*-*-*ATI Radeon 8500 64MB DDR vs. NVidia GeForce 3 Ti-500 *-*-*

[GeForceG]

Which on is better on this system.

Iwill BD100Plus Intel 440BX Chipest
Intel Celeron II 128KB Cache 1000Mhz @ 1330Mhz w/133Mhz FBS.
512MB SDRAM (PC-133) CAS 2-3-3

If Radeon 8500 is you pick, should I wait and buy the Hercules Prophet version of it? The 128MB DDR version?
I Heard horror stories about ATI's drivers a while back...
Please Please Please give me you opinion.
Thank You!

 

[BFG10K]

This topic is posted on almost a daily basis here. Browsing the first few pages would be a wise course of action.

 

[GeForceG]

Yup, but no one has a rig that is similar to mine. My question is which card will work the best with MY system.

 

[mrman3k]

From what I can tell of your system you can run either card. I would highly recommend the 128MB version of the Radeon 8500. The driver problems are fixed, maybe at most with a bug or two, but nothing to worry about. Performance from the 128MB Radeon should be very good, so I would say your best bet is with it. If you want you can wait for the Hercules version, but I think the ATI version should be plenty good.

 

[Theslowone]

You should be happy with either of those cards, i know I was happy when i first got my voodoo 2. Them cards rocked.

You will here both are better, but you really will not know until you try one out. As Bfg10k said this is posted about 10 times a day so you might not get many responses, but all in all with the proper drivers either will/should make you happy.

 

[AA0]

I'd recommend the 64 meg Radeon, not the 128 megs, that just a waste of money as its already been proven there is no performance gain from using the extra 64 megs, even with AA.

 

[SickBeast]

In my opinion the radeon is better for you. Remember that the 2d and DVD playback is unmatched.

 

[Alex]

<< I'd recommend the 64 meg Radeon, not the 128 megs, that just a waste of money as its already been proven there is no performance gain from using the extra 64 megs, even with AA. >>



bullsh*t

there is a gain although not enough to justify the extra 64mb and with AA especially the gains are quite visible...

but i do agree that ya should go with 64mb unless ya have the cash to burn!

 

[GeForceG]

Is the 128MB harder to overclock?
Is it 3.6ns RAM? or 3.4ns?

 

[Pete]

At the $200 retail price point, in a few weeks you will be able to buy a ATi (non-OEM) 8500 LE (250/250) or a GF4Ti4200 (225/250), both 128MB. If the latter card does in fact materialize at that price (if Tom's HW is right), I would definitely buy it over the 8500, no contest. But between a current Ti500 and a current 8500, read the many reviews and opinions online, as both have their pros and cons (8500: HydraVision, superior TV-out, slightly superior DVD playback, "free" aniso; Ti500: slightly faster, generally better drivers, better filtering but with greater perf. hit). As for which will work best with YOUR system, both cards are about the same speed, so I'm not sure how YOUR system is a factor, other than it may be too slow to buy a high-end card for.

 

[GeForceG]

Thanks for your help!

Any more opinions?

 

[GeForceG]

Ok,
I still need help. I read a couple of reviews....Comments...
Seems like 50% think the GeForce Ti-500 is better, and 50% think that I should buy the ATI Radoen 8500.
What do you still think? I am stuck!
I really want BOTH cards, but what would be the best pick?
I driver issue with ATI is kind of pulling my towards the GeForce Ti-500.
I don't know...
Please try to help!

My system specs are above somewhere...
Thanks!

 

[gplracer]

I would not buy a GF3 Ti 500 right now. You best bet would be to get a regular gf3 and overclock it to Ti500 levels or wait for the Geforce 4. I have a Gainward and it will do 240/540 with no problem at all. I got it at newegg for $229 and now it is even cheaper. The 8500 is a good card too. My friend has one and likes it. The image quality may be a tad better but I really do not think so. ATI is known for being slow to come out with drivers. The choice is yours.