Looks like the 9800 pro rides again as the bang for buck mid range AGP solution ;)

[dug777]

i'd say unless you're a d3 junkie (or really, really love sm3.0) then the 9800 pro regains the midrange bang for buck AGP title quite nicely

especially since the average 6600GT price is about $180 (if you don't want a Chaintech), while the average 9800 pro price (ATI/Sapphire/Powercolor) is below $130

(All prices taken from AT realtime pricing).

EDIT: although the 6600GT is basically the bare minimum for d3 and d3 engine based games in the future...

EDIT: You get WMV-HD acceleration with the 9800 pro as well as the 6600GT.

 

[Culvin]

The 9800 Pro is still a good card for the price, but you can pick up a high quality brand 6600GT (eVGA, Leadtek) at newegg for ~$150 or less if you're willing to do a $15 or $20 mail-in rebate.

So the question becomes is it worth spending just over $20 to get a 6600GT over a 9800 Pro, and virtually everyone will answer yes unless you're on an incredibly strict budget.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Culvin
The 9800 Pro is still a good card for the price, but you can pick up a high quality brand 6600GT (eVGA, Leadtek) at newegg for ~$150 or less if you're willing to do a $15 or $20 mail-in rebate.

So the question becomes is it worth spending just over $20 to get a 6600GT over a 9800 Pro, and virtually everyone will answer yes unless you're on an incredibly strict budget.

for your average buyer who doesnt want to do rebate (or bother with the hassle) its a $40 difference. (the reply to that is that you can get the 9800 pro for less than that rebate-style as well if you look).

Seems to me thats like saying 'for only $XX more you can get a 6800NU that will beat the 6600GT in most situations' if you want to do an XX rebate, and you can do that all the way to justfying getting a 6800GT

Bottom line, the 9800 pro at those prices is a better bang for buck card.

/thread

 

[nRollo]

The problem is the 9800Pro performs like a$$ on Doom 3.

Why should you care if you're done with/don't like Doom3?

Prey, Quake4, Wolfenstein 2, etc- all based on Doom3, all running like a$$ on 9800Pro. I don't even consider the 9800Pro a usable solution for Doom3/any of these licenses, it's really weak beyond the point of being playable by modern standards.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2146&p=4

we really don't feel that any less than 40 frames per second is playable in this game (and we would perfer 45).

And there's your bang for buck card, limping along at 42 fps, at a lowly 10X7 0X8X. Pitiful.
(on an OCd FX53 with with a GB of high end RAM no less- how many 9800Pro owners have even close to that pushing it?????)

What about 6600GTs?
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2196&p=5">http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2196&p=5</a>
Oh. 79fps at the same setting. 59fps at 12X10 0X8X. Or 41.9 at 10X7 4X8X.
So it's basically twice as fast on the engine a lot of the big name upcoming shooters will be based on.

Not to mention Sm1.1 at SC:CT with a 9800P. :roll:

Tough call here- twice as fast on modern games with modern feature set, or half as fast with 2003 feature set.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Rollo
The problem is the 9800Pro performs like a$$ on Doom 3.

Why should you care if you're done with/don't like Doom3?

Prey, Quake4, Wolfenstein 2, etc- all based on Doom3, all running like a$$ on 9800Pro. I don't even consider the 9800Pro a usable solution for Doom3/any of these licenses, it's really weak beyond the point of being playable by modern standards.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2146&p=4

we really don't feel that any less than 40 frames per second is playable in this game (and we would perfer 45).

And there's your bang for buck card, limping along at 42 fps, at a lowly 10X7 0X0X. Pitiful.
(on an OCd FX53 with with a GB of high end RAM no less- how many 9800Pro owners have even close to that pushing it?????)

What about 6600GTs?
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2196&p=5">http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2196&p=5</a>
Oh. 79fps at the same setting. 59fps at 12X10 0X0X. Or 41.9 at 10X7 4X8X.
So it's basically twice as fast on the engine a lot of the big name upcoming shooters will be based on.

Not to mention Sm1.1 at SC:CT with a 9800P. :roll:

Tough call here- twice as fast on modern games with modern feature set, or half as fast with 2003 feature set.

Firstly it's arguable that a comprehensive rewrite of the ATI OpengL drivers will lend a reasonable hand here to the d3 engine based games (if it ever happens).

Secondly the bolded bit is a total load, you've chosen to make a sweeping statement just ignoring the Source engine and farcry engine where the 9800 pro is extremely competetive, all your statement applies to is d3 and d3 based engines... (which although you may believe it don't make up all 'modern games' as you chose to put it)

So i guess on every other engine the 9800 is the best bang for buck mid range AGP solution...happy with that?

