I have some videos with the 7900 GTX: ruclips.net/video/ZlPp_THE35Q/видео.html ruclips.net/video/Tvf4-NByjC8/видео.html I will make a proper review for the 7900 GTX, actually, for all video cards that I have.
G7X can have a slightly better OpenGL performance but using Directx9 there is no competition. Better AF quality. HDR + AA is a must to have as well. NV3X, NV4X, and G7X are way worst than ATI R300,R400, and R500.
The Shader Monster! For me, I had an X1950 Pro 256MB AGP at that time. Compared to the 7300GT, it was an ultra significant leap forward. It's hard to imagine that shortly after such a big jump, an even bigger leap followed (Geforce 8800) Back then, hardware (CPU, GPU) was evolving rapidly.
I went from 7600GT AGP to 9800GTX, can you imagine my jump? 😀 And it was ridiculously cheap in 2008 (because of weak dollar in 2008) compared to 2024, hardware was that cheap that I was able to collect money for my new computer just from pocket money and few days of work. Today you pay whole salary just for GPU if you want something better than your 5 years old GPU, it's really disapointing this future.
Hell yes, my favorite card! I went from a x800xl to the x1900xtx in 2006, had it running 800mhz core and 900+ on the memory on watercooling with a socket 939 system. Powered me thru to late 2009!
A video that reminds me of my youth, well my early 40s. I'm 60 now & I've just bought a ati 128 rage pro (ultra OEM ) but only £9, it's as if trying to turn back time. Just finished an xp build & it installed easier than windows 11. Thanks again for the videos, easily my favourite RUclips channel
No problem! I love older and small video cards, such as that 128 rage pro, I'm not a big fan of bulky cards, although I really like some of them, such as this X1900, or even newer, the HD 3870.
I got out the benchmark spreadsheet again for comparison, 9134 in 3DMark05 for a X1800XT on an Athlon 64 3700+, and 12298 in 3DMark05 for a X1950XT on a E6600 rig.
I have repaired many systems since IBM XT days, but during the early 2000s I built almost exclusively new gaming systems for LAN party goers. So I kept the benchmarks for nearly all cards from this era, as I tested each new build. I sadly only personally kept a few, but not the X1800XT.
Nice video, I'm a big fan of the X1900 XTX and I enjoyed a lot of your testing! It's impressive in a lot of games of its time, but I will say it's even more so in later games with DirectX 9. I was really surprised when my card could play Tomb Raider (2013) at 720p with fps around the high 40s. Granted it was at the low settings, but it was nicely playable unlike on my 7900 GTX (which could only manage the low 30s), this card was just so well equipped for the future. 48 Pixel shaders and dedicated scheduling hardware FTW!
Thanks! I'm also a big fan of this card :) The 7900 GTX was ok for up to 2005, but games that relied a lot on shader effects ran way better on the Radeon. ATI were looking to the future with the X1000 series, too bad the next generation was such a let-down.
Those cards were amazing back then, i still have an AGP Radeon X1950 Pro somewhere in a box, that i haven't touched for some years now. I used it with an Athlon 64 X2 4200+ on a socket 939 motherboard with 2 GB DDR 400 (or maybe 333, that i set up to run at 400 mhz, i am not sure, what i am sure about is, that i had to set up the cpu frequency manually, on my weird MB, for the CPU to be recognized correctly as a X2 4200+). I was impressed, when i first started Half Life 2 at max settings in 1280x1024 seeing tripple-digit fps most of the time. A lot of pre 2005 titles work really well with this card even in 1920x1080 (tried it out again around 4 yeras ago). I enjoyed replaying some older titles in higher settings and resolutions, like Need for Speed Underground 2 (that i first played on a Radeon 9200SE on ultra low settings... it was not that enjoyable when to much was going on), F.E.A.R., Half Life 2, GTA San Andreas, RTCW, XIII, NFSU an so on. I even managed to play Crysis on the X1950 Pro later on and it ran somewhere in the mid 30s on low settings 1024x768. When i revisited the card around 4 years ago (during the pandemic) i tried some newer games on it just for the fun of it and i was impressed, that it managed to run Dead Space and Skyrim at playable framerates (i am used to playing PS3 a lot, so i consider anything between 20 - 30 fps playable), even though i have to sacrifice a lot of the visuals, to get them there. Like your videos, keep the great work up! I love this old tech ❤
@@MidnightGeek99This was the time, where AGP was about to be exchanged with pcie. Had a weird socket 775 board afterwards with a core 2 duo, ddr1 & ddr2 slots, and AGP & PCIE slots simultaniuosly (i think it was an ASRock mb). The Card served me well, untill i've got somewhat of a "sidegrade" PCIE Geforce 7900 GS 512mb vram (that i've got from my older brother, who upgraded his pc), which was not much faster, than the X1950 Pro (at least as i can remember, but i might be wrong).
😮 That's an amazing deal these days. I got mine for nearly double that and I'd say its only partially working. Did yours come with the old "sucker" cooler or the newer red and silver one?
@ Its newer red-silver cooler, with DVI and Crossfire connector on the back. Although i don't use original cooler, since card was constantly hitting 90 degree (celcius) even after re-pasting. I've put Accelero S2 with additional 120mm fan and its cool and quiet ever since.
@@postanimus8989 Nice, the Accelero should keep it really cool 👍 My card was getting pretty hot too (around 85C under load) but I found that if you use a more aggressive fan curve you can keep it around 70C without too much noise, seems like the stock fan curve is kinda lacking. Sure, cranking it up compromises on acoustics but I just really love how the red and silver cooler looks, it's my favorite looking card 😍
Wow 8:00 I love F.E.A.R. I´ve played a lot with my friend in 2000´s.... one the best shooters of the decade! I have all in my Steam. Great ideia, I will install here wright now :D
@@MidnightGeek99There are a few mods for optimization that target only grass. They could get you a huge fps boost for just lowering the number of polys the grass is made from without changing the look of it.
I played NFS Most Wanted on Xbox 360. I did however play NFS Underground 1 and 2 on an X1600pro that I eventually upgraded to X1950pro. After I got an Xbox 360 I had a period where I mostly played on that.
Really like these radeons! Just finished repairs on a x1950 xtx that was bought in a lot. Also got a x1800 xt, lovely card, but i cant stand the sound it makes. Nice vid as always! Most games till 2005 use only 1 cpu core so maybe try again with a oc on the cpu. Im thinking the x1900 xtx can do a litte better.
Graduated high school in 2006 lol. Gaming was good. Still a reason to buy a console or PCs. Pc hardware was catching up to the strong start consoles had with the 360.
I used my Geforce4 Ti4800 SE until 2007-2008. I had it for two upgrades since I did not play that much games for a few years and mostly non demanding things.
Was the X1950 Pro that expensive? I remember buying a 7900 GS back then, which was the direct competitor, and it was not that expensive...in 2006 I made a PC with 20 milioane - Core2 Duo, 7900 GS etc.
I played NFS Most Wanted first on a Ati 9700pro and then upgraded to a 6800GS on a P4 2.6c @3GHz - 512Mb DDR500 (wish I had bought 1Gb of cheaper DDR400, but I was a geek).
At that time my PC rocked an X1300XT with a 2.8Ghz Pentium 4 Prescott along with a whopping 1GB of wicked fast DDR2 Haha. I enjoyed steady cinematic 25 FPS in NFS MW and although I never really measured performance in those games on that PC, I can say that by feel, FPS in Carbon was even lower than 25. Maybe closer to 15. It's incredible how far the hardware and software has gone in all these years. I honestly cringe at the memories of myself playing games at sub 20 FPS. Like I get it, I enjoyed it nonetheless. It all didn't matter to me back then but boy oh boy, do I NOT want to go back to that reality. And I am thankful for both modern hardware that is, believe it or not, not as swift to lose its relevancy, but also to modern developers and console manufacturers who actually do not ship titles with majorly sub 25 FPS performance...well, most of the time anyway. PS2 and PS3 era of games on consoles is plagued with cases of extremely poor performance in otherwise great games. Shadow of the Colossus, Metal Gear Solid 3, Grand Theft Auto IV, and the original release of The Last of Us come to mind as an example. All these games are cult classic and amazing experiences, which are best experienced outside their original platforms because the ambitions at the time really clashed with the hardware possibilities (didn't stop me from randomly replaying MGS3 on OG PS2 to test my new retro-scaler lol, the scene of Ocelot unit getting pounded by Snake's judo skills in glorious 12FPS never gets old!). Again, I'm not defending poor performance and image quality in today's titles and think standards should improve, rather than plateau, so when a new game doesn't hit a stable 60FPS while running in 720p base resolution it's just sad. But nonetheless, we have it better today than we had 15-20 years ago and that's great all the same. Sorry I went on a little tangent, I felt like sharing a bit of my thoughts :)
Thanks for the comment :) We played games at 20 FPS, we did not have a choice, and we weren't spoiled with 100+ FPS like we are today, so, if we only knew 20 FPS, 20 FPS was perfect. Back then we expected a game to run bad if we activated Antialiasing, now, if the game drops under 60 with max settings and Antialiasing, we get mad at nvidia and post comments about it. Unfortunately, we still have games today that are locked to 30 FPS...it feels incredible, but still here we are. Many AAA games today have bad performance not mainly because the game broke the boundries of reality or visual fidelity, but because the game was rushed, released earlier that it should have, and also without too many optimizations.
I got some laptop with a geforce in 2007, I played most of those games on a geforce go 7600, which had around the same performance as the 6600gt. Though I played some of it with an older desktop with the atlhon xp and a 9600se
Laptop with 7600? Nice! I would love to have some laptops from that period, with dedicated cards, and compare the performance with their desktop equivalent.
I think you could do AA+HDR on Radeon X19XX. Just enforce it from the driver. It was not possible on GF 78/79XX as far as I remember. Besides, are you running your memory in single channel? You should really update your games list. I really don't understand how all retro channels come up games that are 2-3 years behind the hardware. Things were moving very fast back then. The only relevant picks here are TES IV and FEAR. Heroes 5? Battlefield 2 or 2142? Prey? Titan Quest? Battle for Middle Earth 2? Just some suggestions. Those were the hits in 2006.
