and the framerates are Decent not great and not enjoyable to play. But it doesn't look that great with everything down/off.
Click to expand...
Correct. If you want to be able to play newer games maxed out, though, even an X850XT will not be sufficient

Will this card last for a couple of generation of games? Can you help me find a PS emachines told me just to make sure its ATX... Can any one help me?
Click to expand...
Budget? An XCLIO 450BL or Antec Smartpower 450W might be what you're looking for
 
I was hopin to get a card that I can max out settings on CoD2 and a ps to support the rest of the life of this computer. For under $230.00 I think I am starting to realize this isn't very feasible. I was looking at Tom's hardware and with CoD2 maxed out at 1024x768 nothing ran it over 50-60 fps and that was the 800 dollar cards...

No I am not Canadian I have just had good experiences with ATI and bad with Nvidia, I am fully aware that in some cases ATI is better and in some Nvidia is better this is just one of those things. Kinda like I would never by a Dodge truck... My F-150 has 194k miles and has 0 problems....My moms dodge has 30k miles and been in the shop 3 or 4 times.
 
In many cases it's not ATI or NVidia but the board specs that favor one brand over another. I've run both on older boards seeing one beat out the other just running them stock. The idea of suggesting either the X1300 for replacing the X700 Pro was to meet needs without the expense for the latest if that's not affordable along with being over qualified for your current hardwares. The idea somewhat is to have the best matchup to see the best overall performance that can still be cost effective.
 
What about just getting a bigger power supply and overclocking the X700 until the higher end cards get cheaper? Tom's hardware showed nothing runnning COD2 at frame rates above 30 that wasn't a 300+ dollar card. 170 is about the max I want to spend on a card right now.
 
If you have to spend even upto $170- you are in a rush. What are you running for a supply now? A good one I hope. But just going bigger doesn't always either. You want stability along with that extra power onhand.
 
That can be a big problem when gaming for sure. Most manufacturer's right off the top recommend at least a 350w supply. Most gamers run upwards of a 430-450w to as far as 600w. When you start pushing the video and memory along with the cpu that places a good sized load on the supply itself. A good number of the new games out do just that. Personally I'll be looking into either a 480w or 550w supply for the next build.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top