What graphics card do I need to get 60+ frames

[MoonieGT]

I'm builing a new system in the next month:

E6300 (probably overclock a little)
ASUS P5N SLi
1 gig corsair ram DDR2 800

I can't decide how good of a card I'll need to get at least 60 FPS with the settings dialed up high at 1280x720. I've been looking at the 7900GS, 7900GT and 7950GT (I would consider X1K cards from Ati as well I should). I don't want to buy the top of the line now because I figure I'll need a new card in another 2 years when DirectX 10 cards are out and not too expensive.

thanks for the suggestions

[Fletch]

I'd recommend an ATI X1900XT 512MB but thats probably because I have one.

But your framerate in GTR2 is down to your CPU - an E6300 will be fine so there's no need to go OTT with your graphics card but it is always nice to have something beefy.

[Hotpot]

I was getting a crap framerate at night in Spa. I had an AMD64 4000+ and 2x 6800GT in sli. I threw an 8800GTX in there and my framrate on the same sections shot up from 18 fps to 55fps. That tells me that it's graphically intensive and not CPU intensive as I still have my aged processor.
Oh, I forgot to mention, I like to have the graphics pumped up to max or somewhere near. I'm currently running at 1920 res 16 x AA and 16 x AF with all detaills set on highest except for trackside characters.

[MoonieGT]

Originally Posted by Fletch

I'd recommend an ATI X1900XT 512MB but thats probably because I have one.

But your framerate in GTR2 is down to your CPU - an E6300 will be fine so there's no need to go OTT with your graphics card but it is always nice to have something beefy.

Ya, I don't want to go over the top with it because it will need to be replaced at some point for DX10. I just want to be able to play 1280x720 with the settings turned way up.

[KarlosDaJackal]

The 8800 will easily do it and it is a DX10 card so get it if you can.

Theres a buget version of it out. If thats to much any of the cards you mentioned or the x1900xtx, should be fine. But you will need to replace them in about 18months, DX10 will take a while to kick off, Vista already is desperatly in need of a service pack!

[MoonieGT]

I'm in no hurry to get Vista and DX10. The only reason I'll want DX10 is when GTR is available in DX10 .

The 8 series cards are too expensive for me at this time. My budget is just north of $1000. Those 8 series cards are half or more of my budget...

[ZeZeZoom]

I think you can do it with a X1950Pro (around 200 euros).
I have a X1900GT 256Mb with a AMD 4600x2 socket 939 and GTR2 runs fine at 1680x1050 (Samsung 225BW) with almost all eye candies to the max.
I have another machine with a X1800GTO on a AMD3500 socket 939 at it runs fine at 1280x1024 with almost all eyes candies to the max also.
Both machines 2Gb value ram.
If I were in your shoes I would not spend more than 250 euros in a video card.
Good choice and good luck!
ZeZeZoom

[Dan]

I would think any 7900gt / x1900gt or better is suitable for now...

IMO it would be better to get 2gb ram rather than the 1gb you have spec'd, as quite a few current games like to use a lot of system memory

[MoonieGT]

Question: If I were to spring for the 8800GTS, will it be outdated by the time DX10 games are actually out and available to utilize the card?

[FTY]

newegg.com is allways having sales. Just picked up an ATi 1600 512mb for almost nothing. Grab two of them..

[KarlosDaJackal]

Originally Posted by MoonieGT

Question: If I were to spring for the 8800GTS, will it be outdated by the time DX10 games are actually out and available to utilize the card?

How long is a piece of string?

One of the points of DX10 is that we don't have a DX10.1 or DX10b a few months later to support 1 new graphics card feature that only works on nvidia or ATI.

Usually I avoid first gen cards as there always replaced quickly, remeber DX7 was quickly followed by DX7.1 to support a new nvidia card, then DX8 came out and a few months later DX8.1 was all the rage as ATI and Nvidia wanted to sell more cards. DX9 came out and I got a Radeon 9700 Pro which at the time was the first full DX9 card, it still runs great but can't do some of the DX9.0c stuff.

If you spring for any card its out of date in 6 months anyway, the question is will it still be good enough? I reckon your odds are 50:50. First gen Nvidia cards have a bad rep recently though. Anybody buy a FX5600 when DX9 came out man that card could'nt even do 30fps most of the time.

[phntomF16]

MoonieGT,

A 7900GS or better should be fine in your system, I think.

If you already have an SLI mb, going with a single nVidia card will probably be better than using an ATI card. It will allow you to add more graphics power later with a second nVidia card in SLI mode.

I mentioned my system specs (dual 7900GS cards) and frame rates in your other thread:

Originally Posted by phntomF16

-AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+
-Gigabyte GA-M59SLI-S4 mb with nForce 590 SLI chipset
-Corsair Value S. PC5300 DDR2 single stick of 1024MB RAM
-2 x GeForce 7900GS in SLI
-Soundblaster Audigy Platinum EX


Max details, Medium Shadows, 4xAA
1280 x 1024 resolution, 32-bit, 72 Hz

I get about 80 frames per second average, 16 car grid, dry weather.

I just ran a test comparing single card (disabling SLI) vs. dual card (enabling SLI) at Barcelona, 16-car grid. Here's what I got:

Single card, Dry Weather
On the Grid at Standing Start - 45 Frames/sec
Lap 5, Cars spread out - 70 Frames/sec

Dual Cards (SLI) Dry Weather
On the Grid at Standing Start - 50 Frames/sec
Lap 5, Cars spread out - 80 Frames/sec

Single Card, Wet Weather (Raining 100&#37
On the Grid at Standing Start - 20 Frames/sec
Lap 5, Cars spread out - 45 Frames/sec

Dual Cards (SLI), Wet Weather (Raining 100%)
On the Grid at Standing Start - 25 Frames/sec
Lap 5, Cars spread out - 50 Frames/sec

Not much difference. In fact, I didn't notice any difference without looking at the FPS display. One card (7900GS / ATI equivalent, or better) is enough for GTR2, it seems. Running dual cards made little or no difference in my system. But it may make a difference with other games.

