Whilst in the process of getting together a few ideas for a system rebuild I have been pondering over this for a week or so now....As part of the rebuild I intend to install a mid to high end VGA card. Weighing up the options, I wondered, for similar money which is best:Geforce 6600 512MB PCIe HDTV

Hi Scratch,(Yes, it's me again! Haha...)You asked a few questions here so let me tackle each one in turn.Geforce or Radeon?IMHO, it wouldn't be fair to make such a comparison. Each model has its merits.512MB Geforce 6 series or 256MB Geforce 7 series?In a previous post, I had mentioned that I believe the speed of the GPU greatly trumps the amount of texture memory on a card. Thus, the latter would generally be preferred over the former. Within the same generation of GPUs, then of course, the more texture memory the better. However, even then, there have been benchmarks performed that show that the performance advantage usually isn't enough to justify the much higher price.Looking ahead as far possible is it usually better to choose 512MB over 256MB or better to choose the higher numbered card (eg GF7800 over GF6800)?I believe I have answered this in my response above. Specifically, I would pick the newer generation card (i.e. the higher numbered one).The three cards in the bottom list are two and a half to three times more expensive but do they perform that much better than the three at the top?In a word, yes. Three times better? Depends on the benchmark (specifically, it depends on what resolution you use and whether/how much AA and AF). The lower resolution that you use and the less AA and AF you use, the less significant the difference.If you plan on getting a 19"-22" LCD display, you almost have to get a high-end card because the resolution that entails (at least 1280x1024, probably more like 1600x1200) will warrant a high-end card to keep the frame rates up.I've heard folks praising the Radeon over the GF6600 but then equally the GF7800 over the ATi X1800.Yes, as I mentioned above, each model has its merits. That's why there is no clear winner from the GPU manufacturers. Your research is correct though - at the very high end, NVIDIA is dominating but in the mid range, ATI is winning. The funny thing is, it was the other way around only a few months ago.Perhaps I could start with one card and add a second later in SLI. If I do this must both cards be identical, or at least the same in some ways?Note that SLI only applies to NVIDIA. ATI's answer is CrossFire but it's much more cumbersome as it relies on a "Master card" concept. Also note that FS9 doesn't take advantage of SLI at the moment.For (NVIDIA's) SLI, both cards must use the same GPU. To be on the safe side, I would get identical cards (i.e. from the same board manufacturer) but the latest NVIDIA drivers removed that restriction such that as long as the cards use the same GPU (even if say, one card was made by Leadtek and another was made by BFG), SLI will still work.In sum, you'll need to decide on a specific budget for me to give very tailored advice but of those cards you mentioned, I would suggest the 7800GT. If you can afford it, the 7800GTX (256MB version) would be even better.Hope this helps.Edwin

Hello again Edwin,As always it is great to gain your advice. I would much rather purchase a VGA card knowing I have sought advice from those who know as opposed to guessing and regretting my decisions later.I understand that you are a guy who appreciates benchmark test results. I too am beginning to appreciate their true worth as a tool in assisting in decision making. Last night I found a long and interesting list of benchmark results:http://freestone-group.com/video-card-stab...rk-results.htmlWhat fascinated me was the pattiuuern amongst Geforce cards. It appears, just as you say, to pay dividends to invest in a card at, or towards the top of its class. For example, the performance of an old Geforce 4400Ti seems to exceed that of many of the 5 and 6 series cards (notably the FX5200, 5500, 5600, 5700 & 6200, 6600 etc). Whereas the cheaper Geforce4 MX series does not. However, many of the ATi cards put in some very impressive scores too.From viewing the Nvidia website it is important to me to benefit from the kind of quality texturing that DirectX

"Does anyone have any input, from personal experience, on the ATi cards for smooth texture performance?"Some important things to remember about FS9 and GPU's. First, there have been forum members who claim that SLI helps this sim, but have failed to prove that. Benchmarks show that it does not. Secondly, and most important, is the single most critical feature between the two brands of cards in FS9: nVidia cards AA Alpha textures while ATI cards do not. This is critical because the cloud textures in this sim are Alphas. This would seem to give a profound edge to ATI, but not so because such features as radio antennas, autogen trees, and numerous other ground draws are also Aplhas.The choice really comes down to what you wish to deal with. If weather (i.e. multiple layers of clouds) is not as important to you as nicer looking ground features then perhaps nVidia is the better choice. I stay with ATI primarily because weather is much more important to me and I can tweak the LOD to make the ground stuff look nice. Just comes down to a mattter of personal preference. But I certainly don't want my cloud textures AA'd (big waste of GPU resources for me).You have stated what your price limits are, so maybe the best choice is to work with those numbers for the upgrade. I personally don't agree with that philosophy (I used to follow the same, but time and alot of money has taught me to go with the good hardware and don't look back).Finally, I'll point out that FS9 uses only the DirectX 7 API for it's video (DX 8 is only required for multiplayer in this sim). So those cool DirectX 9.0 features simply don't apply with this game. What MS has planned for the next version of FS is anybody's guess. So unless you play other (more recent) games the DX 9 capabilites of a card may or may not be an important purchase issue for you.Hope this helps,Greg

