best video card for the buck?

[Boiker]

ok.. lots of discussion lately about vid cards.

i need a simple AGP 3d/2d card for less than $70/incl ship. PRIOR to any rebates. I don't want exceptional performance. I want good 3d in resolutions of 800x600 or LOWER. I really don't care about high res performance, and i would like my 2d to be acceptable.

I'm guessing that a tnt 2 or voodoo3 2000 would do the trick. tnt2ultra's are still too expensive.

Let me know what you guys think

 

[LXi]

How much are you gonna spend? The GeForce2 MX seems to be a great video card for the money. It's only $120 and it performs like a GeForce SDR, sometimes close to the performance of a DDR as well.

Edit sorry didnt see you said $70. For $70 I'd say the best card you can get is Voodoo3 2000, great performance. A Matrox G400 16MB cost around $80, a good choice as well.

 

[Jonny]

NV11 all the way.

 

[dl]

you can get a v3 3k agp for 69 shipped now I think...

 

[TheyCallMeSAK]

Another vote for the V3 2000

 

[obeseotron]

If you play games get a Geforce MX. A GOOD card for less that $70 doesn't exist. The V3 is not very fast, not pretty, not the most compatible card, and just terrible compared the the Geforce MX that is only $40 more.

 

[LXi]

<<A GOOD card for less that $70 doesn't exist. The V3 is not very fast, not pretty, not the most compatible card, and just terrible compared the the Geforce MX that is only $40 more.>>

V3 is a GREAT PERFORMER for the money, it's not that pretty but you have the Glide advantage, and I have to say they're one of the best video cards in compatibility. It's not bad at all for $70, which is a full $80 cheaper than the only MX(Hercules 3DProphetII MX $150).

 

[Tominator]

The V3 series is starting to show it's age! Get A Velocity 100. Enable the second TMU and use V3 drivers. Around $40 bucks.
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1076

I'm running 2 of them and for my money there isn't a lot of difference between my V3 3000 and the lowly Velocity.

My next card will be a Geforce MX! I'd save the extra dough for that.

 

[LXi]

Tominator: Im using a Velocity 100 as well, and I must say its a piece of crap. It is basically the same as V3 2000, but it's not only slower, but it also doesnt run 1024x768 very well. The 16MB on the V3s allow you to run higher res with much better frame rates. It runs pretty damn hot as well, V3s dont.

 

[Jhhnn]

&quot;Best&quot; is a vague term within this context. Best at what? I have two computers at home, mine has an aopen pa3010 TNT2, the kids' has a voodoo3 3000.Both are generally set to 600x800. The tnt2 has better 2d quality, supports 32 bit color, but chokes (locks up or illegal operation or BSOD) on some of the kids' 3d games rather badly.latest drivers, bios, same story. The voodoo3 has slightly lower visual quality,16 bit color, but has better compatibility, it plays anything the tnt2 plays, and them some. Original drivers (Why fix anything that isn't broken?) Their mom spoils them rotten, they get a couple of new games a month, plus downloadable demos. For example, Rayman2 is gorgeous in glide on the voodoo, not nearly so on the tnt2 w/o glide. I have switched cards and monitors around, and these observations hold true with any combination of my available parts. Actually, the kidgames are the reason I got interested in computers at all. Self Defense. I couldn't believe how badly commercial software could trash a so-called 32-bit protected mode operating system!

 

[Tominator]

LXi
It really depends on the system and what you expect to get out of it. Most with a 17inch monitor and a sub 500mhz CPU DO NOT run games at 1024X768! 800X600 is the norm.

With the V3 drivers and the second TMU enabled, in most games there is no difference between it an a V3 2000! A V3 2000 is not and never was 'crap!'

3DFX cards are the very best in compatibility. Always have been.

I was only suggesting a mediocre card to get him by as the differences between a V3 3000 and a Velocity 100 on a low end machine only really show up in bench marks. A little cooling and I'll bet the Velocity will take 160mhz or higher.

Save the cash for better upgrades. Like a Duron or Celeron2 setup. Then get a MX or V5 or ?

Read Anand's review...

BTW, I just went and OC'd the Velocity to 153mhz...without additional cooling. This comp has a PII 233 OC'd to 300. LX mb with 64mb SIMMS.
Played several games of UT and averaged 29.7 FPS at 800X600, but smoothe and playable. No lockups at all. That CPU is a regular heatpump as well. No additional case cooling other than normal front fan and an inward blowing powersupply. It has got to be HOT in there.

 

[miken12]

Where can I get a v3 3k for $69??

 

[Rudee]

The best bang for the lowest dollar is currently the TNT2.

 

[KarsinTheHutt]

Boiker,

Your guess is good. I'm using a TNT which is less powerful and my games run fine. But my gut says to wait for the GForceMX and spend the extra buck or two

 

[LXi]

Tominator: What do you mean 17&quot; monitors cannot do 1024x768??? Most 17&quot; today can go even up to 1280x1024! 1024x768 is what I usually play games at and the V3/TNT/2 line is totally capable of doing that, but the crappy Velocity 100 is not. It does 1024x768 but the frame rates crawl like sh!t. For today's standards, if a video card cant even play games at 1024x768, it is pretty crappy.

 

[sov05]

For $70 a Voodoo 3 2000 overclocked to 3000 status is best

 

[duragezic]

Exactly sov05, I second that!

However, a couple weeks ago on Anandtech News there was a Video Card Price Roundup or something like that. They had the absolute cheapest prices for cards (only one card per chipset though). I think the TNT2 16mb was $43 and a TNT2 32mb was $54 or around there. V3 2000 o/c to 3000 specs would probably be the best.

eagle

 

[Tominator]

What do you mean 17&quot; monitors cannot do 1024x768???
Never said that....Most sub 500 mhz systems are not capable of running modern games at 1024X768 with all the 'eye candy' turned on. The same system will get decent FPS at 800X600.

I'll agree that 'here' on AnandTech 1024X768 might be the 'norm,' but 800X600 is what most users play games at. I'm running a BP6 with 2 Celeron 366s@550. 192mb Pc100 and a V3 3000. Every game runs fantastically at 800X600. In Q3A, using 1024X768 is not as smooth as 800X600 with the detail slider all the way up.

Again, do not take my word for it! Anand's excellent benchmarks tell the story...

 

[LXi]

Tominator: I dont care how good the benchmarks are, if it doesnt live up to today's gaming standards, it sucks. Try using Velocity100 to run Q3 1024x768, and then run 800x600, you'll notice there is a huge performance difference, because the 8megs of RAM is just not enough. V3 on the other hand handles high res much better than Velocity100. Anyway, I think the bottomline for any light gamers should be a V3 2000, Velocity 1000 is just unacceptable.