Tbh once worn in properly, I find them really good. You get the occasional resonating frequency in the bass, but otherwise play nicely all round. Played through the audigy of course. Mine shake the room with the bass, try playing AOE3 or something with really bassy explosions, and you will see what I mean.

Quote from Anarchi-H :

I have some megaworks 2.1, and I'm pretty disappointed with them. They are loud, but mids are flat, bass is pretty muddy and doesn't go down to that sub-sonic-shake-stuff-off-the-desk sort of range.
High frequency response is ok, but nothing ground breaking.
Sound stage is ok, but all but the best produced tracks lack presence.

I have a £30 set of Altec ACS-33s (2.1) that I bought nearly 5 years ago, and they beat the Megaworks 2.1 hands down for quality, but you can't crank them up too much.

I don't know, I find this are pretty damn good. Though the sub is a bitch under my desk, as I can't hear it unless I put my head under the desk, or crank it to 3 bars, which gets people downstairs banging on my door >.<

The only problem I seem to have is a high pitch screaching noise, at first I though the speakers might have been screwed, so I turned everything down, still does it, plugged in headphones, still does it it gets very annoying, very fast, as you'll be listening to what is being said then "BZZZZT" you have your ears raped

Quote from pb32000 :

Tbh once worn in properly, I find them really good. You get the occasional resonating frequency in the bass, but otherwise play nicely all round. Played through the audigy of course. Mine shake the room with the bass, try playing AOE3 or something with really bassy explosions, and you will see what I mean.

I've had mine for about a year and a half now. I mainly listen to music, but watch the occasional DVD with them too.
Listening to the intro track on 'Speakerboxx' by 'Big Boi', the bass is there, but not quite as thunderous as it should be. I've tried them in different rooms, and from different sound sources and I get a similar pattern everywhere.
Afriend has a set of ADA890s from Altec, and they sound just like my Sennheiser HD25 monitor phones do, except with a little less clarity. Unfortunately, Altec stopped making these a while back.

Quote from Stellios :

As for APG quoted above, ATi have rumoured that they are going to be making an AGP version of the X1800 series, but theres no further information as of yet. AGP isnt totally dead yet, but in a years time it will be.

That rumor was false:

Link.

Sucks so much.

I only read the first post, but i don't think the cause is the extra memory.

I have an old Ati Radeon 9700 with 128 mb of mem and my average fps is around 60.. screen res. is 1280x1024.

All my settings are as high as possible and i have 2x AA and 8x anisotropic filtering.. Not bad for a three years old gfx card.

I only have PCI for now until I get my new pc.. so would I see an improvement going from a geforce2mx 32mb to the 128mb fx5500 ?

Quote from WGooden :

I only have PCI for now until I get my new pc.. so would I see an improvement going from a geforce2mx 32mb to the 128mb fx5500 ?

Yes. A lot. On PCI you'll benifit from a 256mb fx5500 too, as PCI is so slow it can store textures in the vram.

Im running a GeForce 128Mb in my comp, i reli cant remember anythin else about it, just looked it up from where buoght it from and all the specs have changed, but it came with computer and i get about 80fps sinlge and drops to about 50 - 60 online when ive raced 10 people, som im all happy i keep trying to see how many people online will take to get it down to 20 fps lol

W.Gooden, what's your processor speed? Not the fastest if I remember correctly. On my P4 2.5 I went from onboard to 256 mb PCI and it didn't get me ANY frame rate increase. But what it did was give me no difference between minimum graphics settings to maximum graphics settings. Before the gfx card, I had to run minimum settings and in wheels view with 35-45 FPS. Cockpit view would drop me to 10-15, unplayable. Now I maxed the settings and am back in cockpit view, but still get 35-45 FPS. If I minimize graphics, even dropping resolution and color to 800x600x16, I get no increase, so it's now my processor bottlenecking the system. My point, if you are running OK with a crappy looking game because you are at minimum settings, then the gfx card would help to run it looking better. But it won't be an "OMG, this is so fantastic change!"

