GeForce 6200 256MB vs. Radeon 9600 Pro 128MB

[xxTurbonium]

NVIDIA GeForce 6200 256MB vs. ATI Radeon 9600 Pro 128MB

Which is the better card in terms of raw power?

 

[happy medium]

9600pro wins with more raw power, but if you factor in the ps3 capability of the 6200 in more modern games the 6200 wins. They are very close.

scroll down to the bottom of this page.

http://www.experts-exchange.co...rdware/Q_21475106.html

 

[xxTurbonium]

Originally posted by: happy medium
scroll down to the bottom of this page.

http://www.experts-exchange.co...rdware/Q_21475106.html

I'm not a member of that forum, so I can't view the thread.

 

[happy medium]

For some reason you have to google it first.



Top of google page.

http://www.google.com/search?h...00pro+vs+6200&aq=f&oq=

 

[betasub]

GPUreview for raw / theoretical comparison

 

[xxTurbonium]

Thanks for those links - especially the latter one. Looks to be quite useful. I've been looking for something similar on tomshardware.com, but with no luck.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

Well I actually have had both cards. The 9600 Pro gave me a better gaming experience.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: happy medium
9600pro wins with more raw power, but if you factor in the ps3 capability of the 6200 in more modern games the 6200 wins. They are very close.

scroll down to the bottom of this page.

http://www.experts-exchange.co...rdware/Q_21475106.html

Just because the 6200 supports PS3.0 doesn't mean it can actually run PS3.0 games with anything close to resembling enjoyable performance. I have two 6200s (one PCI and one PCI-e) that are generally only good as backup cards for 2D use.

The 9600Pro should definitely be the better card in terms of raw power, but its not going to be that much better.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: happy medium
9600pro wins with more raw power, but if you factor in the ps3 capability of the 6200 in more modern games the 6200 wins. They are very close.

scroll down to the bottom of this page.

http://www.experts-exchange.co...rdware/Q_21475106.html

Are you kidding me? The 6200 was a low end card even when it was new, there's absolutely no modern game it will run using PS3 at playable settings.

 

[Laminator]

I have crippled versions of both of these cards - a Radeon 9600 Pro EZ (slower memory) and a GeForce 6200 with 64-bit memory. The 9600 was better. I don't know if this is a good measure of "raw power," but in Quake III Arena tests on the same machine, the 9600 pushed out slightly more frames per second. Of course, both cards sucked at playing anything from after 2004. I don't even want to think about what playing a Pixel Shader 3.0 game like BioShock or Rainbow Six: Vegas would be like on the 6200.

 

[xxTurbonium]

I actually used to own a 9600 Pro, but passed it over as a hand-me-down. It really wasn't that bad of a card. It managed to run Doom 3 in the mid 20s of FPS iirc. That's not too bad, all things considered.

 

[dguy6789]

9600 Pro hands down.

 

[Sylvanas]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: happy medium
9600pro wins with more raw power, but if you factor in the ps3 capability of the 6200 in more modern games the 6200 wins. They are very close.

scroll down to the bottom of this page.

http://www.experts-exchange.co...rdware/Q_21475106.html

Are you kidding me? The 6200 was a low end card even when it was new, there's absolutely no modern game it will run using PS3 at playable settings.

This.

 

[happy medium]

I believe ps3.0 came out in 2003/2004 when the nvidia 6 series was released. When I said modern I meant 2003-2006 games (which a 6200 should be able to play). Remember we are talking about old ass cards and I wouldnt expect them to run up to date games like Bioshock ect .ect.

 

[Qbah]

The 6-series was the first one to utilize PS3.0. The first game that had it implemented was Chronicles of Riddick. Even the 6800Ultra was getting slaughtered using those settings. A card with 4 times as many pixel pipelines and more than 4 times the memory bandwidth. I am pretty sure the 6200 couldn't run any games at an acceptable level back when it was released running the PS3.0 code. It's like the 9400GT of today - good for everything but gaming.

As for the comparison, the 9600Pro should be somewhat faster. It's from a generation before the GF6200, however it's specs are a bit higher (cause it was a midrange card when it was released, the 6200 was a low-end to begin with). So don't expect games even from its time to play well, I'm afraid.

 

[happy medium]

Thats funny I have a copy of chronicle of riddick on my system and a 7800gs (=6800ultra) and I run the game all settings maxed just fine.

I also have Doom3 (ps3) which the 6200 puts a beating on the 9600.

If I remember correctly all of the 6200 are also softmoddable to a 6600.
This was a time before the pipes were laser cut. Just a thought.