gota have dual monitor support, and can hadle most games will be used mostly for 2d graphics, and will be paired with Intel 2.53 on a 8x agp board with about 1024 MB of pc 2700. Sorry I have not decided on the motherboard yet suggestions there are also welcome.
If you were to spend up to $170 on a video card which would it be?
- Thread starter Dreadogg
- Start date
If you look around hard a Radeon9500PRO may fall into (or VERY close to) your price range and it is MUCH better than even the GF4TI4600/4800 cards. You get outstanding '2D' image quality, great TVout, and I believe all these cards come with Dual RAMDACs, great TVout, full DX9 hw, excellent AA+AF, great hw DVD/MPEG playback and are very consistent across all manus hence dual display functionality too (ideally you want a DVI-to-CRT adapter bundled in). Otherwise a GF4TI4200 is probably your best bet, certainly a 128MB version and ideally a 4200-8X one with 250/500-250/512 clocks which are known to o/c VERY close to GF4TI4600/4800 speed.Hmm I don't know Anand Austin. The Ti4600 is often faster no AA/AF, and the AA/AF of both carsds is really too feeble to be a deciding factor. When you're talking 5800/9700/9800, I'll buy that it's almost usable at least.
sash1
Diamond Member
- Jul 20, 2001
- 8,896
- 1
- 0
Snowman:
"are you kidding? a ti4200 does decent aa/af in all but the most recent games. "
No, I consider the AA/AF of those cards totally unusable except for games like "Railroad Tycoon" and other games that framerate doesn't matter.
9500Pro at a whole 44fps 10X7, 4xAA, 8AF
Wow, 28 and 59fps here. The frames are flying!
Lowly Ti4200 AA/AF is only 22, 19, 47 on those same benches. My Voodoo 2 was faster than that.
"are you kidding? a ti4200 does decent aa/af in all but the most recent games. "
No, I consider the AA/AF of those cards totally unusable except for games like "Railroad Tycoon" and other games that framerate doesn't matter.
9500Pro at a whole 44fps 10X7, 4xAA, 8AF
Wow, 28 and 59fps here. The frames are flying!
Lowly Ti4200 AA/AF is only 22, 19, 47 on those same benches. My Voodoo 2 was faster than that.
Man by the time they actually make a game with the latest support, 2 generations of video cards pass. Don't waste your money.
sash1
Diamond Member
- Jul 20, 2001
- 8,896
- 1
- 0
Hahah!
Yeah, but on games where it is fully playable on both cards: The 9700 crushed the 4600
And in UT2k3, AA/AF is only playable on the 9700: Link
Of course I still wish everyone would stop benching cards @ 1600x1200 (or even 1280x960 for that matter) with 4xAA on. Seriously, NO ONE plays with those settings. And if you do, you're on crack because the graphical advantages you will be seeing will be so little, that you'd have to not be playing the game to notice the differences.
Although, if you do look at those tests, the FX 5800 beats the 9700, even with AA/AF. So besides the cooling of the card, looks like nVidia did something right.
~Aunix
Aunix:
"Yeah, but on games where it is fully playable on both card"
But, ye olde Q3 is 3 years old. That's like 86 in human years!
"Although, if you do look at those tests, the FX 5800 beats the 9700, even with AA/AF"
Fool! Don't you know the 9700 crushes that POS 5800 in ALL BENCHMARKS?!?!
"Yeah, but on games where it is fully playable on both card"
But, ye olde Q3 is 3 years old. That's like 86 in human years!
"Although, if you do look at those tests, the FX 5800 beats the 9700, even with AA/AF"
Fool! Don't you know the 9700 crushes that POS 5800 in ALL BENCHMARKS?!?!
