Help me pick a video card.

Keep in mind I'm on a tight budget. Looking to spend no more than $150. Preferably, around $70. The games I have are Call of Duty 2, and Battlefield 2. Is a GeForce 5500 256mbs good enough or do I need to buy a GeForce 6600+. Also, how comparable are ATI cards, performance and price wise. Thanks for any advice you can give me.

 

COD2 and BF2 are your weapons of choice.... I'd say if you possibly can ... do it ... get the 6600. You will be playing those games knowing you made the right choice. Don't get the 5500 256MB now, it makes no sense as it's already an old card, and I know how it is on a tight budget but if you have to go cheap get the 6200 256MB, probably same price or cheaper. The bottom end Radeon cards (sub $150) aren't worth looking at except the GF6600's twin sister, the x700 (but try to get the pro version).

Hope this helped.

 

Id go at least a 6600gt, dont like ATI in the leaast bit but you can get a 6800 128mb for like 160 about. not a 6600 they suck. even though they have more memory than the gt, they are much slower. 6600gts go for about 115 up (newegg.com usually has some with rebates)

 

o yeah, a 5500 or 6600 will have major problems with bf2 or cod2, a 6800 will be what you want to run those decently, along with at least 1 gig RAM

 

Ye Viper I agree with you all the way - the 6600GT does make the 6600 look silly. There almost no visible difference between the 6600GT and the vanilla 6800 unless your talking 1600x1200 with FSAA. But... I read the reviews of the vanilla 6600 and told my brother not to get one, but he got one anyway. When I saw it running I was amazed at how quick it was. On paper it looks slow but it ran Q4 like a dream with a P4 2.8Ghz chip.
But ye - don't know about prices of GCards in the USA but over here in the UK the 6600GT and 6800 are way past his budget (about $200 and $240 respectively).
Obviously the 5500 is only good for Wolfenstien 3D.

 

PCI express or AGP?

PCI:
6600gt: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814130214

6800: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814127179

AGP:

6600gt:http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814130220 (read the review on this one, a surprising coincidence)

6800:http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814133155

 

Thanks for the advice guys. I'm going to go for the 6600GT, but do I really need a 256mb or is 128MB good enough?

 

128MB is fine.

There is no difference in performance between a 128MB and 256MB 6600GT card.

Off course if they are the same price, then go for the 256, otherwise 128 is fine.

 

I know this comes late and you may already have bought a card, but if not ... I just want to point out that as cards are now shipping with 512MB onboard, there is a difference between the 128MB and 256MB. A year or so ago, there was little difference but now if you want to use the highest detail level in a game (ie. skin detail, texture detail) you need at least a 256MB card as a 128MB will not allow you access the highest detail levels.
Only some games this is true of, but more and more lately. Performance wise, there is only a little increase in speed - but like I said more memory = higher options availible = better graphics.

eg. Doom 3 at ultra detail (which a 6600GT will tear through) needs at least 512MB for no texture swapping (hard drive access will cause a jitter whilst playing). 256MB DDR = 512MB... so you need the 256 version over the 128, especially if there is little price difference between the two.

 

There is no difference between performance with a 128MB and a 256MB 6600 GT card.

Just because cards are shipping with 512MB means absolutely nothing.

Games may benefit in the future, but not at the moment, and certainly not anything noticeable to the user nor to justify the extra.

 

That extra video ram benefits HIGH resolution more than anything else.

IMO, I'd think anything in the 1024x768 area, 256 isn't going to be as effective.

 

It's true extra video RAM can help with high resolutions, but it's not noticeable in a 6600GT, and they don't really cope well with anything more than 1024 or 1280 x 768 regardless of how much RAM they have.

If it was a higher end card, then I'd get as much video RAM as I could.

 

hmm.. dont you think someone with a tight budget isnt going to play on ultra detail and stuff?so i kinda have to agree that a 128 MB card is enough.. hehe easy for me to say.. and x800 gto here

 

Having 512MB onboard texture memory means nothing eh? Remember the texture benchmark on 3dMark 2000? Where 2Mb, 4Mb, 16Mb and 64Mb textures were benchmarked onscreen? Back then most graphics cards had just 16-32mb ram. Watch how long it takes to complete the last (64mb) test on a 32mb card, then tell me that video ram means nothing.
When games start becoming more widespread with 128mb and 256mb single textures a 128 card will grind to a halt every time you move into a new location. It's true video ram affects higher resolutions more, as at a lower resolution the texture is scalled down in software as the detail will be missed. But a 6600GT will almost any game as well in 1600x1200 than in 1280x1024. Is there a big difference between in graphics quality between those two resolutions though? I think not.
I think paying an extra £20 to be able to use the highest texture quality setting in a game is well worth it. Why not realise the potential of a card instead of having the best features locked out because of memory constraints?

 

Did you even bother to digest what I said before you raced to misrepresent me?

Please show me where I said that. I said a 6600GT, that's the topic of this thread, which you obviously didn't read.

And I said.....forget it, what's the point?

 

there

 

Show me one benchmark where a 512mb card outperforms a 256mb card please.

Then, lets compare and see if the price is worth the performance increase (if there is one).

 

I'll post one that I found.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2406&p=8

Now lets compare prices.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102579
259.00

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102499
239.00

I guess it doesn't make that much difference, I suppose. Pay 20 bucks extra for bragging rights

So I'd say 512mb means nothing right about now. But, I'm open to other information on the subject

 

And then tell me how you can notice the difference between 80 fps or 82 fps as most benchmarks suggest.


Again Jendajess, we are talking about 6600 GT's, not 7800 GTX's.