Pfff, I've been hunting the XTX since forever! I envy you for this🤣 My best finding at a decent price is a X1950PRO. I don't know where you've found it, but congrats! To be honest, I think the GPU is bottlenecked by the CPU. And as you mentioned in the video, if the games are not optimized for multithreading, it's game over.
The GPU is bottlenecked by the CPU, yes, but in spring of 2006 you only had Athlon 64 X2s, and maybe some Athlon 64 FX dual core, but not a lot faster than this 5000+. Actually, I have 2 X1900 XTX, and a X1950 Pro :D
@@MidnightGeek99 I know. Having a PC with similar specs in 2006 was a dream. I remember rocking Barton 2500+ with a Geforce FX5600 (I think it was ultra) until late 2007. Then, after my first salaries, I've built a system with an Athlon X2 4000+, 1GB RAM and a Geforce 8600. That one lasted me until spring of 2012. Still, it would be interesting to find out how much undiscovered potential the GPU has. Speaking of your triad, what can I say?! Very nice! It's very satisfying to own a generation's top dog :) Starting from Radeon 9000 series up until HD7900 series I have managed to grab all the fast cards, but none of them is the fastest :). As I mentioned before, I have the X1950PRO, but not the XTX.
I played NFS:MW on a 2GHz P4 system overclocked to 2.6GHz with a GeForce4 Ti4200 card running on AGP 4x bus. It was okay for the most part, but I was getting annoying stutters in some parts of the game. I had to ask my mom to give me a loan equivalent to 30 USD at the time to get myself a used Radeon 9800 XT card. I would later find out it wouldn't work properly on AGP 4x. It performed worse than my GeForce4 Ti when running on AGP 4x bus. Arrrgghh. I still remember the frustration and disappointment vividly.
It's strange that the Radeon 9800 XT did not work properly on AGP 4x, maybe there were other issues, such as drivers, maybe you needed a clean install for the OS.
@@MidnightGeek99 I don't know, man. I had researched the issue as much as I could before throwing the towel at the time. I even tried many different drivers and even patched a custom motherboard BIOS. I could only conclude that either the card absolutely needed a 0.8v AGP 8x slot or my PSU was not providing enough power on the 5v rail. I did not have the resources to eliminate one possibility or the other so I just sold the card to a classmate, whom was very happy with it.
I still don't understand what hardware I was supposed to have for playing Quake 4, it's unplayable on everything from that time. 😀 I had some 6800LE for very short time before I damaged it, then I switched to some MX440 from box with inscription "old crap" and then I switched to 7600GT, but that worse version with DDR2. I still keep my old installer of Quake 4 with Czech dubbing, yes, it was the time when even FPS games had dubbings, but I mostly play it from GOG version now. I was not playing Unreal Tournament for much more pragmatic reason, because I JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE DAMNED INTERNET BACK IN THE DAY!!! I still don't know well how big difference there was between AGP version and PCI-e version of the same GPUs, I never actually properly tested it, I had still socket 478 and AGP slot in that time. Now I am testing difference between Pentium 4 and core 2 duo and that difference is really massive, you have just 2 years difference and performance is not just double, it's like multipletimes better, GPU is not bottlenecked anymore and you are somewhere else completely than you was just one year before, but unfortunately, we mostly didn't have the newest hardware in that time. I noticed that older games have much shorter input lag with low FPS, I can't really explain that, but old games are mostly playable even in 25 FPS, in modern game when you have 25 FPS, your mouse is delayed like half second, it's unplayable. BTW, I like how clean you have your retro gaming room, my looks like you walk on IDE harddrives and sit on pack of old motherboards. 😀
@@MidnightGeek99 Then it'd be totally ready for Windows Vista and some more modern games like Crysis. I think, there's a big gap between DirectX 9 and DirextX 10 or above. Making a hardware in 2006 and limiting it with a dying OS like Windows XP is not that convenient though. Play Far Cry 2 in both DirectX 9 and DirectX 10. The difference is like day and night. l think, DirectX 10 was what next gen graphics should have looked like in that era.
I had a X1800GTO2 back in 2007, it was a good card, until i got to play STALKER, it was not a good experience to say the least :) Later that year i sold it and got a 8800GTS 320MB, it was a huge upgrade in STALKER, nearly doubled my frame rate.
Lol, I used a pc with AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+, 4GB DDR2, 500GB HDD, GeForce GT 610 till 2022 with Windows XP (the GT 610 was an upgrade from an 8400GS, 4gb from 2gb, and 500gb from 250gb)
I still remember a discussion on a forum, where a random dude asked if he hould buy 2 X1900 XTX and use them in CrossFire, the price for both was $2000, he said he could earn that amount in 1 month...eu luam 8 milioane "in mana".
@@MidnightGeek99At the time of the X1900XTX, 8 milioane in mana, was a proper amount of lei. I don't remember how much I earned, but I suspect that it was around the same.
Played most wanted on a Sempron 140 Palermo 1.8ghz, 2gb DDR 400 generic ram, and a Geforce Inno3d 7600GST 256mb GDDR3. I do not remember finishing it cause as I vaguely remember, I'm still playing it years later on a Pentium E5200 @ 3.6ghz, Patriot Signature 4gb DDR2 800 and Palit HD4670 Super 512mb GDDR3 Also, I think you are running out of ram on your F.E.A.R run. Though system memory states it's only using around 1.6gb. The system is probably already swapping virtual memory from the hard drive hence the stuttering.