Rad9500PRO (reaches 9700nonPRO speeds when o/c'ed):Toms
AnAnd
Firing Squad
HardOCP 1
Gaming Nexus
Hexus
Xbit
HardOCP 2
GF-FX (note the FX5800ultra will never truly be released and is unusably LOUD):Extreme FX5800ultra vs Rad9700
Toms FX5800ultra vs Rad9700 & GF4TI4800
AnAnd FX5800 & FX5800ultra vs Rad9700 & Rad9700PRO
HardOCP FX5800ultra vs Rad9700PRO
Xbit FX5800ultra vs Rad9700PRO & GF4TI4800
Tech Report FX5800ultra (inc Det43.45) vs Rad9800PRO, Rad9700PRO & GF4TI4600
Toms FX5200ultra & FX5600ultra vs basicly everything
AnAnd FX5200ultra & FX5600ultra vs Rad9500PRO, Rad9000PRO, GF4TI4200 & GF4MX440
HardOCP FX5200ultra & FX5600ultra vs Rad9500PRO, Rad9000PRO & GF4TI4200
FX5200 & FX5600 (ultras?) vs Rad9500PRO & GF4TI4200GamePC
GamePC - Gainward FX5200 & 5200ultra vs GF4TI4600, GF4TI4200, GF4MX460 & GF4MX440
OCtools - Compro FX5800 & FX5800ultra vs Rad9700PRO
EDIT: Added more info on what the FX reviews show.
"Rad9500PRO (reaches 9700nonPRO speeds when o/c'ed):"
So what? A. It has half the memory bandwidth (128 vs 256bit) B. OC isn't "guaranteed" and it often shortens the life of the part
So what? A. It has half the memory bandwidth (128 vs 256bit) B. OC isn't "guaranteed" and it often shortens the life of the part
Finally when o/c'ing you only really run the risk of damaging your component if you use big clock jumps, don't test thoroughly, run too near (or past) the limits or hike up the voltage. If you avoid those pitfalls you run virtually no risk at all when o/c'ing. You seem to forget that Rad9500PRO uses the same technology as the Rad9700PRO albeit with 128bit DDR instead of 256bit DDR. What you basicly find is that the cores are practicly identical just like in the different Rad8500 cards, GF4TI cards, GF3TI cards etc. All that's really different is the speed they are guaranteed to run at (hence set to by default) and you find that the 'lesser' cards' cores almost always get close if not surpass the top card in the same range. The same is true of the CPUs where you see P4 2.6ghz hitting 3ghz+ and XP1700+ TbredB hitting XP2700+. Since the actual technology is essentially identical inside the 'lesser' components in the same range you find it is generally capable of the same speeds as the 'top' ones, you aren't actually shortening the lifespan of your component nor stressing it in a way it wasn't designed for (unless you go mad or are a hardcore o/c'er). Seriously Rollo do a little reading...Rollo = t3h funnah man. All or nothing nVidia advocate yet his defense against his bias is that he owns a 9700 Pro of which he makes out to look like it's "just" working out ok and cannot wait for the salvation the NV35 will bring. Until then its recommend and defend anything nVidia despite the parameters being set in range of a superior ATI solution. had the budget be $150 or less a Ti 4200 easily would be the winnar here, just doesn't cut the bill when you can afford a 9500 Pro, easily the best and most versitile mid range solution.
"All or nothing nVidia advocate yet his defense against his bias is that he owns a 9700 Pro of which he makes out to look like it's "just" working out ok and cannot wait for the salvation the NV35 will bring"
Bunny: I have owned/used EVERY VGA by ATI and nVidia since the Rage 32 and TNT1. (and some well before those) I don't have any fanboy bias like most here.
I know DX9 isn't an issue yet, especially at this price point.
I know AA/AF performance is pretty feeble at this price point.
I LOVE my 9700Pro, it's probably the best VGA I've ever owned. It's just a piece of hardware though, and I'm curious about others, and I know ATIs interest in me goes as far as how much money they can remove from my wallet, and nVidia is the same. So I don't have ANY brand loyalty in VGAs, or anything else. (although I do like Browning guns)
Bunny: I have owned/used EVERY VGA by ATI and nVidia since the Rage 32 and TNT1. (and some well before those) I don't have any fanboy bias like most here.
I know DX9 isn't an issue yet, especially at this price point.
I know AA/AF performance is pretty feeble at this price point.