Hi guys... I bought a Gainward GeForce 6600GT 256MB online yesterday, and i'll be getting it tomorrow....I'm just a little worried about my processor... Its a Celeron 2.8 GHZ, and I have heard that Celerons are some of the worst gaming processors

How much Increasy in FPS do you think i'll have from my old Sapphire Radeon 9250 256 mb....? WIth no cars on screen i did around 40 fps, with cars on screen i had between 10 - 25....

768RAM

Quote from mrodgers :

W.Gooden, what's your processor speed? Not the fastest if I remember correctly. On my P4 2.5 I went from onboard to 256 mb PCI and it didn't get me ANY frame rate increase. But what it did was give me no difference between minimum graphics settings to maximum graphics settings. Before the gfx card, I had to run minimum settings and in wheels view with 35-45 FPS. Cockpit view would drop me to 10-15, unplayable. Now I maxed the settings and am back in cockpit view, but still get 35-45 FPS. If I minimize graphics, even dropping resolution and color to 800x600x16, I get no increase, so it's now my processor bottlenecking the system. My point, if you are running OK with a crappy looking game because you are at minimum settings, then the gfx card would help to run it looking better. But it won't be an "OMG, this is so fantastic change!"

hmm its an athlon that runs alittle above 1ghz.. its about 5 years old lol. My fps are similar to yours.. I always use no mirrors, and every thing on its lowest settings. Although offline my fps are alot better.

Quote from WGooden :

hmm its an athlon that runs alittle above 1ghz.. its about 5 years old lol. My fps are similar to yours.. I always use no mirrors, and every thing on its lowest settings. Although offline my fps are alot better.

Bummer dude I thought you were gonna have your new PC by now
If your going to get it in the next few months I wouldn't do anything with your current system from a 1Ghz cpu I don't think you'll get a huge jump (especially in online servers with 20 connections) If circumstances have changed and your not going to be getting your new PC for quite some time then I'd look at upgrading some stuff... how much money can you get

Quote from audimasta :

Hi guys... I bought a Gainward GeForce 6600GT 256MB online yesterday, and i'll be getting it tomorrow....I'm just a little worried about my processor... Its a Celeron 2.8 GHZ, and I have heard that Celerons are some of the worst gaming processors

How much Increasy in FPS do you think i'll have from my old Sapphire Radeon 9250 256 mb....? WIth no cars on screen i did around 40 fps, with cars on screen i had between 10 - 25....

768RAM

I'd say about 80 without any car in sight and about 40 with many cars...

Quote from bbman :

I'd say about 80 without any car in sight and about 40 with many cars...

Thx. I'd be happy with that. I know two guys though, that has the same card...Their doing 90-110 fps all the time and around 60 in the starts. But they have Pentium 4 processors...

I'm not an expert, audimasta, but I'd have to disagree with bbman. But I may be wrong, like I said, I'm not an expert. Since I have a P4, but only 2.5 GHz and you have a 2.8, but only a Celeron, I think we would probably be similar, maybe me taking a slight edge because of it being a P4. I've also heard Celerons are NOT good for gaming whatsoever. Upgrading your card, may allow you more AA/AF or higher resolution, ie, making it look prettier, but I'd say performance wise, your processor is the bottleneck as it is also in my machine. If I can't get any performance increase going from max AA/AF, max resolution (monitor hampered 1024x768x32) and max graphics settings in LFS, to minimum graphics and even dropping to 800x600x16, then you'd probably be the same. You could get it looking prettier than you have now, but you wouldn't gain FPS. I'm currently running a Diamond Radeon 9250 256 mb, but it is PCI (no AGP on the MB) and my bottleneck is still in the processor. But like I said first, I'm not an expert, especially with gfx cards, as this is the first one I've ever had that wasn't onboard and I just got it a few months ago.