 

[nRollo]

Yep, I'm happy with that- if you exclude OpenGL and SC:CT the 9800Pro is competitive.

Losing Doom3, Prey, Quake 4, Wolf2, and SC:CT* altogether seems a high cost in gaming experience to save $40 though, don't you think?

If you're into shooters, it's pretty likely at least one of those ill be a big deal to you, and you really won't be able to play at all on a 9800Pro.



*I only throw SC:CT in because SM1.1/banding/lower IQ to me is a big deal

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Yep, I'm happy with that- if you exclude OpenGL and SC:CT the 9800Pro is competitive.

Losing Doom3, Prey, Quake 4, Wolf2, and SC:CT* altogether seems a high cost in gaming experience to save $40 though, don't you think?

If you're into shooters, it's pretty likely at least one of those ill be a big deal to you, and you really won't be able to play at all on a 9800Pro.



*I only throw SC:CT in because SM1.1/banding/lower IQ to me is a big deal

fair enuff

 

[dguy6789]

A 9800 Pro plays Doom 3 with perfect playability. Maybe YOU dislike running around 30-40FPS, but it is still perfectly playable. You dont have to have an FX53 to get the most out of a 9800 Pro. You could get the same FPS with a much lower class CPU.

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory is also a moot point. There is hardly a difference at all between SM1.1 and SM3.0 in that game. A few places are a bit brighter, big deal... I wouldnt say it is worth the $50 difference between the cards.

 

[RussianSensation]

Rollo, doenst doom 3 automatically enable 8X anisotropic filtering at High Quality setting? I am not sure...

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: dguy6789
A 9800 Pro plays Doom 3 with perfect playability. Maybe YOU dislike running around 30-40FPS, but it is still perfectly playable. You dont have to have an FX53 to get the most out of a 9800 Pro. You could get the same FPS with a much lower class CPU.

Splinter Cell Chaos Theory is also a moot point. There is hardly a difference at all between SM1.1 and SM3.0 in that game. A few places are a bit brighter, big deal... I wouldnt say it is worth the $50 difference between the cards.

This is very bad advice. To say the difference in 42fps and 79fps at Doom3, Prey, Wolf2, and Quake 4 isn't worth the price of one game could only be posted by A. an ATI employee B. someone who really hates other board members and wants to screw them up C. someone who knows they will never play these games or other D3 based shooters (someone who doesn't play shooters).

It saddens me to see such a blatant disregard for giving usable advice in a community that is supposed to be based on helping each other with our experiences.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
Rollo, doenst doom 3 automatically enable 8X anisotropic filtering at High Quality setting? I am not sure...

This is correct- I'll edit!

Still- the 6600GT is twice as fast at this setting, and gives th4e user the option to run at higher resolutions, or add some AA to smooth edges.

A 9800Pro literally plays D3 like A$$ and will likely play it's licenses as bad or worse.

 

[apoppin]

where are you getting those prices? . . . the 9800p (128MB/256bit) has regularly been at $115 and as low as $105 and there have been some GREAT sales on the 6800 series. :Q

that said - unless you are satisfied with TODAY's games at limited resolutions - the 9800p is dropping to the low/mid range . . . and the 6600gt isn't far behind [holding up the midrange] - you might want to look at a faster card
edited

even the EVGA 6800std was $189 and BFG6800stdOC has been ~$210 shipped . . . i'd save by not buying a SINGLE game to get something better than a 9800p - now
{of course, i'd STILL wait as prices are a'droppin' - FAST]

 

[ddogg]

its definetely worth spending a little more and getting a more future proof solution and a higher performing card. although the 9800Pro is at a great price at the moment i feel getting a 6600GT is a better choice.

 

[fstime]

Rollo did a good job bashing an almost 2 1/2 year card.

Either way, $115 seems like a great deal for the card.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: BouZouki
Rollo did a good job bashing an almost 2 1/2 year card.

Either way, $115 seems like a great deal for the card.

I wanted people to make an informed buying decision.

You apparently wanted to honor the memory of a card that was arguably the best 2.5 years ago, and let people screw themselves over $40 measly dollars.

Who's helping and who's harming?

 

[fstime]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: BouZouki
Rollo did a good job bashing an almost 2 1/2 year card.

Either way, $115 seems like a great deal for the card.

I wanted people to make an informed buying decision.

You apparently wanted to honor the memory of a card that was arguably the best 2.5 years ago, and let people screw themselves over $40 measly dollars.

Who's helping and who's harming?

