My old setup was an Epox NF4 Ultra mobo with an Athlon 64 FX55 running
about 2.8 GHz and the upgrade has the Biostar 790GX/SB750 chipset and an
Athlon 64 X2 5400+ BE running again about 2.8 GHz. Both had the same
4850 video card and the same 2 gigs of RAM. The only difference is
between DX9 XP Home and DX10.1 Vista64 Home Premium. Now I have yet to
use the benchmarking utility for Crysis (all patched up of course) but
it ran smoothly enough at that resolution and medium settings before
that I had no problem getting my crosshairs on the Koreans and fragging
them. Now however it visibly stutters and I attribute that to Vista and
of course the 64 bit version has been widely reported to also be slower
for gaming. Hopefully more RAM will help. What kind of boxes do the rest
of the list members use for gaming?Gam
maccrawj wrote:
If you're playing @ 1920 with a single 4850 I am not surprised you
don't like the results! What's the specs on the rest of the system?
I think you should read some more because consistently ATI has beat NV
$ for $ performance wise, the 3870X2 has matched 280's and beaten
260's never mind the new 4870 & X2 versions.
Stan Zaske wrote:
Complex questions. First off, I game on a 24" monitor @ 1920x1200. My
old box with WinXP, DX9 and 2 gig of RAM DID run Crysis with
everything set an Medium with good results. My recently upgraded box
still with 2 gigs (soon to be 4 as soon as NewEgg ships my Mushkin),
Vista64, DX10.1 and Catylyst 8.9 I have to set everything on low or
it starts to drive me nuts. I used the same Radeon HD4850 in both and
even though DX10 is visibly better looking I'm disappointed in the
performance drop. Anyway, they're both good cards and even though I
try to support AMD every chance I get the GTX260 is apparently
superior in every respect.