I played NFS:MW 1.8 Ghz Intel Celeron (oc to 2,4ghz), 1gb ram, Ati radeon 9250 . I have no idea how much fps i had. In that times i just enjoyed the games not checked every faking time how much fps i have. I should delete MSI Afterburner and Rivatuner hmmm
:)) I did not use FRAPS early 2000s, I had a GF2 MX 400 and enjoyed gaming like there was no tomorrow. After 2005 I started using performance metrics, don't know why :)
Did you enabled EAX or any 3D hardware acceleration? I am asking this because you have chosen a cheap Audigy that doesn't have any EAX Hardware support or 3D support. Everything is emulated. It means that you will have lost performance.
Yes I did, in FEAR. You are right, this is an Audigy SE, no hardware EAX, but I don't think the A64 X2 will loose a lot of performance with emulated EAX.
Ah Oblivion. Whether minimum or high spec - runs poorly on period appropriate PC. Still amazed at how far I was able to get into the game with a Sempron 2800+ and my particular 128bit FX 5700LE. And the fact that the FX 5700 was no faster in it. Really is a CPU hog (would be worse if I didn't run with 2GB of RAM).
@@MidnightGeek99 Fun fact: I at one point had a very barebones PC setup for my brother,with only an; i5 4440, 8GB of RAM and a laptop HDD. Oblivion actually ran very well on the iGPU, better than it did on my then laptop with a Phenom II N970 (huge upgrade from OG P920) and 1GB Mobility Radedon HD5650 (that I ran overclocked to match the standard HD5650)
best era of games but also best era for you to pay games ut2004 cs source hl2 hl1 nfsMW gothic-series loved those games and tbh i still prefer playing them to titles nowadays and it is not only nostalgia idk i just don't like new games even warcraft 1 dota was kinda cooler than lol and such new shit
@@MidnightGeek99understandable same for me except i play cs2 instead of cs go which also sucks so much more (cs2) ... later games = worse mechanics > graphics
Finally someone who tested the old card with proper games. Please, if you have the opportunity, do a similar test with the Geforce 7900 gtx.
I have some videos with the 7900 GTX:
ruclips.net/video/ZlPp_THE35Q/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/Tvf4-NByjC8/видео.html
I will make a proper review for the 7900 GTX, actually, for all video cards that I have.
G7X can have a slightly better OpenGL performance but using Directx9 there is no competition. Better AF quality. HDR + AA is a must to have as well. NV3X, NV4X, and G7X are way worst than ATI R300,R400, and R500.
I played NFS:MW on an Athlon XP 2500+, Radeon 9550, 512MB RAM and 1024x768 17" CRT
Good times
There you go :)
The Shader Monster!
For me, I had an X1950 Pro 256MB AGP at that time. Compared to the 7300GT, it was an ultra significant leap forward. It's hard to imagine that shortly after such a big jump, an even bigger leap followed (Geforce 8800)
Back then, hardware (CPU, GPU) was evolving rapidly.
I went from 7600GT AGP to 9800GTX, can you imagine my jump? 😀 And it was ridiculously cheap in 2008 (because of weak dollar in 2008) compared to 2024, hardware was that cheap that I was able to collect money for my new computer just from pocket money and few days of work. Today you pay whole salary just for GPU if you want something better than your 5 years old GPU, it's really disapointing this future.
The X1950 Pro was a very good card, price / performance, similar to the 7900 GS.
@@MidnightGeek99
Aspacialy,the 512 mb version!!
Hell yes, my favorite card! I went from a x800xl to the x1900xtx in 2006, had it running 800mhz core and 900+ on the memory on watercooling with a socket 939 system. Powered me thru to late 2009!
Yes, I like this card myself, it was different from what nvidia had to offer, the architecture was quite future-proof.
ca tot ai pomenit de CS, harta preferata a fost, si inca este, de_ice. o jucam in retea in caminul P26 cam 314, poli, regie ce fun era :)
Tu, si noi toti :)
A video that reminds me of my youth, well my early 40s. I'm 60 now & I've just bought a ati 128 rage pro (ultra OEM ) but only £9, it's as if trying to turn back time. Just finished an xp build & it installed easier than windows 11. Thanks again for the videos, easily my favourite RUclips channel
No problem! I love older and small video cards, such as that 128 rage pro, I'm not a big fan of bulky cards, although I really like some of them, such as this X1900, or even newer, the HD 3870.
I got out the benchmark spreadsheet again for comparison, 9134 in 3DMark05 for a X1800XT on an Athlon 64 3700+, and 12298 in 3DMark05 for a X1950XT on a E6600 rig.
The X1800 series was quite good also, I would love one of them now, I have only from the X1900 series.
I have repaired many systems since IBM XT days, but during the early 2000s I built almost exclusively new gaming systems for LAN party goers. So I kept the benchmarks for nearly all cards from this era, as I tested each new build. I sadly only personally kept a few, but not the X1800XT.
