HijackGMH Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 I'm posting on the main board to reach a wider audience. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am currently using the following: 16MB Diamond Viper NVIDIA TNT AGP card 450 MHZ PIII w/512 cache I would like to upgrade my system to enhance Combat Mission. I figure my video card is the limiting factor. Would you experts give me a recommendation of what video card to upgrade to? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pham911 Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 Just a warning, steer clear of ATI Rage 128 chipset cards. They won't support fog in CM. Otherwise, I've no clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeri Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 I have a system with the already over a yaer old Matrox G400 (32MB DH). Although it cannot compete against the newer GeForce ect. cards in terms of 3D speed it is certainly sufficient for CM (At least I am very content with it). Since it is already an older card it shouldn't be that expensive (if that is a factor in your decision). Besides 3D performance which is adequate (comparable to at least TNT2) it has two very good features namely: - Dual head: which means you can connect a second monitor or TV to your computer. I use this quite regular to whatch DVD's on my TV and it works great. - Excelent 2D quality: This is especially an issue when you have a big monitor and use high resolutions (1600*1200 and the likes). Matrox have a tradition of being the best cards for 2D. I have this card for a year now and I am very content with it (including playing CM). If you like this card you can also consider the G450 which is a recent product with basically the same 3D performance but some extra things (not sure what). When you are only interested in raw 3D speed you are better of with a different card. Maybe GF2, Ati Radeon? Hope this helps, Joeri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daveman Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 If cost is a concern, I don't think you can go wrong with a Voodoo3 3000. I don't know what they're going for now after the release of the newer Voodoo's but when they came out they were a reasonable $150ish. It's not the latest and greatest, but I think it's got the most bang for the buck. CM, and a number of flight sims and FPS all play great at 1024x768 on my moderate P2-300 w/ 64mb RAM. It doesn't have any FSAA, but as I said, this is a bargain choice. I have noticed some posts here complaining about this card and CM though. I haven't had any problems myself... well, if I esc or alt-tab and return to CM I sometimes get a bunch of white lines across the screen, but esc/alt-tab back out and in again clears it right up. ------------------ “Out in front every one is holding out. Every one. My grenadiers and my engineers and my tank crews – they’re all holding their ground. Not a single man is leaving his post. They are lying silent in their foxholes for they are dead.” – Gen. Fritz Bayerlein on an order to hold his position Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teamski Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 Without a doubt, the Geforce2 GTS is your choice. FOr about $250, you get the next generation card thats pretty damn quick. I love using FSAA that this card is capable of, (Full Screen Anti-Aliasing) with CM. It sharpens everything up and takes all of the graphical "shimmering" away. It Makes a BIG difference in the display quality..... -Ski ------------------ "The Lieutenant brought his map out and the old woman pointed to the coastal town of Ravenoville........" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gashford Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 I have a GE Force Annihilator Pro, 32MB. Works like a dream with no problems, or slowing even on large maps. My system is an Athelon 500Mhz, 128MB. Hope this helps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 I think Dave is on the right track. If you go to high on a card, then your system might end up being the bottleneck anyway. Also, how much RAM is in your system? It's always possible that more memory may actually be a better upgrade for you. You could actually get a faster card AND a memory upgrade combined for close to, or less than the price you might pay for the highest end video cards. I think a Voodoo3 or TNT2 card and 128M of RAM would be a better upgrade than a Geforce2 GTS for example. [This message has been edited by Mr. T (edited 09-22-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemo2 Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 It's important to realize that with a PIII-450 processor, some of the newer video cards will not provide as much of performance increase over other generation cards as you might think. i.e. - GeForce2 over an original GeForce. That being said, I would recomend a GeForce card of some sort. Either the GeForce2 GTS or GeForce2 MX. You may want to consider the original GeForce card too. (On a PIII 450, the difference between a GeForce and GeForce 2 isn't as big of difference as you'd expect by having the new GeForce2 chip.) Many people prefer the Voodoo 5500 card too. (My personal preference is the GeForce, but there's no doubt Voodoo makes an excellent chip too.) I guess it depends on how much you want to spend and if you will keep this card for a future upgrade of your motherboard/cpu. If you plan to upgrade this part too someday, then get the faster video card today even though you will not realize all