Hi Scratch,All your talk about DX9 shaders, SM3.0, True HDR went way over my head! Really, I don't go into all that detail. You're right in my emphasis on benchmark results because to me, that's all that really matters. I really respect the forum members like Greg who look into pipelines, shaders etc. I don't understand any of that. All I look at is which GPU wins for which benchmark and at what resolution/AA/AF. It's a very simplistic way of looking at things but it has worked for me whenever I have had to pick a new video card.I've had fantastic performance with ATI's Radeon 9800 Pro. It's amazing to me that a card that I bought in April 2003 could still be going strong in early 2005. During that time, I was playing games like Far Cry and Half Life 2 at 1600x1200 (!) albeit without AA and AF. Like I said above, I can't comment on the technical aspects of the card, but just superficially, I completed two very graphically-intensive first-person shooters with an ATI GPU at high resolutions and sufficient frame rates for a smooth and enjoyable gaming experience.I just wanted to point that out I may be using an NVIDIA now but I was raving about ATI previously. I'm open to whichever manufacturer has the better product. And for me at the high-end at this point in time, it's NVIDIA's 7800GTX.As we agreed in an earlier post, it's important to have a "balanced" machine where neither the CPU nor the GPU is a bottleneck. Thus, maybe you could decide on an overall budget for your system and then find the right CPU/GPU balance. Even then, I like to pick the GPU first because there are so many different CPU speeds (and therefore price points) so that one can vary the CPU according to how much budget you have left (after accounting for all the other system parts).Hope this helps.Edwin

GregPleased to meet you. It's very helpful indeed to hear your in depth opinions on the ATi cards. Very good indeed. I am interested by the comparison of technologies on offer and note your comments relating landclass/terrain to Geforce and clouds/weather to Radeon cards. As for me, well, I am probably somewhere in between. I can certainly appreciate the appeal of an aircraft sitting on soft 3D clouds just like in real life. It is a very pleasant experience seeing perfectly formed clouds, but I do happen to love seeing lifelike landclass from the air too. However, I find many of the sceneries available from the many highly talented designers on both here and over at Flightsim.com are just too good for the Microsoft base scenery. Some are so realistic that they stand out like a sore thumb amongst the less than realistic FS9 textures.I do certainly follow your suggestion to go for the best possible card as opposed to saving a few bucks to see a lower performance. Much as Edwin has said with the Radeon 9800 PRO, it pays off in the long run to go for the best card in its class as the card will give an aceptable performance for much longer. Hence less frequent upgrading. When we bought our desktop system, now over 3 years ago, I could have saved a fair amount of money by choosing a cheaper Geforce4 MX, but I decided on the Geforce4 Ti. Looking back, I am very glad I did as I can still get a reasonable FPS performance with this same card now.Perhaps I will further consider an ATi Radeon card. I have heard so many good things about them. I just happen to be so used to the Geforce card I suppose. However, my decision is by no means incontrovertible in favour of Nvidia. I will certainly bear in mind your advice. I am very grateful to you for sharing your Radeon experience.Scratch1964

EdwinI can assure you that whatever amount I know about Nvidia's texturing exploits is going to be far less than you will know yourself LOL!The information was redily availble at their site and looking at the picture comparisons I just felt that there was an improvement I would like to incorporate into my next upgrade. I do find the less than smoth tile edges a little annoyaing at the moment, especially when one is slightly out of focus for a a second or two.On reflection I think I may be better to wait and see what Flight Sim 2006 brings. As Greg said, who knows what will and won't be supported. I may then be able to discount certain options. I also bear in mind that the same hardware will be cheaper by then and that I still have a few ounces spare in my Geforce 4Ti card (I do stress only a few!).I did make one very small upgrade this week by swapping my Logitech Attack3 joystick for a Saitek Cyborg Evo stick. I am impressed with its ease of handling. It is much more realistic in responding to movements. Still a far cry from a yoke and rudder pedals but nonetheless an improvement. Well worth the