So I'm thinking of building this new pc..

[sweener2001]

and you threw away money because you were impatient. ninety dollar card + 60 dollar psu = 150 dollar card.

and it's not like the 7600 was good at dx9 code. your comparisons and "what if's" aren't working here.

EDIT: as a clarification, i'm not completely against sli. but as an upgrade option, i'm agreeing more with gil and death and everybody else. brand new, and with cash to burn, it's plenty cool. but that is around one grand for video cards. and that's why i'm now a console gamer.

[I.S.T.]

Uh... I NEVER said that you should buy a PSU just for SLI(Unless it's for a new system, of course).

Besides, you forget one very important fact: Not all SLI capable cards need or even have the extra power connector. The 7600 GT doesn't.

The 7600 GT was decent enough at DX9 code: http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/10138/8

Look for the Gigabyte card's results in Fear(Quake 4 has the weird Doom3 engine, so it doesn't really count when looking for DX9 results.). If you already have one, and you want an extra bit of speed but do not have 135(Lowest price for a GTS, IIRC), another 7600 GT is the best way to go if you don't mind SLI. if ya do, you're fucked.

I should mention something: I never plan on using SLI ever. However, I can see why people would use it.

Edit: You also forget my earlier example: sometimes you only have one chance at an upgrade due to a temporary cash infusion, such as a tax refund check and shit. In cases like that, you can't just save up because you spend most of your normal paycheck on bills, and the rest goes to food and gas.

[mudlord]

Quake 4 has the weird Doom3 engine, so it doesn't really count when looking for DX9 results.

..I hardly consider Doom 3 using OpenGL with OGL 1.4-2.0 extensions a weird engine. Same with Quake 4. Its a extremely optimized engine at that, much more optimized than Crysis, thats for sure. And a lot more scalable.

8600 GTS SUCK HUGE HORRIBLE AMOUNTS OF ASS AT DX10 CODE.

Running DX10 code on them is useless. They're not fast enough.

What a logical fallacy. These cards can run DX10 code fine. I did some coding on my GeForce 8 card just fine, so I dont see how running code that uses Shader Model 4.0 on those cards is "useless" in your words.

[I.S.T.]

Quake 4 has the weird Doom3 engine, so it doesn't really count when looking for DX9 results.

..I hardly consider Doom 3 using OpenGL with OGL 1.4-2.0 extensions a weird engine. Same with Quake 4. Its a extremely optimized engine at that, much more optimized than Crysis, thats for sure. And a lot more scalable.

8600 GTS SUCK HUGE HORRIBLE AMOUNTS OF ASS AT DX10 CODE.

Running DX10 code on them is useless. They're not fast enough.

What a logical fallacy. These cards can run DX10 code fine. I did some coding on my GeForce 8 card just fine, so I dont see how running code that uses Shader Model 4.0 on those cards is "useless" in your words.

I'll rephrase: They suck at running DX10 games. Google if you wish to run more.

As for the Doom 3 engine, I was referring to the fact that it's mostly DX 8 and below tech. People have gotten it to run surprisingly well on Voodoo 5s.

[mudlord]

As for the Doom 3 engine, I was referring to the fact that it's mostly DX 8 and below tech. People have gotten it to run surprisingly well on Voodoo 5s.

I consider some of the graphical features it supports more DX9-tech than anything. People who have gotten it to run well on old cards its a testament to how well coded the engine really is. I'm shocked and dissapointed that not much engines are developed like this anymore, save the Source Engine. It seems all this new hardware just gives people a excuse to bloat thier code. Just look at Crysis for instance.

[funkyass]

there is too much stupid here.

I.S.T you are an idiot: saying that a first generation, midrange, DX10 card runs DX10 code like shit on a non-service pack new version of windows with a radically redesigned driver model grants you the Captain Obvious award.

Voodoo's 1 and 2 offered much more than in SLI that what is offered today, you got FPS improvements in all games, and a larger framebuffer- you could do 1024x768!

modern SLI is the computer's industry version of expensive razors - designed to get more sales to people who like to buy into marketing without thinking about it.

its like buying a Rolls Royce because you can get 5% off.