I LOVE my 9700Pro, it's probably the best VGA I've ever owned. It's just a piece of hardware though, and I'm curious about others, and I know ATIs interest in me goes as far as how much money they can remove from my wallet, and nVidia is the same. So I don't have ANY brand loyalty in VGAs, or anything else. (although I do like Browning guns)
I mean it seems brutally clear that it's never going to be released as a mainstream card, just a limited niche thing for those who must have nVidia. It isn't truly viable hw IMHO as it's clear nVidia had to seriously overclock the GF-FX technology just to get near to Rad9700PRO perf (6+ months old by that time too). It has so many downsides it is wierd anyone would even consider buying one ... basicly just because a select few can afford AND get their hands on them doesn't mean they are TRULY released in my book.Radeon9500 Pro if you can get it, or if you can't, then either GF4Ti4200,4400, or 4600 (whichever you can afford).
Anand Austin:
"Whether the Rad9500PRO has half the memory bandwidth or not is not really relevant IF you can overcome the limitation through o/c'ing."
Do you REALLY believe you can OC a 9500 Pro high enough to offset the bandwidth disparity?
"Rad9500PRO yield Rad9700nonPRO speed with simple clock speed hikes "
So what? It still has half the bandwidth. A smarter person might spend $40 more and get the 9700 non-pro?
"Finally when o/c'ing you only really run the risk of damaging your component if you use big clock jumps, don't test thoroughly, run too near (or past) the limits or hike up the voltage. If you avoid those pitfalls you run virtually no risk at all when o/c'ing."
Give it a rest. If I had $5 for every "I burned my cpu/gpu and had to rma it" post I've read, I wouldn't be going to work tomorrow. LOL- The "safety and reasonableness of OCing". I don't think you can guarantee every chip OCs the same, no matter what powers your hippie cigarette gives you.
"basicly just because a select few can afford AND get their hands on them doesn't mean they are TRULY released in my book. "
I wish you would share that stuff you're smoking.
A. $300 and $400 MSRP is what VGAs are ALWAYS released at? "select few"?
B. If you can order them from Newegg.com and other websites, I think you can call them "released"
"Whether the Rad9500PRO has half the memory bandwidth or not is not really relevant IF you can overcome the limitation through o/c'ing."
Do you REALLY believe you can OC a 9500 Pro high enough to offset the bandwidth disparity?
"Rad9500PRO yield Rad9700nonPRO speed with simple clock speed hikes "
So what? It still has half the bandwidth. A smarter person might spend $40 more and get the 9700 non-pro?
"Finally when o/c'ing you only really run the risk of damaging your component if you use big clock jumps, don't test thoroughly, run too near (or past) the limits or hike up the voltage. If you avoid those pitfalls you run virtually no risk at all when o/c'ing."
Give it a rest. If I had $5 for every "I burned my cpu/gpu and had to rma it" post I've read, I wouldn't be going to work tomorrow. LOL- The "safety and reasonableness of OCing". I don't think you can guarantee every chip OCs the same, no matter what powers your hippie cigarette gives you.
"basicly just because a select few can afford AND get their hands on them doesn't mean they are TRULY released in my book. "
I wish you would share that stuff you're smoking.
A. $300 and $400 MSRP is what VGAs are ALWAYS released at? "select few"?
B. If you can order them from Newegg.com and other websites, I think you can call them "released"
9500 Pro
Rollo, if you are afraid to OC that would be your problem. Last time I looked this board was full of enthusiasts.
Rollo, if you are afraid to OC that would be your problem. Last time I looked this board was full of enthusiasts.
OK please point me to a store that has them in stock or even an online store with ultra's in stock... (sorry I had to ask.. ) For that matter people already have 9800pros and they are even faster than the 5800ultra....
of course the above is off topic since the ultra fetches more than $400US on ebay because there are none to be found.
I would go with the 9500pro, you do get the dx9 (only good to look at demo's now) however I would suggest that it is faster then the ti4800 with newer drivers (many of the reviews used cat drivers before 3.0).
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter