Computer Help forum

General discussion

Video card question.

I want to know people's opinion on this video card:
Connect3D ATI RADEON 9550 Video Card, 256MB DDR, 128-bit, DVI/TV Out, 8X AGP. Is it any good? What is good about it and what is bad about it? If you want to recommend a video card you can. Thanks.

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Video card question.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Video card question.
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Re: Video card question.

In reply to: Video card question.

alright i can explain a few points of view on this card...first off how much does the one you are looking at cost?
Anything over $100 on the 9550 is too high (since the 9550XT is $99 on newegg)

So, this is a value graphics card...I am assuming you haven't bought it yet...it is the ATI version of nVidia's GeForce 5500 (I am pretty sure these 2 are in the same league...price wise they are)

But anyways if you are looking to game, I would go for the ATI Radeon 9600Pro/XT, unless you want Doom 3 in which case I would go for the Radeon 9800 (read 9800, not the Pro or the SE). I have the 9600Pro on my system, it's about 4 days old and so far I have had zero issues with any of my games (the most graphicly intensive game I run is Halo, and the 9600Pro will play it fine)
So I would buy what you need. The 9550XT 128MB is what I almost bought, and then I thought...for $14 the 9600Pro is going to be a better performer...once you move out of the value card range you can get some nice stuff (the 9600Pro may be considered Value-Range today, but 6 months ago it was mid-range...and all my games are about the same age or a little newer, I don't want FarCry or Doom 3 so it's sufficient to play Halo or Unreal Tournament 2004)
What are you looking to do with your computer?
What graphics card/chip do you currently have?
If you want to do basic desktop things: like browsing the internet, e-mail, office programs (like word processing) basicly applications that aren't computer games, that card is a little overkill...you can do basic desktop apps with a GeForce4 MX-440...which is alos capable of playing Halo...but I am not sure if the level at which it plays Halo is acceptable to some (I run my MX-440 on my other box, it will play Halo with lowered settings) The number one question is what do you plan to do?

Collapse -
Re: Video card question.

In reply to: Re: Video card question.

I'm in much the same boat as cezar, though I have a more specific purpose in mind: playing City Of Heroes. I'm getting by well enough with the GeForce2 GTS/GeForce2 Pro 32 MB video card that came with my system (seemed like a good choice three years ago!), but the visual compromises necessitated by my Minimum System Requirement display adapter are sometimes glaringly obvious. I want to get up to at least the Recommended System Specification of a GeForce FX 5600 or ATI Radeon 9600, but I want to keep it to around $100 (if possible) and I know jack about the various iterations of video cards, the quality of one manufacturer vs. another, or even the nomenclature surrounding them. If anyone can recommend a good card or point me to a round-up/comparison of mid-range and/or mid-price video cards, I'd be appreciative.

Collapse -
Re: Video card question.

In reply to: Re: Video card question.

That's a small world. One of the desktops went from the Ge2 GTS to a fx5600 and it is a significant stepup. While it was used, compgeeks had some for 49 bucks It was too good a deal so I used that in a kids PC and it works fine.

Loot at http://www.tomshardware.com and the VGA charts to see where your prospective card falls.

Bob

Collapse -
Re: Video card question It's a value card.

In reply to: Video card question.

Nice card, but for Doom 3, it appears that you have to be at the top end to see the full effects. So far D3 is playable on P4 2GHz machines with 512MB and the fx5600 and fx5700le card, but the settings are less than max.

Bob

Collapse -
Re: Video card question It's a value card.

In reply to: Re: Video card question It's a value card.

actually isn't it true that not even the 6800Ultra can fully meet the system specs of Doom 3 for Ultra Quality (THG had an article, the requirement for Ultra Quality was a 512MB card, any clue as to when these will emerge for the non-pro OpenGL market?)

Collapse -
Re: Video card question.

In reply to: Video card question.

Personally, I've had some bad experiences with ATI's drivers on WinXP, and have known quite a few people with nearly identical problems. ATI's drivers can be real hit or miss in quality, and the problems seem to be related to the motherboard chipset.

Personally, I'm real happy with this GeForceFX 5700 Ultra I picked up. Aside from being a physically monsterous card, it's a pretty good performer. It replaced my older Radeon 8500 which would have problems with the video chipset rebooting constantly during games. Very annoying, let me tell you.

Also, the nice thing about Doom 3, is that you'll get better looking results most of the time by running it at say 1024x768 on low detail level compared to say 640x480 at the ultra high detail level. The vast majority of Doom 3 has you wandering around cramped hallways that are poorly lit (if at all) and shooting at monsters you never get a really good look at anyway. The only thing the higher detail levels will do, is make some of the text on computer screens a little clearer and things like the floor grating more defined. After you get out of Mars City, there just aren't many brightly lit areas you come across. I wouldn't worry about getting a top end card just to play Doom at the highest detail levels, because it's not necessary. Lower detail levels and higher resolutions will get better results. I played it at 800x600 on medium detail level and it was fine aside from a small amount of aliasing on computer screen text when I wasn't standing right in front of it.

Popular Forums

icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

GRAMMYS 2019

Here's Everything to Know About the 2019 Grammys

Find out how to watch the Grammy Awards if you don't have cable and more.