[Deathlike2]

I.S.T you are an idiot: saying that a first generation, midrange, DX10 card runs DX10 code like shit on a non-service pack new version of windows with a radically redesigned driver model grants you the Captain Obvious award.

You can blame most of that to driver maturity (or lack thereof) and midrange cards at this point are still going to be DX9 friendly even though it supports DX10. This is natural.. expect future mid-range hardware to not suck as much (the next one should be better). The expectation of midrange hardware at the moment to be great is no less than playing the lottery.

[I.S.T.]

I.S.T you are an idiot: saying that a first generation, midrange, DX10 card runs DX10 code like shit on a non-service pack new version of windows with a radically redesigned driver model grants you the Captain Obvious award.

Do you even read graphics card reviews? Look them up. you'll see the same results over and over: The 8600 GTS and 2600 XT are not fast enough. The 3850/70 and 8800 GT are the way to go if you want a not insanely expensive card that runs DX 10 games well enough.

Seriously, DO THE FUCKING RESEARCH, YOU DUMBASS

[funkyass]

I.S.T you are an idiot: saying that a first generation, midrange, DX10 card runs DX10 code like shit on a non-service pack new version of windows with a radically redesigned driver model grants you the Captain Obvious award.

Do you even read graphics card reviews? Look them up. you'll see the same results over and over: The 8600 GTS and 2600 XT are not fast enough. The 3850/70 and 8800 GT are the way to go if you want a not insanely expensive card that runs DX 10 games well enough.

Seriously, DO THE FUCKING RESEARCH, YOU DUMBASS

again, I have to shout this:

I WAS AGREEING WITH YOU DIPSHIT. BUT IN A NEGATIVE AND SARCASTIC MANNER.

[Gil_Hamilton]

As for the Doom 3 engine, I was referring to the fact that it's mostly DX 8 and below tech. People have gotten it to run surprisingly well on Voodoo 5s.

I consider some of the graphical features it supports more DX9-tech than anything. People who have gotten it to run well on old cards its a testament to how well coded the engine really is. I'm shocked and dissapointed that not much engines are developed like this anymore, save the Source Engine. It seems all this new hardware just gives people a excuse to bloat thier code. Just look at Crysis for instance.

Indeed. The sloppy coding present on modern PC games disgusts me.

Like I said earlier(and in several other places on the net in the time since Doom 3 came out), it's a shining example of why you don't NEED the absurd hardware escalation that passes for system requirements on most PC games.
As a GAME, I found it frustrating(I played the demo, hated the flashlight mechanic, deleted it). But from a technical standpoint, it's EXACTLY how PC games should be designed.

[I.S.T.]

I agree with that, but I can see why games like Crysis(Which I should remind everyone runs at acceptable speeds in DX9 medium settings) can and should exist. They just shouldn't be the norm.

[sweener2001]

not really. by the time your pc is good enough to run crysis, you'll have better things to do than relive some nostalgia.

and honestly, the saving money issue is moot. if you can never afford to save an extra 50$, you shouldn't even be getting the upgrade in the first place. buy some ramen instead. it will last longer.

and just because a video card doesn't have an extra power cable doesn't mean it isn't going to be sucking all the power it can out of the pci-e slot. and if you're actually upgrading an older rig, odds are you're going to need the new PSU.

sli appeals to me as a brand new, blow your wad and be set for a couple years path. not as a keep the arthritic blind dog around for another couple months. extreme analogies, but the point is valid.

EDIT: grammar

[I.S.T.]

If you don't use AA and lower the res to 1024x768, you can run crysis on a non-sli rig.

[sweener2001]

you can do for most any game, it's just that with crysis, you're half defeating the purpose. still pointless to publish a game engine that really isn't viable in the market.

[I.S.T.]

Not the game engine perse, but what was done with it. >.>

Also, as a better example of your point, Assassin's Creed is getting ported to the PC.

WITH A FUCKING 2 GIGABYTE OF RAM MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.

And DX9.0c video cards being minimum requirement too(I'm not being sarcastic here. >.> Those cards have been out for years, so it's normal for it ot be that high.). A 30 dollar video card can support it.

Ironic, eh?

[funkyass]

not ironic, considering you can get 2gb of ram for the price of the game.