Great timing! I just got a 512 MB x1950 GT (not the same, but for 1280x1024 it’s probably enough for XP) and will be trying it in a couple of days
You can use it for 1280x1024 for sure, have fun with it :)
Nice video, I'm a big fan of the X1900 XTX and I enjoyed a lot of your testing! It's impressive in a lot of games of its time, but I will say it's even more so in later games with DirectX 9. I was really surprised when my card could play Tomb Raider (2013) at 720p with fps around the high 40s. Granted it was at the low settings, but it was nicely playable unlike on my 7900 GTX (which could only manage the low 30s), this card was just so well equipped for the future. 48 Pixel shaders and dedicated scheduling hardware FTW!
Thanks! I'm also a big fan of this card :) The 7900 GTX was ok for up to 2005, but games that relied a lot on shader effects ran way better on the Radeon.
ATI were looking to the future with the X1000 series, too bad the next generation was such a let-down.
Nice card and good choice of games. Cheers !
Thanks :)
Those cards were amazing back then, i still have an AGP Radeon X1950 Pro somewhere in a box, that i haven't touched for some years now. I used it with an Athlon 64 X2 4200+ on a socket 939 motherboard with 2 GB DDR 400 (or maybe 333, that i set up to run at 400 mhz, i am not sure, what i am sure about is, that i had to set up the cpu frequency manually, on my weird MB, for the CPU to be recognized correctly as a X2 4200+). I was impressed, when i first started Half Life 2 at max settings in 1280x1024 seeing tripple-digit fps most of the time. A lot of pre 2005 titles work really well with this card even in 1920x1080 (tried it out again around 4 yeras ago). I enjoyed replaying some older titles in higher settings and resolutions, like Need for Speed Underground 2 (that i first played on a Radeon 9200SE on ultra low settings... it was not that enjoyable when to much was going on), F.E.A.R., Half Life 2, GTA San Andreas, RTCW, XIII, NFSU an so on. I even managed to play Crysis on the X1950 Pro later on and it ran somewhere in the mid 30s on low settings 1024x768. When i revisited the card around 4 years ago (during the pandemic) i tried some newer games on it just for the fun of it and i was impressed, that it managed to run Dead Space and Skyrim at playable framerates (i am used to playing PS3 a lot, so i consider anything between 20 - 30 fps playable), even though i have to sacrifice a lot of the visuals, to get them there.
Like your videos, keep the great work up!
I love this old tech ❤
The AGP versions for the X1900 series were very helpful, many people were stuck with AGP, and the performance was amazing, just like you said.
@@MidnightGeek99This was the time, where AGP was about to be exchanged with pcie. Had a weird socket 775 board afterwards with a core 2 duo, ddr1 & ddr2 slots, and AGP & PCIE slots simultaniuosly (i think it was an ASRock mb). The Card served me well, untill i've got somewhat of a "sidegrade" PCIE Geforce 7900 GS 512mb vram (that i've got from my older brother, who upgraded his pc), which was not much faster, than the X1950 Pro (at least as i can remember, but i might be wrong).
I managed to get X1950XTX Crossfire for 20 bucks. I love people that don't know what they're selling.
Wow, epic deal!
😮 That's an amazing deal these days. I got mine for nearly double that and I'd say its only partially working. Did yours come with the old "sucker" cooler or the newer red and silver one?
@ Its newer red-silver cooler, with DVI and Crossfire connector on the back. Although i don't use original cooler, since card was constantly hitting 90 degree (celcius) even after re-pasting. I've put Accelero S2 with additional 120mm fan and its cool and quiet ever since.
@@postanimus8989 Nice, the Accelero should keep it really cool 👍 My card was getting pretty hot too (around 85C under load) but I found that if you use a more aggressive fan curve you can keep it around 70C without too much noise, seems like the stock fan curve is kinda lacking. Sure, cranking it up compromises on acoustics but I just really love how the red and silver cooler looks, it's my favorite looking card 😍
Wow 8:00 I love F.E.A.R. I´ve played a lot with my friend in 2000´s.... one the best shooters of the decade! I have all in my Steam. Great ideia, I will install here wright now :D
yes, amazing game! I did not play it on multiplayer though, only single.
Oblivion was such a pain to play in 2006. Its good you were not in the capital city with that card. I got 30 frames average with a GTX 7800 at 760p.
You could still choke a modern gaming rig with oblivion. There are mods for that.
Actually the grass has the biggest impact on FPS , I think.
30 frams in Oblivion was godly in 2006 :)
@krazownik3139 Yes, engine-related performance issues.
@@MidnightGeek99There are a few mods for optimization that target only grass. They could get you a huge fps boost for just lowering the number of polys the grass is made from without changing the look of it.
I played NFS Most Wanted on Xbox 360. I did however play NFS Underground 1 and 2 on an X1600pro that I eventually upgraded to X1950pro. After I got an Xbox 360 I had a period where I mostly played on that.
I never played the NFS series on console, but I'm trying to collect all NFS games for PS2, PS3 and Xbox 360.
Really like these radeons! Just finished repairs on a x1950 xtx that was bought in a lot. Also got a x1800 xt, lovely card, but i cant stand the sound it makes. Nice vid as always! Most games till 2005 use only 1 cpu core so maybe try again with a oc on the cpu. Im thinking the x1900 xtx can do a litte better.
