RADEON 9800 XT can achieve 50 fps in 1600x1200??
i dont see it....

thank you, great review!!!!
i am getting 9800 Atlantis for this game, it that the same as 9800 pro???

Ok, looked at the first picture for refrence, as the others had some link problems...anywho, here's what I saw. First off, the NV had a bit clearer graphcis on the texturing, notable on the cracks along the wall above the window, they were fuzzy on the ATI. Second, the water ripples, the ATI did a generall fuzzy for the ripples while the NV had straiations. Lastly, the transparent graphics (the HUD) are clearer on the NV then on the ATI.

I do realize that most of this is on a finite level, but there are notable differences between the ATI and NV, though minute they may be.

Where are tests with older cards like GF4 4200 and older systems like Athlon XP 2000+???

I think there are a lot of people still using these cards/systems and want to know how these systems perform with CS:S.

X600XT running on par with Geforce 6600, ouch....

9800PRO/XT run so good, and there isnt no AF cheating with this cards, why's that?

Why X800 series run so "bad"...

Ain't is possible to download those demoes you use? Then we can compare your test's with our own results

What are the settings used in this test for:

-textures
-Shadows
-Model
-shader detail
-reflections

for both pure speed and eye candy mode ?????

You say you use two different platforms - one is an Intel PCI-e platform with a $545 CPU, $195 motherboard and DDR2 costing at least $314, so the combined total is at least $1,054.

The other is AMD-based, with a $204 CPU, $114 motherboard and $250 (max) memory, a total of $566

It would be nice to know what benefit, if any, the user gets from going with the Intel platform, but the results section doesn't even say which CPU is used. If I assume that all the AGP cards are using the AMD platform, then the extra $500 for the Intel platform, not to mention the higher cost of a PCI-e graphics card, appears to be a total waste of money.

Where are the slightly older CPU's like the P4 3.06ghz rather than the CPU's that people cannot really afford if they have to eat while they live etc. I have a 2.8 prescott and i know i'm going to have to upgrade if i want to run any serious games these days, but i want to know how bad my situation really is

ATI RADEON X800 XT and NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra image quality comparison


Pic nr. 3 is wrong linked (both from the GeForce).

This review imo is misleading.

I have a 2.4 ghz p4
512 ram
Geforce 4 ti4200

the settings i use for cs:s are as follows:

af/aa off
1024 x 768
everything on high.
shaders on
reflect all

i get from 50-60 fps steady
in gun fights about 25-30

And trust me this is VERY playable.
these reviews make people think that they need to go upgrade. But wait! im not finished.

my brother-inlaw has
1.6 ghz
256 mb ram
64 mb radeon ( i forgot which one )

and he was saying it seemed to be able to play fine!
even on lower end pc's it runs fine. don't upgrade until you play it first people.

"Graphics cards like the GeForce 6600 GT and RADEON 9800 XT deliver fine framerate even in 1280x1024 resolution, which is one of the most used today."

No, no, no, not in games, 800x600 is the most commonly used resolution for games of this kind. Those high resolutions or mainly used by those who wants to make eyecandy screenshots, those who just want to see how nice the graphics can be and benchmarking. With new games now days you can't play with 1280x1024 and still have stabile FPS in dogfights, only exceptions would be those few with super computers.. I'd like to see you play Good old Counter-Strike 1.6, Joint Operations or Doom3 with 1280x1024 in heavy action still have stabile FPS! Buy that NASA computer or a SUN system and you can prove me wrong.

The second picture down, for the Nvidia card, there are white lines on the wall to the left of the door at the end of the castle wall, as well as white lines around the shadows of the castle wall on the right hand side of the door.

Some of the lines look a little more aliased in parts of the nvidia screenshots.

The water on the Nvidia card looks much nicer with the striated reflections. Instead of just blurry reflections they actually look like ripples created by wind or water.

Hows the performance with PentiumM-1800 and Radeon9700Mobile?
Since this is my primary gaming machine, I'm very interested!

Thanks,

I am perplexed at the benchmarks produeced here.

I have a 6800 gt and athlon fx 53 with 1 gig of ram. And with all the eye candy options turned on at 1280x1024 I can't pull anymore than 50fps. So I'm wondering at 40 fps gap between my results and yours.

Mind you I'm not a complete idiot, my computer is properly defragged and adware scanned, with ample (+110 gigs) of hhd space, and more than adequate cooling and powersupply.


Can someone offer their opinion on the cause of this discrepancy?

clearification, the 50fps limit I described was from the stress test included in CS:S.

sens me the game in icq 218195873 pliz i very love him and i want him pliz send it to me...

The Games A Great But IF You are asking me you should have a mission or hole game on the war agents Iraq

I cant get it running , please tel me the right way to get it running

can you buy counter strike source at a store