my ti4600 has packed in!!! 8(

hey all thanks for all your replys much appreciated

I think from most of your comments i would be silly not to go for a ATI 9800
pro for price/performance ratio now my question is is there any specific
brand of the 9800 pro i should aim for or are they all the same i.e. memory
chips etc... Also does it matter about 128mb or 256mb is there much
performance difference?

TIA.


snip
-----
Lee.

Just been thinking would it be worth while me getting such a fast card as
the 9800 pro cause i own a 17" TFT and am using DVI-I which limits it to a
max of 60hz which i believe means i couldn't get more than 60fps in any
game.

Any comment on this?

Cheers.

On Fri, 07 May 2004 19:00:11 GMT, Lee
wrote:

:hey all thanks for all your replys much appreciated
:
:I think from most of your comments i would be silly not to go for a ATI 9800
:pro for price/performance ratio now my question is is there any specific
:brand of the 9800 pro i should aim for or are they all the same i.e. memory
:chips etc... Also does it matter about 128mb or 256mb is there much
:performance difference?
:
:TIA.
:
:
:snip
:-----
:Lee.

-----
Lee.

On Fri, 07 May 2004 20:29:52 GMT, Lee
wrote:

Just been thinking would it be worth while me getting such a fast card as
the 9800 pro cause i own a 17" TFT and am using DVI-I which limits it to a
max of 60hz which i believe means i couldn't get more than 60fps in any
game.

Any comment on this?

If you can get 60fps in Far Cry you are a lucky man.
--
Andrew. To email unscramble & remove spamtrap.
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.

If you can get 60fps in Far Cry you are a lucky man.

Or a witch doctor! :-)

Just been thinking would it be worth while me getting such a fast card as
the 9800 pro cause i own a 17" TFT and am using DVI-I which limits it to a
max of 60hz which i believe means i couldn't get more than 60fps in any
game.

Not true. Having a smaller monitor lowers your resolution capabilities, but
it doesn't lower FPS. FPS is what the computer sends to the monitor.
Basically, a better monitor allows higher resolutions and gives better
picture quality. As far as the refresh rate (that's what you're talking
about), Windows locks it at 60 Hz out of the box, but the Nvidia drivers
allow you to change it. You need to know what your monitor's highest
refresh rate is at various resolutions. For example, my Hitachi CM751
allows a refresh rate of 75 Hz at 1600x1280, and 100 Hz at anything below
that. That's not bad. You need to consult your manual or an online spec
sheet for your monitor to see what refresh rates it allows. For me, I try
to play all of my games at 1600x1280, because 75 Hz refresh rate is usually
fairly clean in games, but I won't run my desktop at anything below 100 Hz.
Going below that is too much eye strain for reading text and such. I hope
this all makes sense to you. I just spent the last several days fine-tuning
my refresh rate changes, and it does make quite a difference!

Hi Brian

Thanks for the reply mate but i don't have a CRT which is what i believe you
are referring too, TFTs are only ever capable of a max of 60hz throught the
DVI output due to the technology.

On Fri, 7 May 2004 17:14:24 -0400, "Mr. Brian Allen" wrote:

: Just been thinking would it be worth while me getting such a fast card as
: the 9800 pro cause i own a 17" TFT and am using DVI-I which limits it to a
: max of 60hz which i believe means i couldn't get more than 60fps in any
: game.
:
:Not true. Having a smaller monitor lowers your resolution capabilities, but
:it doesn't lower FPS. FPS is what the computer sends to the monitor.
:Basically, a better monitor allows higher resolutions and gives better
:picture quality. As far as the refresh rate (that's what you're talking
:about), Windows locks it at 60 Hz out of the box, but the Nvidia drivers
:allow you to change it. You need to know what your monitor's highest
:refresh rate is at various resolutions. For example, my Hitachi CM751
:allows a refresh rate of 75 Hz at 1600x1280, and 100 Hz at anything below
:that. That's not bad. You need to consult your manual or an online spec
:sheet for your monitor to see what refresh rates it allows. For me, I try
:to play all of my games at 1600x1280, because 75 Hz refresh rate is usually
:fairly clean in games, but I won't run my desktop at anything below 100 Hz.
:Going below that is too much eye strain for reading text and such. I hope
:this all makes sense to you. I just spent the last several days fine-tuning
:my refresh rate changes, and it does make quite a difference!
:

-----
Lee.

