What can you tell me about the ATI RADEON X300SE?

[recipher]

Good enough to play HL2 / Far Cry / D3 / etc at 1280 x 1024?

The PC I'm looking at has this installed - would it be ok? Or would I need to upgrade? And is there a problem upgrading this card, if it's PCI-Express, to, say a 9800Pro, which is AGP? I'm not really too clued up about all this jazz.

Cheers for any advice...

[Concept]

Stay away from SE versions of ATI cards. They're usually a sign of being rejects of Pro versions from the production line.

Personally, I'd probably say the 9800Pro/XT is more powerful than an X300. Have you thought about another mid-range alternative such as the 6600GT or the x600Pro?

To achieve playable frame rates at full detail (including full AA/AF) 1280x1024, you'd probably need a 3Ghz P4/Athlon 3000+, 1GB Ram and a 6800GT/x800Pro or higher.

Sorry if it isn't what you want to hear.

At 1024x768 (excluding AA), a 2.6Ghz P4, 512MB Ram and 9800Pro should perform quite well too. It was roughly a PC of that quality which the binks were recorded on for Half-Life 2.

[Concept]

PCI-Express is certainly going to overtake AGP eventually as the recognised standard, but the problem is at the moment, cards for it are really expensive. There are PCI-E versions of the 6600GT and x700 though out right now to the best of my recollection.

As for the 9800Pro... I'm not sure if there is a PCI-E version.

[recipher]

Thanks for that. The spec for the box is 512mB (which I'll upgrade), 3.2gHz P4 and the x300se with 128mB (which doesn't match the spec of the rest of the box, it would seem).

Upgrading isn't a problem but another version of the machine (which doesn't seem to be available right now) has a x600pro specced. Wasn't sure whether it was worth waiting for it.

I'll find out when it is out and decide then. After all, an x600pro is only gonna be about ?80-odd. If I was to upgrade then I'd probably go a bit higher. Anyone want to recommend a decent PCI-E card?

Cheers for the advice.

[choddo]

That doesn't sound like a good PC. you got a link?

[Chadruharazzeb]

I keep pimping it, but the forum at Overclockers is a very helpful place to try if you're curious about hardware.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/

[recipher]

Nice one. Thanks Chad.

What makes you think that it's not a good PC based on 3 spec items? And no price? And no idea of requirements. I know what makes a good PC - I don't know much about graphics cards. Though I'm learning.

Looking at the spec items I mentioned - 512mB - too low, cheap to upgrade. 3.2gHz p4 - nothing wrong with that. x300se 128mB - not exactly top end but again, simple enough to upgrade.

The PC has other features that I'm interested in apart from playing games - specifically Windows XP MCE 2005, which is piqueing my interest.

[Concept]

Your processor and RAM aren't all that bad. The only thing significantly holding you back with regards to the current generation of games is obviously the GPU if you're looking for near-to-top-end resolution and detail.

[Ginger Tosser]

Sadly with Graphics card no matter what you buy its always wrong in someones eyes. Me, i just go with yesterdays technology as its much cheaper. You never know you might be able to run some games on it.

The PC seems fine to me, it would do i suppose as i dont want to run Half Life at 12800x10240 on my sony jumbotron.

[Montaver]

The x300se will be a waste of time for gaming dude.

[choddo]

What makes you think that it's not a good PC based on 3 spec items? And no price? And no idea of requirements. I know what makes a good PC - I don't know much about graphics cards. Though I'm learning.

Looking at the spec items I mentioned - 512mB - too low, cheap to upgrade. 3.2gHz p4 - nothing wrong with that. x300se 128mB - not exactly top end but again, simple enough to upgrade.

The PC has other features that I'm interested in apart from playing games - specifically Windows XP MCE 2005, which is piqueing my interest.

I just said it sounds it, rather than it is it, as you didn't quote a price, hence the linky request. The P4 3.2 is way overpowered & overpriced for the rest of the system, a 2.4 would be a better balance and more cost effective imho. And a PCI-E graphics card means you're very restricted in terms of what you can upgrade to. Only trying to help.

[Kirby]

The X300SE is based on a cut down 64 Bit version of the old Radeon 9600 and has no place in the rest of that system. Fine if you want to play oldish games (Call of Duty, Painkiller etc) in 800x600 with no AA or AF. HalfLife 2, FarCry and Doom III will murder it with no remorse at 800x600, let alone 1280x1024.

[Ish]

Just get yourself a 9800 Pro if your on a budget. I've got one in my box and it still handles games absolutely fine (including Doom 3 and Far Cry). I'd considered upgrading mine for both of those games but after playing them on the Pro I couldn't see the point... not for the outlay anyway.

[recipher]

The P4 3.2 is way overpowered & overpriced for the rest of the system, a 2.4 would be a better balance and more cost effective imho.

If you'd actually said that I might have understood. Saying it sounded "bad" didn't make any sense to me.

It's primarily a development box. Second, it's a media center (whether I actually get MCE 2005 is another thing). And third it's a gaming pc. The card is underpowered but there may not be MCE 2005 drivers for any other cards yet - though I could be wrong. I'll be upgrading the card anyway, if I go with it. Not entirely decided yet.

http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/uk/en/ho/WF06b/35123-35527-39847-39847-39847-9671337-15161851.html