Quote from mrodgers :

I'm not an expert, audimasta, but I'd have to disagree with bbman. But I may be wrong, like I said, I'm not an expert. Since I have a P4, but only 2.5 GHz and you have a 2.8, but only a Celeron, I think we would probably be similar, maybe me taking a slight edge because of it being a P4. I've also heard Celerons are NOT good for gaming whatsoever. Upgrading your card, may allow you more AA/AF or higher resolution, ie, making it look prettier, but I'd say performance wise, your processor is the bottleneck as it is also in my machine. If I can't get any performance increase going from max AA/AF, max resolution (monitor hampered 1024x768x32) and max graphics settings in LFS, to minimum graphics and even dropping to 800x600x16, then you'd probably be the same. You could get it looking prettier than you have now, but you wouldn't gain FPS. I'm currently running a Diamond Radeon 9250 256 mb, but it is PCI (no AGP on the MB) and my bottleneck is still in the processor. But like I said first, I'm not an expert, especially with gfx cards, as this is the first one I've ever had that wasn't onboard and I just got it a few months ago.

K, thx for the info. I'll let you know how it all turns out tomorrow

Quote from mrodgers :

I'm not an expert, audimasta, but I'd have to disagree with bbman. But I may be wrong, like I said, I'm not an expert. Since I have a P4, but only 2.5 GHz and you have a 2.8, but only a Celeron, I think we would probably be similar, maybe me taking a slight edge because of it being a P4. I've also heard Celerons are NOT good for gaming whatsoever. Upgrading your card, may allow you more AA/AF or higher resolution, ie, making it look prettier, but I'd say performance wise, your processor is the bottleneck as it is also in my machine. If I can't get any performance increase going from max AA/AF, max resolution (monitor hampered 1024x768x32) and max graphics settings in LFS, to minimum graphics and even dropping to 800x600x16, then you'd probably be the same. You could get it looking prettier than you have now, but you wouldn't gain FPS. I'm currently running a Diamond Radeon 9250 256 mb, but it is PCI (no AGP on the MB) and my bottleneck is still in the processor. But like I said first, I'm not an expert, especially with gfx cards, as this is the first one I've ever had that wasn't onboard and I just got it a few months ago.

Then how comes that I can play LfS with all details to full at 1024x768x32 on an Athlon XP1800+ with a Radeon 9600 (no-pro, but 256 MB RAM) and 768 MB RAM with 45 FPS all the time (limited it to that) except for dropping FPS at big starts (I'm talking about 16 cars and above)?

Quote from mrodgers :

I'm not an expert, audimasta, but I'd have to disagree with bbman. But I may be wrong, like I said, I'm not an expert. Since I have a P4, but only 2.5 GHz and you have a 2.8, but only a Celeron, I think we would probably be similar, maybe me taking a slight edge because of it being a P4. I've also heard Celerons are NOT good for gaming whatsoever. Upgrading your card, may allow you more AA/AF or higher resolution, ie, making it look prettier, but I'd say performance wise, your processor is the bottleneck as it is also in my machine. If I can't get any performance increase going from max AA/AF, max resolution (monitor hampered 1024x768x32) and max graphics settings in LFS, to minimum graphics and even dropping to 800x600x16, then you'd probably be the same. You could get it looking prettier than you have now, but you wouldn't gain FPS. I'm currently running a Diamond Radeon 9250 256 mb, but it is PCI (no AGP on the MB) and my bottleneck is still in the processor. But like I said first, I'm not an expert, especially with gfx cards, as this is the first one I've ever had that wasn't onboard and I just got it a few months ago.

