Will GeForce6800 be ok for my older PC?

[James]

Hi
I want to get doom3 to experience those amazing graphics but know that my
system wont really show it to its full (see system details below).
I'm not really that well informed on PC hardware and wondered if someone
could please advise me.
I'm not sure what motherboard would be in my system, so dont know what extra
ram i could put in it yet.

I also want to purchase a new graphics card, possibly a BFGtech GeForce 6800
Ultra but can someone tell me,
1. would it simply slot into my system or would i need a new motherboard?
Someone told me i'd need a water cooling system!
2. Would it be a waste of money because my processor wouldnt be able to keep
up with the graphics card?!
3. Does anyone know a good online store to order such a graphics card? i'm
in the UK
4. What RAM is the best to buy?
5. Will Half life 2 be better graphics/gameplay?

Also, does anyone know any software online that can tell me exactly whats
inside my PC without me having to open the box?

My system is a Compaq Presario 6540 uk
AMD athlon XP - 2600+ (2.13Ghz)

512mb ddr-sdram

80gb ultra dma hard drive

ATI Radeon 9000

64 mb dedicated video memory

 

[JK]

Doom 3 requires a powerful cpu as well as a high quality video card to run well.


http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2149&p=7

The Athlon XP chips aren't so great for Doom 3. The Athlon 64 chips
are superb for Doom. You might be able to boost the performance a bit
if you buy a better video card, however your processor and ram will
definitely hold you back. Buying a very expensive video card for your
system is a waste. You might want to buy a new system with an Athlon 64
processor and a high end video card.

 

[~misfit~]

Doom 3 requires a powerful cpu as well as a high quality video card
to run well.


http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2149&p=7

The Athlon XP chips aren't so great for Doom 3.

They aren't that bad either. I have a couple fo friends who have been
running it on XP's. One just upgraded his graphics card yesterday and said
it made a huge difference and that the game doen't seem to be CPU-bound (in
his case). He's running a Barton 2500+.

If you have a reasonably modern Athlon XP (2100+ upwards, 2500+ upwards is
better) you should be fine. Sure, the FX 53 will give you massive
frame-rates but the XP2000 gives you 46.1 FPS at 1280 x 1084, high quality.
(According to that link) Plenty fast enough.

People get too carried away by the latest and greatest, often overlooking
the fact that 46 FPS is more than adequate.

 

[Mac Cool]

I also want to purchase a new graphics card, possibly a BFGtech
GeForce 6800 Ultra but can someone tell me,
1. would it simply slot into my system yes

Someone told me i'd need a water cooling system! no

2. Would it be a waste of money because my processor wouldnt be able
to keep up with the graphics card?!

hmmm, probably not
http://www.anandtech.com/

4. What RAM is the best to buy? Mushkin

5. Will Half life 2 be better graphics/gameplay?

The gameplay is certain to be better. Graphics aren't everything. Doom3
has superior graphics and 1987 gameplay, IMO it is a waste of money to
upgrade for Doom3. I would play it on what you have and wait a little
while and base your upgrades on HL2.

 

[John]

People get too carried away by the latest and greatest, often overlooking
the fact that 46 FPS is more than adequate.

I think Im going game crazy. Ive been fairly uninterested in playing
games generally the last few years and actually only was interested in
the design aspects. Ive always pretty much lagged in my video card
buying etc because of it.

I thought anyone who would spend more than 150-200 for a card must be
rich or insane. But after trying out Doom , Im actually considering a
better card than my 9800. Maybe the 800 Pro or the 6800GT or something
a bit later when the price comes down.

Strangely enough - DOOM III is very very playable with my 3200xp +
9800 setup even though measuring with FRAPS an app that shows the
framerates on screen - it often dips in the 30-40s from the 50-60s.

And thats at 640x480 which the prog autosenses and adjusts. It has
this thing that autodetects your hardware and then sets the settings
and mine was set at 640x480 medium no FSAA. Actually it looks fine and
works fine at that setting though theres obviously some noticeable
jaggies. At higher settings I get some lags, Still might be able to
improve it with some tweaks to get it at higher res settings.

Still since Ive been such a cheapskate and finally bought the 9800 I
was expecting more high end performance so eventhough in real world
terms I probably wouldnt notice all that much difference with a better
card - strangely enough Ive begun to want one. If they drop a bit in
price - it does give you that much more headroom for all the games
that will be out and are out - Far Cry , HalfLife 2 and the raft of
games that will be using their engines in the next 2 years.

After all the hype I was expecting to be stunned. Then as I finally
tried it - it seemed a bit disappointing , the graphics not as
startling with all the leaks and stuff as I worked through the slow
beginning part. Now I just started the action part and it really is
addictive , immersive despite the smattering of negative reviews by
consumers already who prefer Far Cry or are already looking past it to
Half Life 2.

 

[Jabba]

I think Im going game crazy. Ive been fairly uninterested in playing
games generally the last few years and actually only was interested in
the design aspects. Ive always pretty much lagged in my video card
buying etc because of it.

I thought anyone who would spend more than 150-200 for a card must be
rich or insane. But after trying out Doom , Im actually considering a
better card than my 9800. Maybe the 800 Pro or the 6800GT or something
a bit later when the price comes down.

I still consider anyone who pays may than £200 pounds for a card mad as a
hatter. I what really annoys me is that games makers can't develop games
that run on reasonably systems. I have a system that is similar to the OPs
and if I can't play Doom III on it then I won't buy it. Far Cry is fine so
why not Doom III?

 

[Tool]

I'm not sure if its already been said, but that computer wouldn't have
a power supply powerful enough anyway, They say you must have a
480watt power supply and I wouldn't be supprised if you had a 300 or
350, that won't cut it. I used to have a compaq and I can tell you,
their power supplies are notoriously weak.

==============
Posted through www.HowToFixComputers.com/bb - free access to hardware troubleshooting newsgroups.

 

[Chris Stolworthy]

I still consider anyone who pays may than £200 pounds for a card mad as a

hatter. I what really annoys me is that games makers can't develop games
that run on reasonably systems. I have a system that is similar to the OPs
and if I can't play Doom III on it then I won't buy it.


Lol all I can think about this comment is "Well if my Geo Metro won't go as
fast as Porsche then I guess I just won't buy a car." The fact of the
matter is that Doom 3 will run just fine on resonable Systems that aren't
the "latest greatest". You have to take into consideration that they don't
just whip these game in 3-4 months. So number one they are projecting the
game to play on what they *think* the hardware should be at when they
release the game. Because, lets face it if you picked up the ewest game and
saw that it recommended a P3 500 with 128Mb ram, you wouldn't be thinking
very highly of this game now would ya? Also people constantly want a better
looking more interactive experience. Lets think about this, better looking=
more polygons and rendering, which in turns means you need a better video
card to do that. Then more interactive = better unscripted AI. Better
unscripted AI = more work per cycle. More work per cylce = more processing
power needed. So you are gonna need a better processor to get the full
extent of the AI. Thats not even factoring in the dynamic enviroments,
sounds, calculations for weapons fire and so on.

-Chris