Looking for a "pretty good" PCI-E video card ...

No One wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:

No One wrote:

Augustus wrote:


I'm not sure I agree with the need to upgrade to Vista. It
doesn't fix anything that's broken.


I wouldn't upgrade to Vista until SP1 and other issues have been
addressed. But it doesn't hurt to get your budget card Aero
capable. He may have it for 3-5 years.



A trully Aero capable card is gonna cost no less than $400.


Lemme guess, you've never actually _seen_ Vista. All features of
Aero run fine on my Radeon 9600.


Yes I have, but I still don't know why I want to rotate all my windows
and watch streaming videos sideways or backwards.

Oh, now all is clear. You saw a demo and now you're an expert.

I have no idea what you mean by "rotate all my windows". Are you
talking about Flip3d which has nothing to do with viewing things
sideways or backwards, or are you talking about support for pivoting
displays or are you talking about an undocumented feature?

I have it running on several machines, with Aero fully enabled, that you
claim are incapable of running Aero.

It's nice that you're willing to share more than you know in order to
help people but you need to learn the limits of your knowledge.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

No One wrote:
Cessna 310 wrote:
No One wrote:


More important is Direct X 10 compliant. Good luck finding one under
$450.


Why is it important to have a card that's DirX10 compliant? Won't the
current crop of 9 cards work?

No, they will not. Currently, only the nVidia 8800 line works with
Direct X 10.


You didn't answer the question. Let's try it again....

Why is it important to have (use) a card that is DirectX compliant?
Won't the current crop pf DirectX cards work? Will they not operate in
Vista and give desired results?

No One wrote:
Cessna 310 wrote:

No One wrote:

J. Clarke wrote:

Augustus wrote:

"Barry Watzman" wrote in message
...

Hey, Sky King: It just doesn't make to get a card that's not Vista
(Aero) compatible when one that is doesn't cost any more. Without
regard to whether or not one has current plans to actually use Vista
(plans change).


This is essentially my point.



I don't know what you people are on about. It's hard to find a
PCI-Express video board that is _not_ "Aero compatible". You'd have
to pretty much set out deliberately to find one. Seems to me that
it's a non-issue.


More important is Direct X 10 compliant. Good luck finding one under
$450.


$450? Either there are pretty many out there or I'm just, as you say,
lucky:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814130082


That's quite interesting since nVidia stated no 8800 line card would
have less than 512MB of RAM.

Guess you're not keeping up with current events, eh?

No One wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:

No One wrote:

Augustus wrote:


I'm not sure I agree with the need to upgrade to Vista. It doesn't
fix anything that's broken.


I wouldn't upgrade to Vista until SP1 and other issues have been
addressed. But it doesn't hurt to get your budget card Aero capable.
He may have it for 3-5 years.



A trully Aero capable card is gonna cost no less than $400.


Lemme guess, you've never actually _seen_ Vista. All features of Aero
run fine on my Radeon 9600.


Yes I have, but I still don't know why I want to rotate all my windows
and watch streaming videos sideways or backwards.


No One, in your last message you wrote:

"Please reread the thread. I was not saying Vista requires a card that
powerful, just the Aero interface. Many people are running Vista on far
less vid equipment, but not the Aero interface. Vista steps itself down
quite nicely depending on how powerful your computer is. The more power
you have, the more it becomes a hog."


You've been saying that Aero requires a DirectX 10 compatible video
card. But it seems that all those Aero features that you say require a
DirX card run on a Radeon 9600.

So what's the story?

And bottom line, what advantage to Vista bring to the table that
justifies migration from XP?

"No One" wrote in message


[...]

Please reread the thread. I was not saying Vista requires a card that
powerful, just the Aero interface. Many people are running Vista on
far less vid equipment, but not the Aero interface. Vista steps
itself down quite nicely depending on how powerful your computer is. The
more power you have, the more it becomes a hog.

For your own sake, if no-one else's, read up on the Aero specs. Aero does
not require DX10 nor does it require a monster graphics card. The Geforce 5
series is Aero rated, for heaven's sake!

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 06:56:41 -0400, No One
wrote:

Cessna 310 wrote:
No One wrote:


More important is Direct X 10 compliant. Good luck finding one under
$450.

The GTX is usually around $600. Some versions of the FTS are showing
up around $the upper $300's.


Why is it important to have a card that's DirX10 compliant? Won't the
current crop of 9 cards work?

No, they will not. Currently, only the nVidia 8800 line works with
Direct X 10.

And what works with DX-10? Some programs are slated to eventually
such as FSX.

I'm waiting until something comes out that uses it by which time there
should be more cards and better prices.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

DRS wrote:
"No One" wrote in message


[...]

Please reread the thread. I was not saying Vista requires a card
that powerful, just the Aero interface. Many people are running
Vista on far less vid equipment, but not the Aero interface. Vista
steps
itself down quite nicely depending on how powerful your computer is.
The more power you have, the more it becomes a hog.

For your own sake, if no-one else's, read up on the Aero specs. Aero
does not require DX10 nor does it require a monster graphics card.
The Geforce 5 series is Aero rated, for heaven's sake!

Minor nit here--the only way you can get Aero is bundled with Vista, and
Vista includes DirectX 10, so while from a purely technical viewpoint
Aero may not require DirectX 10, it's rather difficult to get it
installed on any machine that does not have DirectX 10 installed.

On the other hand, there's nothing in it that seems to require hardware
acceleration of the new features of DirectX 10.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Roger wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 06:56:41 -0400, No One
wrote:

Cessna 310 wrote:
No One wrote:

More important is Direct X 10 compliant. Good luck finding one under
$450.

The GTX is usually around $600. Some versions of the FTS are showing
up around $the upper $300's.

Why is it important to have a card that's DirX10 compliant? Won't the
current crop of 9 cards work?
No, they will not. Currently, only the nVidia 8800 line works with
Direct X 10.

And what works with DX-10? Some programs are slated to eventually
such as FSX.

I'm waiting until something comes out that uses it by which time there
should be more cards and better prices.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com


I'm interested in some justification for getting upgrades that require
this level of performance. For most applications / home PCs, nobody has
shown that there is any justification for DirectX 10 or Vista.

J. Clarke wrote:


On the other hand, there's nothing in it that seems to require hardware
acceleration of the new features of DirectX 10.


That's a key point, but still does not get back to the basic
justification for migrating to Vista.

Cessna 310 wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:


On the other hand, there's nothing in it that seems to require
hardware acceleration of the new features of DirectX 10.


That's a key point, but still does not get back to the basic
justification for migrating to Vista.

If you don't see anything in it that you need then there is no
justification. If you don't want it don't get it.

Asking people who have not the slightest clue what you do with your
computer to give you a justification for upgrading is silly. For all we
know your main use could be to run WordStar on a CP/M emulator.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)