it's potential now. If it's a 'final' purchase for this computer, then I wouldn't get anything faster than the original GeForce or would even consider the previous TNT2 Ultra to save money because the little performance increase isn't worth the added cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 I owned a V3 3000, but I just upgraded to the V4 4500. I can now use the mods in CM without any slowdown. I'm running a P3 600 w/256 Megs of RAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HijackGMH Posted September 22, 2000 Author Share Posted September 22, 2000 Thanks to all for your replies. I am only interested in improving the performance of Combat Mission and I don't intend to use this card to enhance any other games or a future system. My system memory is 384Meg already, so I figured the card was my best route for improvement. Given this scenario, would you recommend the original GeForce card? Thanks again for your expertise! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcelt Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 I am also thinking of upgrading from V3 to either V5 or Geforce 2. Are there any considerations re backward compatibility with games like European Air War etc. Thanks for any insights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compassion Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HijackGMH: Thanks to all for your replies. I am only interested in improving the performance of Combat Mission and I don't intend to use this card to enhance any other games or a future system. My system memory is 384Meg already, so I figured the card was my best route for improvement. Given this scenario, would you recommend the original GeForce card? Thanks again for your expertise!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I would go for the GeForce 2 MX. Better performance than the original GeForce AND has hardware FSAA (and this directly impacts CM performance). My GeForce 256 (the origional) uses software FSAA and its very nice, but I'd prefer hardware. You and I have similar systems in that I have a dual celeron 466 box, but for games I've been playing in WIn98 and I can see the hit of using FSAA... For similar prices (My GeForce 256 DDR is still selling for about what the new GeForce 2 MX is priced at), I'd definately go for the richer features, faster speed and competitive price of the MX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priest Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 Gforce 2 MX It is reasonably priced and has 32MB RAM. It features the same chipset but fewer processors. IIRC the card kept up with the much more expensive GForce 2 GTS 32MB all the way to 1024x768. I personally use a GForce 2 GTS with 64MB RAM and am playing CM at about 1200+ res but the card is expensive. Buy the MX and invest in 64MB ram stick for the system. Enjoy. ------------------ Sir are you sure you want to go to red alert...it would mean changing the bulb -Priest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dumbo Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 Hey bro, My advice is get the card that has the least compatibility problems with games rather than worrying about a high end "turbo nutter bastard" card with go faster stripes. For my money you cant go far wrong with a Voodoo 3 by these criteria. just my 0.02c cheers _dumbo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teamski Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 pcelt: I run EAW with my Geforce2 and it really blew away the Voodoo3 3000 I used to have. I have no problems running the game with this card, especially with the new drivers. Believe it or not, I get NO slowed frames with EVERYTHING on in EAW. The game is starting to look dated, the card is so good! -Ski ------------------ "The Lieutenant brought his map out and the old woman pointed to the coastal town of Ravenoville........" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemo2 Posted September 22, 2000 Share Posted September 22, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Compassion: I would go for the GeForce 2 MX. Better performance than the original GeForce AND has hardware FSAA (and this directly impacts CM performance). My GeForce 256 (the origional) uses software FSAA and its very nice, but I'd prefer hardware. You and I have similar systems in that I have a dual celeron 466 box, but for games I've been playing in WIn98 and I can see the hit of using FSAA... For similar prices (My GeForce 256 DDR is still selling for about what the new GeForce 2 MX is priced at), I'd definately go for the richer features, faster speed and competitive price of the MX. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I've been interested in the new MX version of the GeForce, but could not verify it has hardware FSAA. Are you sure the MX version has hardware FSAA? From looking at nVidia's website on the features for the various chips, only the GeForce2 GTS Pro and the GeForce2 Ultra have hardware FSAA. (It does show the MX version has hardware T&L, but not FSAA.) Could just be an oversight on their part, or I just missed it, but I'd be interested in verifying if the GeForce2 MX does indeed have hardware FSAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compassion Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hemo2: I've been interested in the new MX version of the GeForce, but could not verify it has hardware FSAA. Are you sure the MX version has hardware FSAA? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Have to do some more research, but I thought that I had read somewhere that the big diff between the two (G2MX and G2) was that the G2 had 2 rendering piplines rather than 4, but the internal workings of the NV11 were the same as the NV20? Just less IO, cheaper memory, slower clock spee . I checked the buyers guide on SharkeyExtreme http://www.sharkeyextreme.com/hardware/guides/nvidia_geforce2_mx/ , and it seems to support FSAA being hardware based, but doesn't come out and say so, but here's the relevant quote, "The MX also supports 32bpp 3D textures up to 2048x2048, texture compression, FSAA, cube environment mapping and vertex blending, just like the GTS." THe key words being 'Just like the GTS'. [This message has been edited by Compassion (edited 09-22-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 I have a maxigamer pci 32meg and its flawless and for 99 bux a bargain. Now that I have a paying job, I wonder if anyone here has played on a number of different systems (I want to spend a grand). We have all kinds of PIIIs at work but they have crap video cards and have RTV marking the cards so they cant be moved. You cant swap in a vid card for a test. Unbelievable MIS morons. Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Der Unbekannte Jäger Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 ATI RADEON 64mb DDR Thats my card of choice. Think about it a year down the road do you want a has been card that can't keep up (nvidia or 3dfx chipset based) or do you want a card that may not be the best but is still able to keep up? Check out www.tomshardware.com www.sharkyextreme.com riva3d.com These sites should give you a fairly good idea of what to go for. =) ------------------ "I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BasilD Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 I often recommend hardware purchases professionally and accordingly try to keep up on all the latest hardware. I have to say that for that system, I would go with the 32 meg GeForce2 MX. You can get one for about $120 on the net, and its a much faster card than the Voodoo 3000, plus it supports FSAA and 32 bit color. It does NOT support hardware FSAA, only the Voodoo 5 does so, and by all reports the quality of the FSAA on the Voodoo is a bit better. The Nvidia card uses "super-sampling" which means it say renders internally at 1600*1200 and then converts the output to 1024*768. Honestly tho I dont think that card+CPU has the horsepower to really use FSAA well anyways, I would just play at 1280*1024 and enjoy Also if you don't have 128 megs get it. As a side issue, alot of people imo spend too much time and money on their graphics card and cpu, the 2 items that age the fastest on their machine. A wise investment in a really good monitor will last you 5 years, and likewise a really good set of speakers can last just as long if not longer. A cpu lasts maybe 2 years and a video card not even that really. I've never yet spent (tho I've been damn tempted to get a GeForce2 GTS) more than $120 on a video card,and no moe than $225 on a CPU. Instead I spent my money on things like a Hitachi 19" 753 which is truly a great monitor and I anticipate having it for a long time. I also heartily recommend the Klipsch Pro-Media 400 speakers, they have sound quality better than many $1500 systems and are basically so loud that its impossible to turn them up past 5 without permanent hearing loss Likewise the Soundblaster Live gold I bought 3 years ago is still as good of a card as can be bought now. All these items will still probably be part of my system 3 years from now when that $250 Geforce GTS is collecting dust or in the trash. I'm still using my G400 since its 2d is peerless and the 3d runs all the games I like to play well except maybe UT which i rarely play anyways and it does run fine in 800*600 16 bit. Cm runs good in 1280*1024 but if I were to play a 3000 point game Im sure Id have to switch down to 1024. Good enough for me. I may not buy a new card until DX8 ------------------ As the victors define history, so does the majority define sanity... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacX Posted September 23, 2000 Share Posted September 23, 2000 Geforces Hardware or Software FSAA??? I think there is some confusion over FSAA on the Geforces and MX cards... It all stems, I believe from the early reports that the Geforce cards emulated FSAA in software because they were implemented in new driver releases.... Then NVIDIA came out and said that the driver releases were using the T@L GPU for FSAA, so in essence it is hardware FSAA. So this is what everyone reports NOW. Now it appears as if the MX version is offering similar performance to the original SDR Geforce, but for a very good price. Now FSAA can be a killer, so to be honest I would direct you to a 32mb Geforce DDR card, as now the GTS is out, these cards are good value, and with the 6.18 drivers, run CM very nicely with FSAA on. I also have a system with a Voodoo 5500, and CM with 4xFSAA really IS stunning, and beats the Geforce hands down on this score. The Geforce 4x being equal to Voodoo 2x. Though my Geforce still does a pretty good job of removing some of the Jaggies, Sparklies and Crawlies. To sum up.... Either of these cards will do a good job for you, and handle all the graphic mods you can throw at them. I use the Hi-res grass, and a large amount of vehicle mods without any problems with either card. The Geforce with 4x is faster, but nothing can catch the Voodoo for quality. [This message has been edited by MacX (edited 09-22-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts