Is RON CPU limiting or Video Card Limiting? BHG please comment

[MattH]

Uh-oh, the graphics card war continues on a new front! With my Raedon 900pro 128mb, I get a constant 27-37 fps, dropping to 10-15 with larger battles. It's approx. $80 from pricegrabber.com, less if you're willing to wait for a rebate check from a retail store like worstbuy.

DOn't buy ATI, they suck.

Based on what data? And compared to a company that optimizes drivers for benchmark tests instead of real games?

[Carch]

You haven't mentioned your sound card.

I updated my soundblaster drivers when I first got RoN and it made a huge difference in frame rate.

[Grond]

The 9700 and 9800 blow away anything Nvidia has to offer at the moment. I'm using a GeForce 3 Ti 500 and theres nothing Nvidia has right now that could be considered much of an upgrade but I'm not willing to part with $500 for a 9800. I do hope Nvidia gets their act together soon, nothing like competition to drop those prices.

[Q Classic]

Based on what data? And compared to a company that optimizes drivers for benchmark tests instead of real games?

lest you forget, ati did the same thing for its 8500 series...

ati's cards don't suck. it's the drivers. until the catalyst series came out for the 8500 and above, ati's drivers were among the worst to install and deal with for a user. the catalyst drivers even now, however, give me a bitter taste in my mouth every time i update them.

give me nvidia's detonator suite any day over ati's catalyst.

[Sava]

Based on what data? And compared to a company that optimizes drivers for benchmark tests instead of real games?

Based upon my owning ATI cards and they've sucked.

The 9700 and 9800 blow away anything Nvidia has to offer at the moment. I'm using a GeForce 3 Ti 500 and theres nothing Nvidia has right now that could be considered much of an upgrade but I'm not willing to part with $500 for a 9800. I do hope Nvidia gets their act together soon, nothing like competition to drop those prices.

Why not get a GeForce 4 TI series? Sure the 9700 and 9800 are good, but like you said, too much money. Cost plays a role in how one judges how good a card is.

[Grond]

Unless there is a GeForce 4 that is an incredible overlocker I would only get a 20% boost from a 4200 while a 9700 is 100% faster and the 9800 faster still.

[Sava]

Well I get an average of 60fps in this game and I have a TI 4600 128meg that I paid $125 for. I'm playing at 1280x1024x32 with graphics on high. During really crowded battles and scrolling, it drops around 40 fps.

Again, if you are some rich kid, by all means, waste $500 bucks on some ATI card. But if you want the best performance for value, go for a GF4 TI card.

[Q Classic]

ati has the performance crown. with the performance crown comes price.

ati's 9800 pro, while the best on the market right now, are also outside of the price range for a good deal of the market. furthermore, in a sagging economy, people are less likely to buy luxury items--and that includes shiny new graphics cards.

[MattH]

Yeah, the 9700 and 9800 are EXPENSIVE. However, the 9000/9100 are about $100 and the 9500/9600 are about $200. Nvidia has comparable cards with the same price. IMHO, the manufacturer doesn't make a difference if you're looking for somethin in the middle/low areas.

[Grond]

4600's cost twice that.

[MattH]

I was shocked to see how similar the prices were:
GF4 4600- $348
GF4 4200- $117
GF4 4800- $150

R 9100- $113
R 9600 (pro)- $150
R 9800 (pro)- $340

These are all from pricegrabber.com