Thanks for the reply mate but i don't have a CRT which is what i believe
you
are referring too, TFTs are only ever capable of a max of 60hz throught
the
DVI output due to the technology.

I did not know that. That really blows!

Hey lee, let me share something with you. Refresh Rate is NOT applied to
lcd's. I own a VERY fast laptop (P4 3.2HT, 128mb mobility Radeon 9600PRO,
512mb pc2700, 80GB hdd) and I have tried this my self.
I can set the refresh rate through ATI panel to 85 or 100Hz, and it gives no
difference, Except, at higher rates, my mouse movements are much more
smoother.
However, LCD is not limited to 60HZ. If i run games like UT2003, SeriousSam2
or so (with fps counter) i can not see any tearing or such at fps higher
than my refresh rate.

It depends rather on your LCD's "update rate" if that's what the term is
called. If this is high, like 100+ms, your monitor updates pixels at a slow
rate. LCD will get somewhat blurry at high fps games or when fast movement
is applied. But it's not VERY big deal, as you probably won't notice it with
AA enabled.



"Lee" wrote in message
...
Hi Brian

Thanks for the reply mate but i don't have a CRT which is what i believe
you
are referring too, TFTs are only ever capable of a max of 60hz throught
the
DVI output due to the technology.

On Fri, 7 May 2004 17:14:24 -0400, "Mr. Brian Allen"
wrote:

: Just been thinking would it be worth while me getting such a fast
card as
: the 9800 pro cause i own a 17" TFT and am using DVI-I which limits it
to a
: max of 60hz which i believe means i couldn't get more than 60fps in
any
: game.
:
:Not true. Having a smaller monitor lowers your resolution
capabilities, but
:it doesn't lower FPS. FPS is what the computer sends to the monitor.
:Basically, a better monitor allows higher resolutions and gives better
:picture quality. As far as the refresh rate (that's what you're
talking
:about), Windows locks it at 60 Hz out of the box, but the Nvidia
drivers
:allow you to change it. You need to know what your monitor's highest
:refresh rate is at various resolutions. For example, my Hitachi CM751
:allows a refresh rate of 75 Hz at 1600x1280, and 100 Hz at anything
below
:that. That's not bad. You need to consult your manual or an online
spec
:sheet for your monitor to see what refresh rates it allows. For me, I
try
:to play all of my games at 1600x1280, because 75 Hz refresh rate is
usually
:fairly clean in games, but I won't run my desktop at anything below 100
Hz.
:Going below that is too much eye strain for reading text and such. I
hope
:this all makes sense to you. I just spent the last several days
fine-tuning
:my refresh rate changes, and it does make quite a difference!
:

-----
Lee.

There seems to be a lot of confusion here.

1) First of all, I believe Lee is talking about a digital TFT (LCD) and not
an analogue one. Digital or analogue LCD's can be plugged into a DVI-I, but
usually the LCD's that come with a DVI connector are digital.
2) Second the "response time" has nothing to do with refresh rate other than
indirectly limiting the maximum refresh rate that the LCD can display due to
the fact that the individual pixels can only be redrawn so fast, e.g. 25ms
on most 17" LCD's.
3) Just because your LCD is inside a laptop, does not mean it is digital or
analogue. You'd have to check the manufacturers specs to see which type they
used.

Whether using an LCD or CRT, they redraw the screen at a certain rate, it
has too or it would just fade away as the charge was lost at the
luminescent. Changing the refresh on an LCD changes how often the screen is
redrawn just like a CRT. I believe Lee is trying to tell us that his
"digital" LCD only redraws at 60 times per second and does not have the
capabilities of running at any other refresh rate.

If anybody feels I am wrong about any of these suppositions, please feel
free to correct me.

Have a nice day, Rick

"Asestar" a s e s t a r @ s t a r t . n o wrote in message
news
Hey lee, let me share something with you. Refresh Rate is NOT applied to
lcd's. I own a VERY fast laptop (P4 3.2HT, 128mb mobility Radeon 9600PRO,
512mb pc2700, 80GB hdd) and I have tried this my self.
I can set the refresh rate through ATI panel to 85 or 100Hz, and it gives
no
difference, Except, at higher rates, my mouse movements are much more
smoother.
However, LCD is not limited to 60HZ. If i run games like UT2003,
SeriousSam2
or so (with fps counter) i can not see any tearing or such at fps higher
than my refresh rate.