A proper CPU for this card would be a Core 2 Duo :)
Graduated high school in 2006 lol. Gaming was good. Still a reason to buy a console or PCs. Pc hardware was catching up to the strong start consoles had with the 360.
That's right, PC hardware was catching up :) I've also graduated high school in 2005 or 2006.
I think in 2006 I was still using an FX5500, and then my next PC I got a 8600GT.
me too
In 2005 I had a GF2 MX 400, upgraded to 6600, close :)
I used my Geforce4 Ti4800 SE until 2007-2008. I had it for two upgrades since I did not play that much games for a few years and mostly non demanding things.
I see, impressive, in the early to mid 2000s technology evolved a lot, huge spikes in performance.
In that period I had an expensive ATI X1950 Pro, to my surprise just a year later, a cheap 8600GT DDR3 had a very similar performance in all games.
Was the X1950 Pro that expensive? I remember buying a 7900 GS back then, which was the direct competitor, and it was not that expensive...in 2006 I made a PC with 20 milioane - Core2 Duo, 7900 GS etc.
@@MidnightGeek99 the X1950 Pro was sold with 200$ in 2006 and the 8600GT a little cheaper with 150$. I thought the price differernce was bigger.
I played NFS Most Wanted first on a Ati 9700pro and then upgraded to a 6800GS on a P4 2.6c @3GHz - 512Mb DDR500 (wish I had bought 1Gb of cheaper DDR400, but I was a geek).
The 9700 Pro was a good card for this game, compared to what I had, a GF2 :)
At that time my PC rocked an X1300XT with a 2.8Ghz Pentium 4 Prescott along with a whopping 1GB of wicked fast DDR2 Haha. I enjoyed steady cinematic 25 FPS in NFS MW and although I never really measured performance in those games on that PC, I can say that by feel, FPS in Carbon was even lower than 25. Maybe closer to 15.
It's incredible how far the hardware and software has gone in all these years. I honestly cringe at the memories of myself playing games at sub 20 FPS. Like I get it, I enjoyed it nonetheless. It all didn't matter to me back then but boy oh boy, do I NOT want to go back to that reality.
And I am thankful for both modern hardware that is, believe it or not, not as swift to lose its relevancy, but also to modern developers and console manufacturers who actually do not ship titles with majorly sub 25 FPS performance...well, most of the time anyway.
PS2 and PS3 era of games on consoles is plagued with cases of extremely poor performance in otherwise great games. Shadow of the Colossus, Metal Gear Solid 3, Grand Theft Auto IV, and
the original release of The Last of Us come to mind as an example. All these games are cult classic and amazing experiences, which are best experienced outside their original platforms because the ambitions at the time really clashed with the hardware possibilities (didn't stop me from randomly replaying MGS3 on OG PS2 to test my new retro-scaler lol, the scene of Ocelot unit getting pounded by Snake's judo skills in glorious 12FPS never gets old!).
Again, I'm not defending poor performance and image quality in today's titles and think standards should improve, rather than plateau, so when a new game doesn't hit a stable 60FPS while running in 720p base resolution it's just sad. But nonetheless, we have it better today than we had 15-20 years ago and that's great all the same.
Sorry I went on a little tangent, I felt like sharing a bit of my thoughts :)
Thanks for the comment :)
We played games at 20 FPS, we did not have a choice, and we weren't spoiled with 100+ FPS like we are today, so, if we only knew 20 FPS, 20 FPS was perfect.
Back then we expected a game to run bad if we activated Antialiasing, now, if the game drops under 60 with max settings and Antialiasing, we get mad at nvidia and post comments about it.
Unfortunately, we still have games today that are locked to 30 FPS...it feels incredible, but still here we are.
Many AAA games today have bad performance not mainly because the game broke the boundries of reality or visual fidelity, but because the game was rushed, released earlier that it should have, and also without too many optimizations.
It never seems to me that Oblivion could have that bright graphics. But maybe because I always choose to play with AA enabled.
It's because of HDR, with HDR it looks extremely bright, and back then I did not like it, now, it's part of the charm.
I got some laptop with a geforce in 2007, I played most of those games on a geforce go 7600, which had around the same performance as the 6600gt. Though I played some of it with an older desktop with the atlhon xp and a 9600se
Laptop with 7600? Nice! I would love to have some laptops from that period, with dedicated cards, and compare the performance with their desktop equivalent.
@@MidnightGeek99 Unfornately it died too soon
I think you could do AA+HDR on Radeon X19XX. Just enforce it from the driver. It was not possible on GF 78/79XX as far as I remember. Besides, are you running your memory in single channel?
You should really update your games list. I really don't understand how all retro channels come up games that are 2-3 years behind the hardware. Things were moving very fast back then. The only relevant picks here are TES IV and FEAR. Heroes 5? Battlefield 2 or 2142? Prey? Titan Quest? Battle for Middle Earth 2? Just some suggestions. Those were the hits in 2006.
I was using dual-channel, the layout is weird on this motherboard.
2006 gaming does not mean only 2006 games :)
Pfff, I've been hunting the XTX since forever! I envy you for this🤣 My best finding at a decent price is a X1950PRO. I don't know where you've found it, but congrats!