I have no idea what you are talking about.

All I said was,

"$115 seems like a great deal for the card."

 

[nRollo]

I'm talking about $115 is not a great deal for the card if you plan on playing any D3 based games, and I wasn't trying to "trash" the 9800Pro- just say it's a bad deal at almost any price in June 2005. (for a gamer old enough to play D3 based games)

 

[apoppin]

Well letsee . . . the 6600 isn't much of an upgrade from the 9800p [the 'gt' arguably more] . . . or a "real" upgrade the 6800Std would be the likely minimum upgrade . . . $189-$115=$74 . . . for some people, that IS a lot of money . . .

as i said before, i'd NOT buy 2 games [or wait till 3 were bargain bin] just to afford the faster card . . . but that's just me

I would NEVER upgrade a current 9800p to ANY 6600 nor would i even consider a 9800p OR 6600 IF i were buying NOW.
- except as an 'interim' solution *really cheap* - the D3 engine games are around the corner and the first Unreal3 game will be out THIS year [with the 6600 being the MIN card for U3]

 

[LikeLinus]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: BouZouki
Rollo did a good job bashing an almost 2 1/2 year card.

Either way, $115 seems like a great deal for the card.

I wanted people to make an informed buying decision.

You apparently wanted to honor the memory of a card that was arguably the best 2.5 years ago, and let people screw themselves over $40 measly dollars.

Who's helping and who's harming?

I honestly think you're making a huge deal out of nothing. When I had my 9800 Pro, I played Doom3 perfect. It wasn't choppy and it looked beautiful. I was getting 50+ frames almost constantly.

I've since moved on to a 6800 Ultra....but I have that 9800 in my wifes machine. She loves it also.

 

[rise]

so if you were to buy one of them today, which would it be, the 6600gt or the 9800 pro?

 

[apoppin]

neither

 

[rise]

Originally posted by: apoppin
neither

good answer, but the thread was which was better for the buck, the 6600gt or the 9800pro so thanks.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: apoppin
Well letsee . . . the 6600 isn't much of an upgrade from the 9800p [the 'gt' arguably more] . . . or a "real" upgrade the 6800Std would be the likely minimum upgrade . . . $189-$115=$74 . . . for some people, that IS a lot of money . . .

as i said before, i'd NOT buy 2 games [or wait till 3 were bargain bin] just to afford the faster card . . . but that's just me

I would NEVER upgrade a current 9800p to ANY 6600 nor would i even consider a 9800p OR 6600 IF i were buying NOW.
- except as an 'interim' solution *really cheap* - the D3 engine games are around the corner and the first Unreal3 game will be out THIS year [with the 6600 being the MIN card for U3]

You are right, the 6600GT isn't an upgrade from a 9800P.

However, you can buy an EVGA 6600GT for $150 shipped from a tier one vendor like newegg today. (and I didn't even look for better deals)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814130220

I've never seen a new 9800P for under $100.

So, like I said, you're giving up half the Doom3/Prey/Quake4/Wolf2/etc performance for less than the cost of one measly game. Under $50. It's just not even close to worth it if you play shooters.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: rise4310

Originally posted by: apoppin
neither

good answer, but the thread was which was better for the buck, the 6600gt or the 9800pro so thanks.

there is no answer
[is this a trick question?]

it depends on the individual

For me - when i bought my 9800xt OVER a year ago [for $223] i KNEW it had 18 months of life left.

Why anyone [a gamer] would buy a MINIMUM [or subMin] card NOW for games that are coming out [now] is beyond me.
:roll:

but that's just me

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: LikeLinus

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: BouZouki
Rollo did a good job bashing an almost 2 1/2 year card.

Either way, $115 seems like a great deal for the card.

I wanted people to make an informed buying decision.

You apparently wanted to honor the memory of a card that was arguably the best 2.5 years ago, and let people screw themselves over $40 measly dollars.

Who's helping and who's harming?

I honestly think you're making a huge deal out of nothing. When I had my 9800 Pro, I played Doom3 perfect. It wasn't choppy and it looked beautiful. I was getting 50+ frames almost constantly.

I've since moved on to a 6800 Ultra....but I have that 9800 in my wifes machine. She loves it also.

Sorry- I totally doubt this. Doom3 was choppy on my X800XT PE due to ATIs crappy OpenGL drivers- the minimum fps just go lower on ATI. (check HardOCP for verification)

I also totally doubt you had some "magic" 9800Pro that performed 20% better at that setting than Anands, or that you know how to somehow tweak your system to gain 20% over Anand.

I call "Shenanigans".