It depends rather on your LCD's "update rate" if that's what the term is
called. If this is high, like 100+ms, your monitor updates pixels at a
slow
rate. LCD will get somewhat blurry at high fps games or when fast movement
is applied. But it's not VERY big deal, as you probably won't notice it
with
AA enabled.



"Lee" wrote in message
...
Hi Brian

Thanks for the reply mate but i don't have a CRT which is what i believe
you
are referring too, TFTs are only ever capable of a max of 60hz throught
the
DVI output due to the technology.

On Fri, 7 May 2004 17:14:24 -0400, "Mr. Brian Allen"
wrote:

: Just been thinking would it be worth while me getting such a fast
card as
: the 9800 pro cause i own a 17" TFT and am using DVI-I which limits
it
to a
: max of 60hz which i believe means i couldn't get more than 60fps in
any
: game.
:
:Not true. Having a smaller monitor lowers your resolution
capabilities, but
:it doesn't lower FPS. FPS is what the computer sends to the monitor.
:Basically, a better monitor allows higher resolutions and gives
better
:picture quality. As far as the refresh rate (that's what you're
talking
:about), Windows locks it at 60 Hz out of the box, but the Nvidia
drivers
:allow you to change it. You need to know what your monitor's highest
:refresh rate is at various resolutions. For example, my Hitachi
CM751
:allows a refresh rate of 75 Hz at 1600x1280, and 100 Hz at anything
below
:that. That's not bad. You need to consult your manual or an online
spec
:sheet for your monitor to see what refresh rates it allows. For me,
I
try
:to play all of my games at 1600x1280, because 75 Hz refresh rate is
usually
:fairly clean in games, but I won't run my desktop at anything below
100
Hz.
:Going below that is too much eye strain for reading text and such. I
hope
:this all makes sense to you. I just spent the last several days
fine-tuning
:my refresh rate changes, and it does make quite a difference!
:

-----
Lee.

Rick wrote:
There seems to be a lot of confusion here.

1) First of all, I believe Lee is talking about a digital TFT (LCD) and
not an analogue one. Digital or analogue LCD's can be plugged into a
DVI-I, but usually the LCD's that come with a DVI connector are digital.
2) Second the "response time" has nothing to do with refresh rate other
than indirectly limiting the maximum refresh rate that the LCD can
display due to the fact that the individual pixels can only be redrawn so
fast, e.g. 25ms on most 17" LCD's.
3) Just because your LCD is inside a laptop, does not mean it is digital
or analogue. You'd have to check the manufacturers specs to see which
type they used.

Whether using an LCD or CRT, they redraw the screen at a certain rate, it
has too or it would just fade away as the charge was lost at the
luminescent. Changing the refresh on an LCD changes how often the screen
is redrawn just like a CRT. I believe Lee is trying to tell us that his
"digital" LCD only redraws at 60 times per second and does not have the
capabilities of running at any other refresh rate.

If anybody feels I am wrong about any of these suppositions, please feel
free to correct me.


Thats pretty good, but just to clarify further:

CRTs work by firing electrons at a phosphor at the front of the tube. This
excites the phosphor, making it light up. Since there is only one beam of
electrons, that have to hit every pixel in turn there is not a constant
stream of electrons hitting the phosphor, so it's brightness decays. The
refresh rate is the number of times this pixel is hit per second.

LCDs work very differently, the redraw rate is basically the number of times
the transistor lighting the LCD (and I'm assuming a TFT here) pixel can be
switched from one state to another. There is no decay as the electron flow
is constant and unchanging between switching.

A refresh of 20ms = 50Hz on a TFT is pretty good, on a CRT it's awful.
Personally I don't go below 85Hz as I can see the flicker.

I suspect tearing can occur on either system.

Ben
--
A7N8X FAQ: www.ben.pope.name/a7n8x_faq.html
Questions by email will likely be ignored, please use the newsgroups.
I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...