At least 1024x768 with AA is acceptable. Anything higher and the performance just isn't there - even with a GeForce 3. On an interesting side note, ATI still doesn't seem to have fixed (or maybe they it planned) the bug that doesn't allow AA at resolutions above 1280x1024. I personally find this quite a sneaky move, sure the GeForce 2 can't handle it, but at least that's being honest!

Even though our slew of benchmarks gave the MSI Starforce 822 a "thumbs up" all around, the question still remains as to whether or not anyone really needs a graphics card this expensive. Unfortunately the answer is probably no. Especially not right now. There are absolutely no games out right now that can take advantage of the GeForce 3 new architecture, and it will probably remain like that for the next few months.

I guess there could be some arguments from people who use FSAA in their games. The GF3 unlocks far more beauty then any other card before it and that is a valid reason, but is it worth paying $500-$600CDN?

Heck, I don't know. I bought one, but then, that doesn't say much does it? Special thanks to Mike and the crew at C&P Downtown!