Need help: "Native resolution" and next-gen FPS

W

Wayfare

n00b
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
51
Hi all, I just bought a Dell2001FP for my new box, but I just found out that I will only be able to play games in the monitor's native resolution of 1600x1200.

This means I have to find a video card that can play HL2/D3 based games at that resolution (16x12), which is easy, but not cheap. I need your recommendations as to which card to get -- I am looking at the 6800GT (probably EGA/BFGtech) and the X800PRO (Sapphire). I am willing to spend $450, but would be happier the less I spent (monitor already cost me $600).

I need to make sure that it will be able to run CS:Source and all Doom3 engine games (although doom3 itself sort of sucks) at playable framerates at 1600x1200.
My box is:

AMD Athlon 64 3500+
1 Gig PC3200 Kingston Ram at 2-2-2
160 Gig SATA HD at 7200RPM
(right now) Radeon 9600XT

Thanks SO much for the help; long time reader first time poster.
 
Well the pro and the GT are both fine cards. However I would have to recommend the Ultra or the XTPE for being able to consistently hit playable frames in 16x12 with any kind of eye candy going in the newest games. OCing and flashing can get you there with the GT and pro, but I dislike the concept of paying 400 bucks for something only to have to immediately OC and\or mod the card. (Undoubtedly I will take hits for that comment but it is how I feel.)
 
Why can you "only" play at native. I am pretty certain you can put it to other resolutions they just do not look as good as at 16x12.

I think you can pick up some x800xt (non PE) for around $450.
 
Worldhammer: Are neither of those cards workable at 16x12? From what I have been seeing at the benchmarking sites around the web (anandtech, firingsquad, here, etc) the 6800gt ill get me to at least 50 consistent FPS with no overclocking or any special mods. Is this not correct? I see the 6800GT being able to pull 78 FPS in this review here:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2182&p=4


Shieze, I hear games look really crappy in resolutions other than the native. Do you know this not to be true?

EDIT: I also have the option to play these games at 800x600 resolution for the next couple months, and get a new card then. However, isn't this generation "here to stay" so to speak? The next gen cards aren't going to be released soon or anything...


Thanks again.
 
Oh they will in some games. Most notably Doom3 for the GT. Damn there was a review here that showed that 1280x1024 is your most favorable res on those cards but for the life of me I cannot find it. I have an XTPE and it struggles a bit at 16x12, especially in Far Cry's larger outdoor levels and in large scale engagements on Homewold2. I advise the GT over the Pro, but still stand by my initial opinion that you want an ultra or an XT.
 
you do realize you arent locked into 16x12 right? the 2001fp scales pretty well so u could run at 1024 or 1280 and probly not notice any problems
 
bellx1 said:
you do realize you arent locked into 16x12 right? the 2001fp scales pretty well so u could run at 1024 or 1280 and probly not notice any problems
Click to expand...

Bellx, could you elaborate on this a little -- I have found on several forums discussion of how crappy non-native resolutions look. If I can scale down to 1024 with no sigificant problem I will probably wait for a 6600GT AGP card to come out.

I will definately test it when I get my monitor later this week.
 
Wayfare -

I have a similar system and the Dell 2001. I normally play games at full screen 16x12 using my 6800GT with no problems. FarCry at 16x12 mangles the GT pretty badly if I leave settings at max though. That being said, I agree that the 2001 translates to lower res pretty well and things look just fine at 12x10. Plus, there is always the option of playing in a windowed mode (I play CS:S windowed at 10x7 at work. :D ) at a lower resolution. That way, there is no impact on image quality at all.

If you are short the cash and currently happy with the performance from your 9600, I'd say you can wait a bit until either prices drop or the cash is a little easier to come by...
 
if you were gonna try to browse the net or read documents on a non-native res, then yes itll be fuzzy and crappy. but in my experience when u play games its really not noticable to scale to a lower than native resolution due to the lack of small fine details that u really need to notice. i think it looks fine, i dont know if u can google a comparison of some screenshots in native v non-native in games and documents to see what i mean
also, the 2001fp has a zoom out feature so u could play at say 1024 but itll have a border around the screen for the non used pixels, this is if u felt the need for the true 1024 not scaled to 1600
 
Thanks so much for all the replies. I am not really "short" on cash, I just don't want to spend $600 on a video card :)

Anyway, I really appreciate the insights on the downscaling and it not being as bad as I thought. I'll probably pick up a 6800GT or X800 Pro to get full use out of the monitor.

With my current 9600xt I can barely compete at 1024x on my CRT.
 
I have the 2001fp too and I game at 1600x1200 high everything all the time in any game and don't notice fps dropping to anywhere near problematic. I think a 6800GT would do you nice.
 
One thing I've noticed...

It may be the Dell 2001, or it may just be that I've never had a 20" monitor only 30" from my face... Using my 6800GT, I really notice aliasing in a way I never did before. Even at 16x12, I can really tell a difference in aliasing in FarCry or CS:S. I normally run my GT at 380/1.05 and anything above 2xAA causes serious slowdowns in FC while I can do 4x in CS:S without major worries. The difference in 0xAA and 2xAA is REALLY noticeable to me now. Because of that, I've considered picking up an x800xt to see if I can see the "real world" differences between the two cards that everyone talks about.

I've had only ATi cards for a few years now and this is my first return to nVidia. I'd always been happy with my ATi cards for IQ and I wonder if this setup might really emphasize the difference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top