To be honest, I think the GPU is bottlenecked by the CPU. And as you mentioned in the video, if the games are not optimized for multithreading, it's game over.
The GPU is bottlenecked by the CPU, yes, but in spring of 2006 you only had Athlon 64 X2s, and maybe some Athlon 64 FX dual core, but not a lot faster than this 5000+.
Actually, I have 2 X1900 XTX, and a X1950 Pro :D
@@MidnightGeek99 I know. Having a PC with similar specs in 2006 was a dream. I remember rocking Barton 2500+ with a Geforce FX5600 (I think it was ultra) until late 2007. Then, after my first salaries, I've built a system with an Athlon X2 4000+, 1GB RAM and a Geforce 8600. That one lasted me until spring of 2012.
Still, it would be interesting to find out how much undiscovered potential the GPU has.
Speaking of your triad, what can I say?! Very nice! It's very satisfying to own a generation's top dog :) Starting from Radeon 9000 series up until HD7900 series I have managed to grab all the fast cards, but none of them is the fastest :). As I mentioned before, I have the X1950PRO, but not the XTX.
Hardware was so much more fun back then!
You can have fun today, but I'm not that invested in today, I prefer yesterday :)
I played NFS:MW on a 2GHz P4 system overclocked to 2.6GHz with a GeForce4 Ti4200 card running on AGP 4x bus. It was okay for the most part, but I was getting annoying stutters in some parts of the game.
I had to ask my mom to give me a loan equivalent to 30 USD at the time to get myself a used Radeon 9800 XT card. I would later find out it wouldn't work properly on AGP 4x. It performed worse than my GeForce4 Ti when running on AGP 4x bus. Arrrgghh.
I still remember the frustration and disappointment vividly.
It's strange that the Radeon 9800 XT did not work properly on AGP 4x, maybe there were other issues, such as drivers, maybe you needed a clean install for the OS.
@@MidnightGeek99 I don't know, man. I had researched the issue as much as I could before throwing the towel at the time. I even tried many different drivers and even patched a custom motherboard BIOS.
I could only conclude that either the card absolutely needed a 0.8v AGP 8x slot or my PSU was not providing enough power on the 5v rail. I did not have the resources to eliminate one possibility or the other so I just sold the card to a classmate, whom was very happy with it.
I had NFS most wanted installed on my pc with duron 1.2ghz and GeForce 2 mx , i was alble to finish this game
Haha, that's right, I've finished most wanted on a GF2 MX 400 also, and Athlon XP.
I still don't understand what hardware I was supposed to have for playing Quake 4, it's unplayable on everything from that time. 😀 I had some 6800LE for very short time before I damaged it, then I switched to some MX440 from box with inscription "old crap" and then I switched to 7600GT, but that worse version with DDR2.
I still keep my old installer of Quake 4 with Czech dubbing, yes, it was the time when even FPS games had dubbings, but I mostly play it from GOG version now.
I was not playing Unreal Tournament for much more pragmatic reason, because I JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE DAMNED INTERNET BACK IN THE DAY!!!
I still don't know well how big difference there was between AGP version and PCI-e version of the same GPUs, I never actually properly tested it, I had still socket 478 and AGP slot in that time. Now I am testing difference between Pentium 4 and core 2 duo and that difference is really massive, you have just 2 years difference and performance is not just double, it's like multipletimes better, GPU is not bottlenecked anymore and you are somewhere else completely than you was just one year before, but unfortunately, we mostly didn't have the newest hardware in that time.
I noticed that older games have much shorter input lag with low FPS, I can't really explain that, but old games are mostly playable even in 25 FPS, in modern game when you have 25 FPS, your mouse is delayed like half second, it's unplayable.
BTW, I like how clean you have your retro gaming room, my looks like you walk on IDE harddrives and sit on pack of old motherboards. 😀
For Quake 4 you need at least 8800 GT :)
My room is not clean, only the corner where I shoot the videos :)))
I think it's a shame that this card doesn't support DirectX 10. It really deserves it. The fastest DirectX 9 card ever.
DirectX 10 for what? From my point of view, the only necessary jump was from DirectX 9 to 12, 10 and 11 were...meh.
@@MidnightGeek99 Then it'd be totally ready for Windows Vista and some more modern games like Crysis.
I think, there's a big gap between DirectX 9 and DirextX 10 or above. Making a hardware in 2006 and limiting it with a dying OS like Windows XP is not that convenient though.
Play Far Cry 2 in both DirectX 9 and DirectX 10. The difference is like day and night. l think, DirectX 10 was what next gen graphics should have looked like in that era.
I had a X1800GTO2 back in 2007, it was a good card, until i got to play STALKER, it was not a good experience to say the least :) Later that year i sold it and got a 8800GTS 320MB, it was a huge upgrade in STALKER, nearly doubled my frame rate.
STALKER was a demanding game, and not very well optimized.
my first gpu was the 8800gt and i still have it:)))
Nice GPU to have as the first one. Is it still working? The 8800 GTs had some reliability issues.
@@MidnightGeek99 Don't know if it's still working but i'll check it
Lol, I used a pc with AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+, 4GB DDR2, 500GB HDD, GeForce GT 610 till 2022 with Windows XP (the GT 610 was an upgrade from an 8400GS, 4gb from 2gb, and 500gb from 250gb)
GT 610, non gaming card that can play Windows XP games pretty well :)
@@MidnightGeek99 ikr. Played Minecraft and GTA 3 a lot on it😀
The video I was looking for! The Xbox 360 killer 😂
Back in the day, I would have sold a politician's kidney for such a nice video card. If you add that soundcard, I would have sold both his kidneys.
I still remember a discussion on a forum, where a random dude asked if he hould buy 2 X1900 XTX and use them in CrossFire, the price for both was $2000, he said he could earn that amount in 1 month...eu luam 8 milioane "in mana".
@@MidnightGeek99At the time of the X1900XTX, 8 milioane in mana, was a proper amount of lei. I don't remember how much I earned, but I suspect that it was around the same.
@@AndreiNeacsu hmm, maybe my memory plays tricks on me, maybe it was a few years later :)
Played most wanted on a Sempron 140 Palermo 1.8ghz, 2gb DDR 400 generic ram, and a Geforce Inno3d 7600GST 256mb GDDR3. I do not remember finishing it cause as I vaguely remember, I'm still playing it years later on a Pentium E5200 @ 3.6ghz, Patriot Signature 4gb DDR2 800 and Palit HD4670 Super 512mb GDDR3
Also, I think you are running out of ram on your F.E.A.R run. Though system memory states it's only using around 1.6gb. The system is probably already swapping virtual memory from the hard drive hence the stuttering.
Yes, I also think the RAM was not enough, I was using 2 GB for a specific purpose, you'll see why in one of the next videos :)
I played NFS:MW 1.8 Ghz Intel Celeron (oc to 2,4ghz), 1gb ram, Ati radeon 9250 . I have no idea how much fps i had. In that times i just enjoyed the games not checked every faking time how much fps i have. I should delete MSI Afterburner and Rivatuner hmmm
:)) I did not use FRAPS early 2000s, I had a GF2 MX 400 and enjoyed gaming like there was no tomorrow. After 2005 I started using performance metrics, don't know why :)
Did you enabled EAX or any 3D hardware acceleration? I am asking this because you have chosen a cheap Audigy that doesn't have any EAX Hardware support or 3D support. Everything is emulated. It means that you will have lost performance.
Yes I did, in FEAR. You are right, this is an Audigy SE, no hardware EAX, but I don't think the A64 X2 will loose a lot of performance with emulated EAX.
Ah Oblivion. Whether minimum or high spec - runs poorly on period appropriate PC. Still amazed at how far I was able to get into the game with a Sempron 2800+ and my particular 128bit FX 5700LE. And the fact that the FX 5700 was no faster in it. Really is a CPU hog (would be worse if I didn't run with 2GB of RAM).
Yes, it needs fast CPUs, and GPUs, and HDD, and...everything. Bethesda magic :)
@@MidnightGeek99 Fun fact: I at one point had a very barebones PC setup for my brother,with only an; i5 4440, 8GB of RAM and a laptop HDD.
Oblivion actually ran very well on the iGPU, better than it did on my then laptop with a Phenom II N970 (huge upgrade from OG P920) and 1GB Mobility Radedon HD5650 (that I ran overclocked to match the standard HD5650)
Radeon X1900 XTX is the Best Directx 9 3D card
Ttechnically, it's the X1950 XTX, but not very far!
nobody's gonna question that foam?
What foam? :O
@@MidnightGeek99under the graphics card
@@alyctro8158 yeah, I know :) it holds the card in a good position.
@@MidnightGeek99is it safe?
@@alyctro8158 I don't know, never thought about it :))
О!!
Exactly, what i meant to do!!
lol...so, did you do it?
@@MidnightGeek99
Not yet.
Have to finish assembly &sale of the recently modern systems.
8)))
What monitor your using while demonstrating?
Eizo S2100, 21" 1600x1200 S-PVA.
Aah quake 4
Yes, the good old...
Geez. where all games back in the day so stuttery?
Not really, provided you had enough RAM and did not use 1600x1200 maximum settings!
... and a CPU cooler blowing hot air into the graphics card 🤣🤣
I like to...try various cooling solutions, you should see my previous one!
PS3 graphics during the PS2 era
Haha, that's right!
Ps I love that keyboard
It's amazing, and it has a lot of features, I will make a small presentation in the future.
best era of games but also best era for you to pay games
ut2004 cs source hl2 hl1 nfsMW gothic-series
loved those games and tbh i still prefer playing them to titles nowadays and it is not only nostalgia
idk i just don't like new games even warcraft 1 dota was kinda cooler than lol and such new shit
I feel you, 90% of all the games that I'm playing right now are from the late 90s, early to mid 2000s.
@@MidnightGeek99understandable same for me except i play cs2 instead of cs go which also sucks so much more (cs2) ... later games = worse mechanics > graphics
ATI drivers fun...
Actually I had no issues with the drivers :O
@@MidnightGeek99 but you do with the bad performance :P
Why not the GeForce 7600GT dude? Why this shit card?
Why not a 8600 GT?