I need input...

[lemmiwinks]

As many of you have probably seen, there is a Radeon 9600np in the Best Buy ad for friday. Iam in the need of a new video card and was wondering if this would be a good upgrade. I know the Pro version is better but it costs twice as much. Do you think the non-pro version would last me until August(able to play new games well) and be able to play HL2 decently?? Also, does anyone know where I can find benchmarks for the 9600np?

 

[Corporate Thug]

9600 np is kinda of a weak card, i think you may be better off with the frys 5600 ultra for $98

 

[Blastman]

I actually think the 9600 is a pretty decent card for $70, much better than the low end cards like the 5200/9200 around this price.

There are benches for the 9600 ?

digilife ? 3dcenter

 

[Keysplayr]

Umm, I wouldn't go near the 9600np. Stick with Shady on this one. the NP is severly crippled compared to a pro in core and mem speeds.
5600Ultra is where you should be looking. Or a Ti4200 128MB for under 100.00.

keys

Oh, by the way. HL2 Is barely playable on a 9600XT and only mediocre on a 9800pro. So you would be playing the slideshow version of HL2 if you purchased a 9600np. The same goes for the 5600U. Dont count on playing HL2 even half decently on any card under 300 bucks.

 

[Rogodin2]

At newegg you can only get 5200s and radeon 9100s for $70 and a FX5600U will run around $170.

Looking at the benchies you're getting a decent card for very little money ($70).

go for it.

rogo

 

[Blastman]

A 9600, ran the HL2 coast demo at 42fps (1024x768 16xAF - digilife). The 9600XT was at ~ 62fps.

And this was probably at the highest quality settings. By turning down the some of the settings like textures from high to normal and turning off AF one can increase frame rates substantially. With lower settings and AF off, the 9600 would probably easily run faster than the 9600XT did at those higher settings.