The card you got there is low end and it's pci so that WOULD affect your performance as much as your cpu, I had a P4 2.6 and AGP 9600Pro128 it gave me 80-90 max and 30 - 40 min fps.
In LFS the CPU does have a big effect on fps but it's NOT the only thing that effects fps infact in your case I'd be bold enough to say the bottleneck in your system for fps IS the pci low end video card.
Also in regards to celeron and P4 for gaming, while that used to be very ture, I'd think the gain from celeron to P4 is no where as big as it used to be... LFS isn't even optimised to use the P4 fully anyway shrug
Hope you get your system back up and running for this weekend at the moment thats your biggest bottleneck

Quote from B2B@300 :

The card you got there is low end and it's pci so that WOULD affect your performance as much as your cpu, I had a P4 2.6 and 9600Pro128 it gave me 80-90 max and 30 - 40 min fps.
In LFS the CPU does have a big effect on fps but it's NOT the only thing that effects fps infact in your case I'd be bold enough to say the bottleneck in your system for fps IS the pci low end video card.
Also in regards to celeron and P4 for gaming, while that used to be very ture, I'd think the gain from celeron to P4 is no where as big as it used to be... LFS isn't even optimised to use the P4 fully anyway shrug
Hope you get your system back up and running for this weekend at the moment thats your biggest bottleneck

i always thought that only the very very top end cards were anywere near pushing the AGP specs? i only thought it went PCI-E now because of the rocessors changing pins!

Quote from Jakg :

i always thought that only the very very top end cards were anywere near pushing the AGP specs? i only thought it went PCI-E now because of the rocessors changing pins!

Mrodgers doesn't have PCI-E or AGP he's got PCI which is definately less performance than AGP or PCI-E but you are right there's no significant advantage to using PCI-E at the moment, but that's true for all the latest technology which is why I personally avoid buying newly released top-end hardware better to buy stuff that's been on the market for a few months, the price will have come down significantly and any problems with the initial release will have been found and fixed

Quote from B2B@300 :

Mrodgers doesn't have PCI-E or AGP he's got PCI which is definately less performance than AGP or PCI-E but you are right there's no significant advantage to using PCI-E at the moment, but that's true for all the latest technology which is why I personally avoid buying newly released top-end hardware better to buy stuff that's been on the market for a few months, the price will have come down significantly and any problems with the initial release will have been found and fixed

whoops, didnt see the bit bout PCI!

Yes, it's OLD technology PCI, not the PCI-E. Really stinks! The Radeon 9250 was the best that I thought I could get with PCI. I don't have an AGP slot and the PC was built before PCI-E. Like I said, I'm no way an expert on gfx cards, this is my first ever external card. I didn't even get an FPS increase upgrading to it from 8 mb shared onboard gfx. But like I said, it does allow me to turn on all the eye candy at my monitor's max res.

Quote :

Hope you get your system back up and running for this weekend at the moment thats your biggest bottleneck

LOL, yea, that is my bottleneck right now. I'm on the old trusty Celeron 667 (you oldtimer RSC forum guys remember my questions on getting this thing to run S1 demo?) You would not believe how SLOW trying to surf the internet on dialup with this dinosaur is. To bad there isn't any servers for the old S1 0.3H version. I could pop the gfx card in this and probably race pretty good, since I was almost able to back then. Oh, well, no racing over the weekend or for a while until I can find a motherboard now. I just wish the MB went bad BEFORE I got this card. I'll have a lot more options out there that I wouldn't be able to afford.

Quote from mrodgers :

Oh, well, no racing over the weekend or for a while until I can find a motherboard now. I just wish the MB went bad BEFORE I got this card. I'll have a lot more options out there that I wouldn't be able to afford.

Bummer I take it the 256MB stick from work didn't work...

Hi

Something's wrong here.....I've installed my new card, and everything seems ok.... But i'm not having ANY increase in FPS in LFS compared to my old card! I did a test on 3D Mark 2001, and there it worked a lot better than my old card. But not in LFS... Its still the Gainward 6600GT 256MB. Any suggestions?

well I see now that I have an agp slot.. its 4x though but I guess any card will still work with it. Going to get an agp card today not sure which one but Ill see whats under 60 bucks.