Which one!? WHICH!? lol

[Howling]

True, but they independently render half the screen each - meaning that each 256mb card would only be rendering half the resolution worth, which gives the illusion of doubling ram, due to half each's workload.
So "adding" the ram together, while not entirely accurate, does give a good indication.

[Kalean]

Placing 2 256 mb cards in a sli/crossfire configuration would obviously increase performance. But they would still be prone to the same weakness when it comes to resolution size...Yes it is lessened, but the performance difference between a similar 512 mb setup wit the same architecture gpu/clocks would give completely different results. Yes the two cards do parallel process in order to lessen the load...But the issue is still there...Each card independently have 256 mb's of Vram...they should not be added =P.

Of course, as stated, performance would increase...but the performance gains of a sli/crossfired 512 solution would be much larger at high resolutions.

[Dez]

Somewhat unrelated to the topic at hand, but i'm kinda wondering about something. I'm currently running on a 8800GTS card, is there some limitation to which monitor I can use optimally with the card? I was thinking of buying a "24 Widescreen.

[Kalean]

What type of 8800 GTS? 320? 512? or 640?

It all depends...the 320 would be able to do 1650x1050...but would begin to dwindle on performance considering the smaller amount of vram...1920x1200 is a absolute no on that one...the impact on performance would be large since their isn't enough memory....Same goes for 256 mb cards..but they'd experience it worse.

In terms of the 512 model (g92), and the 640 (g8x based), it will do absolutely fine. 24" widescreen comes with a native res of 1920x1200...So you'd want a 512mb + card, otherwise you'll get a drop in performance...You could drop the res. But do keep in mind that the image gets stretches since LCD's have native resolutions. If your monitor supports 1:1 pixel aspect ratios..you could play it that way in a smaller resolution without stretches, but it would place black borders around your video in order to only utilize 1650x1050 or whatever your resolution is set to for 1:1.

[Dez]

It's a 320MB ^^

[Kalean]

^_^...Then yea, a 24" might be a bit much for your graphics card...If you want to pick up a 24" inch monitor....I'd recommend picking up a new card =(.. The 320 mb gts was only really good for 1280x1024 resolutions, at 1650x1050 it would take a decent performance hit to the lower vram...but at 1920x1200 the performance hit becomes massive....Obviously this is also in traits with 256 mb cards.

If you need to buy a new card..I'd recommend a ATI 3850/3870...or a 8800 GT...I know it's a bit pricey...But atleast you'll be able to play with some decent eye candy ^_^...8800 GT heavily recommended. go With XFX/EVGA if you can...They offer lifetime warranties as well as special programs, BFG also offers a lifetime warranty..but no special programs =(.

[Howling]

just out of interest, which 24" are you looking at getting?
I bought a Belinea 22" last summer for just over $300, they're now down at $200.. but I can honestly say it's been fantastic.. The lack of inputs is it's only drawback imho, but the picture quality is decent, there's a little bit of light bleeding at the top and bottom - as expected with most lcd monitors... Res could be a little higher, supports 1650x1050.. But still plenty high enough for most applications I run my xbox through it most of the time.

Just a recommendation on a cheap monitor

[Dez]

It's not a real need for me to buy a new monitor, it's more the fact that i've used my "19 for 2 years now, and you kinda deserve to upgrade by that. "19, surprinsingly enough is still very nice, I just want better because I can figured maybe delaying until Aion came, then I've got a real reason aye. Oh and I thought the 8800GTS where a level above the GT, sounds like it. Like this, Ultra > 8800GTX > 8800GTS > 8800 GT, am I uncorrect? Oh and this is the monitor i'm considering;

Hardware.no - Samsung SyncMaster 245B

I know a "22 would be bit cheaper, though 3 more " wouldn't be that much, i'm planning on getting a real upgrade to use for years ahead, and then I want a real difference. Might as well throw some extra money on something really good, then abit less on something just decent. Kinda think like that, you know?

[Kalean]

Have you even owned a PVA panel howling?...The colors are a lot more vibrant =P...That 22" at that price range is a TN panel =(. But the only downside with PVA is black crush >_<....dark areas merge together and you lose detail (AKA black crush). Which favors TN considering they don't suffer from this issue..but Tn has the lowest color accuracy of all the LCD panels, but they do sport the fastest response times.

Personally..I'm a crt man ^_^...Just gonna nab myself a Sony FW900 in it's 24" widescreen goodness ^_^...at around 150-450 it can beat any monitor out there in the market as long as the condition is good ^_^. Since I know how to use windas as well, I adjust convergence, brightness, and use the internal focus pots as well for calibration =D

[Howling]

That monitor is very expensive and has fairly poor image quality.. Though it is cheaper because of it..
Samsung SyncMaster 245B 24in Monitor - TrustedReviews

Sure the extra few inches is nice, but you really do pay through the nose for the increase.. Unless you're planning on sitting at the other side of the room while you use the monitor - I would recommend a 22inch.

[Dez]

Hm, and people even use "30's with a computer. I guess i'll take it from you and go for a "22 then, it seems like it's the best bang for the buck and more then okay.

Considered a "24 just because I wanted the most inch without going too much up in price, and after "24 it gets really expensive ain't that rite? Thanks for the advice, now I only need to find a solid one

[Howling]

Newegg.com - SAMSUNG 2220WM-HAS Black 22" 5ms DVI Widescreen LCD Monitor with Height Adjustment 300 cd/m2 1000:1 Built in Speakers - Retail That's a good choice tbh, basically any Samsung will do you proud... Except that 1 you'd picked out, lol.

[Dez]

lol, by reviews here in Norway it seemed like the best bang for the buck, seriously. Odd.

Anyway yes Samsung is indeed a good brand, they do Harddrives and monitors well atleast. Thank you, i'll take a closer look on that.

[Howling]

It is "fairly" good for the money.. Personally if I was going to spend that much on a monitor I'd want good image quality over sheer size, especially being a gamer and occasional 3d modeller.
If you REALLY wanted the extra 2 inches and didn't mind average image quality, have a look at some KDS models... I've heard mixed things about them - ranging from fantastic to awful, but they are a budget company and you'll get the extra 2 inches for very cheap.

[Celestin]

Originally Posted by Kalean

In terms of quality/performance. It's been a known fact in that past that ATI cards offer better visual quality, in the past it was a massive lead..Now-a-days it's smaller but still can be seen between the two. In terms of performance...The r6x0 architecture is not good for anti aliasing...If you plan to bump up the AA..you'd be better off going with a Nvidia based solution. But also, do keep in mind that nvidia does tweak their drivers a bit to cheat on frame rates...yes you get high frame rates..but the visual quality is not as good as the ATI based solutions. Also note that ATI is much better with driver support and releases then nvidia...

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention this earlier...

Though I wish it wasn't so, a lot of games that run HDR don't support or do not simultaneously support AA. I don't know why because AA makes a big difference, but it's just the trend. Rainbow Six, Oblivion, all HDR intensive games without AA. By the looks of it AION is pretty HDR intensive so my hopes to see AA in the game are actually very low. The AA issue might not be that big in the end.

Additionally, I'm not sure it's so much that ATI cards suck at AA or the new ATI method of AA isn't ready or as good. Some time ago, after the X1900XT series, ATI started using this new AA method that iirc, that kind of applies a Gaussian blur effect to edges as opposed to the standard method, which iirc, finds edges and jitters them or something. So it might not be that the ATI card itself sucks at AA, but ATI's new method just might not be as good or not properly developed yet because I'm pretty sure that ATI's new architectures are tailored around doing repetitive stuff like AA well.