[sweener2001]

Not the game engine perse, but what was done with it. >.>

Also, as a better example of your point, Assassin's Creed is getting ported to the PC.

WITH A FUCKING 2 GIGABYTE OF RAM MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.

And DX9.0c video cards being minimum requirement too(I'm not being sarcastic here. >.> Those cards have been out for years, so it's normal for it ot be that high.). A 30 dollar video card can support it.

Ironic, eh?

you keep failing.

YES, the game engine. there's no point in marketing the engine NOW. no computer can run it maxed. at least with HL2, UT, and doom3, the top of the line rigs would be able to run it fine. top of the line rigs fail at crysis NOW. that's the point. the engine needed to wait at least a year. sure, it's a first that the software is "ahead" of the hardware for once, and it's retarded.

and so is sli as an upgrade option.

[I.S.T.]

you can do anything with a fucking engine. You can use Crysis to make FF1 NES if you so wished.

And it is ironic, funkyass, considering that even Crysis doesn't require that much ram to run at lowest settings.

[Panzer88]

you can do for most any game, it's just that with crysis, you're half defeating the purpose. still pointless to publish a game engine that really isn't viable in the market.

not true, Crysis is a planned trilogy from the beginning, they hardly have to spend any more money developing engine stuff for the next projects, and the original will be on par with the other two and will still look great in several years compared to it's peers when everyone turns their settings up (because they finally have PCs that can run them)

maybe not for other things, but for THAT reason I think it's a smart move and will give the games a consistent look, it also makes the engine more valuable long term rather than having to make a new one in less time, it's more long term and it's still usable on low settings now (even though it may not be the most optimal)

[Rydian]

you can do for most any game, it's just that with crysis, you're half defeating the purpose. still pointless to publish a game engine that really isn't viable in the market.

not true, Crysis is a planned trilogy from the beginning, they hardly have to spend any more money developing engine stuff for the next projects, and the original will be on par with the other two and will still look great in several years compared to it's peers when everyone turns their settings up (because they finally have PCs that can run them)

maybe not for other things, but for THAT reason I think it's a smart move and will give the games a consistent look, it also makes the engine more valuable long term rather than having to make a new one in less time, it's more long term and it's still usable on low settings now (even though it may not be the most optimal)

That's where my whole "they planned for the future" argument came from. That got lost amid the people that don't know how money works.

[funkyass]

Planning games/movies as a trilogy(rather than like how the LOTR movies was done) is a very risky thing to get money for - the first installment needs succeed on paper.

Not adding any new features engine wise for the next two installments is something EA likes, but it might prejudice players against the second installment.

[sweener2001]

you can do for most any game, it's just that with crysis, you're half defeating the purpose. still pointless to publish a game engine that really isn't viable in the market.

not true, Crysis is a planned trilogy from the beginning, they hardly have to spend any more money developing engine stuff for the next projects, and the original will be on par with the other two and will still look great in several years compared to it's peers when everyone turns their settings up (because they finally have PCs that can run them)

maybe not for other things, but for THAT reason I think it's a smart move and will give the games a consistent look, it also makes the engine more valuable long term rather than having to make a new one in less time, it's more long term and it's still usable on low settings now (even though it may not be the most optimal)

this is the first post i've read against my point that actually moved the debate forward. thank you

i'm just going to go with funky's reply on this one.

[Panzer88]

I'm sure they will add features to the subsequent games, but they've got the framework there. I'll admit it certainly is a risk, but even if the first game was kinda crap it's gotten so much attention that you know a million idiots plus some sane people will buy it. It's got so many people involved in it, it almost has guaranteed moderate success, I'm not saying that I think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, but we'll just have to see in the next few years, I'm no seer.

[Deathlike2]

Not adding any new features engine wise for the next two installments is something EA likes, but it might prejudice players against the second installment.

Well, on the flip side, they can wait for the rendering to be refined speedwise..and let the hardware/drivers catch up at the same time.

[Gil_Hamilton]

Planning games/movies as a trilogy(rather than like how the LOTR movies was done) is a very risky thing to get money for - the first installment needs succeed on paper.

See: Beyond Good and Evil. :'(


I hear Crysis isn't selling as well as expected, either.