As some have said earlier, GTR2 is probably processor-intensive, especially in traffic, so your E6300 should do very well, if not better. Going with 2GB of RAM may give a good bang for the buck, too.

[Hotpot]

I have NOT found GTR2 to be processor intensive as I'm using an old AMD64 4000+ which is single core. Upgrading from 2x 6800GT cards in sli to an 8800GTX took me right over the comfortable fps mark. Prior to upgrade, on nighttime tracks I was getting as low as 18fps in 1024 res. Now, the same sections do not drop below 55 IN 1920 RES! All other settings maxxed out. Anti-aliasing and anistrophic filtering BOTH set to 16x at driver level in the display options.

[Fletch]

Originally Posted by Hotpot

I have NOT found GTR2 to be processor intensive as I'm using an old AMD64 4000+ which is single core. Upgrading from 2x 6800GT cards in sli to an 8800GTX took me right over the comfortable fps mark. Prior to upgrade, on nighttime tracks I was getting as low as 18fps in 1024 res. Now, the same sections do not drop below 55 IN 1920 RES! All other settings maxxed out. Anti-aliasing and anistrophic filtering BOTH set to 16x at driver level in the display options.

That's because there was such a big step up in the graphics department of your system. In fact a HUGE step up because you now have a DX10 card.

Phantom also found that if you use SLi there is hardly any difference in GTR2.

I used to use an X800SE but I've now upgraded to an X1900XT ans there is only a small increase in FPS, it's more stable just hasn't increased a lot at all. I'm still on a AMD 3700+ (single core)

GTR2 is still, IMHO, CPU intensive. Either that, or, I didn't get enough "bang for my bucks" when I bought my X1900XT.

It's a tricky one. Some situations sound like the game is CPU intensive, other make it sound GPU intensive. :confused::

[phntomF16]

Maybe there is a better way for me to say it:

In my system, and in the system that MoonieGT proposes, the CPU is the limiting factor.

Today's mid-grade GPUs like the 7900GS can produce decent frame rates for GTR2.

[phntomF16]

We can use the chain analogy to describe how a PC handles the demands placed upon it by sims such as GTR2, and by other 3D games.

Games rely primarily on three components in the PC: the Processor (CPU), the Graphics Card (GPU), and the memory (RAM).

We can think of them as links in the PC "chain", so to speak. And like the saying goes, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

If a PC doesn't have one, a separate sound card or an on-board sound processor can also improve performance by taking the sound processing load off of the CPU.

Running GTR2 with and without SLI enabled makes little or no difference in my system, so I think my weakest link is not the graphics card (7900GS). That is also why I think MoonieGT's proposed system will run fine with a 7900GS or better: My weak link is either the CPU or the 1GB of RAM.

Hotpot,

I have another computer that is similar to the one you described before your upgrade to an 8800GTX:

AMD Sempron 2600+ CPU
Asus A7N8X Deluxe motherboard with nForce 2 chipset
nVidia 6600GT 128MB AGP GPU
1 GB of RAM, 2 x 500MB sticks running in dual channel

here's how that system performs with details set to Medium, 1280 x 1024, no AA, at Spa:

Dry Weather
On the Grid at Standing Start - 18 Frames/sec
Lap 5, Cars spread out - 40 Frames/sec

I'll run more benchmarks later (Wet weather)

[Hotpot]

When I tried my 6800GT in single card mode (note: I DISABLED sli altogther at the driver level) I too did not see any difference between one 6800GT and two of the bastards running in sli. The conclusion I came to was that basically GTR2 in sli was shit, either due to bad drivers or something else.
The 8800GTX has upped the performance considerably, but still using the same processor, MB and memory arrangement.
I think it's graphically intensive but the fact that the sli function with this game is crap, throws us a curve and makes it look like extra graphical muscle makes no difference.

[phntomF16]

SLI makes no difference in my system performance, either. I looked at fps in dry weather, 100% rain, on track, in the pits, private practice, 16-opponent grid, warm-up, grid walk, and race.

No difference between SLI enabled and disabled.

[MoonieGT]

I finally ordered my system and I went with the 8800 GTS. I decided I didnt want to spend $200 or so now then want to upgrade to a DX10 card down the road.

I guess the next year or two will determine if it was worthwhile...

[Matty]

the card is DX10 already

[BWX]

MoonieGT
I decided I didnt want to spend $200 or so now then want to upgrade to a DX10 card down the road

LOL- how many times did people say the 8800's are already DX10?
Anyway- I have a Oc'd 7900GTX/ 2.9Ghz A64-1MB cache San Diego/2GB 500mhz low latency OCZ Platinum ram- still bogs at night in rain with AA and AF cranked up and all other in game options cranked up behind a full field.

If I were you I would have gotten an 8800 GTX.. it IS a DX card as everyone tried to tell you.

[MoonieGT]

Originally Posted by Matty

the card is DX10 already

I know... that's why I bought it. I was saying that I bought the DX10 card now because I didnt want to buy a DX9 card now and then have to fork over more money later for a DX10 card down the road.

[Fast_Fingers]

That was a good decision, especially if you weren't sure if the GTX would fit in your rig. In any case, you won't have to worry about any problems running newer titles, as DirectX10 finally focuses on efficiency over eye candy.

[BWX]

If I had the cash now I wouldn't be able to control myself... I would have blown it on the GTX.. and a new case if needed.