more future proof nvidia 5900 ultra or ati 9800 pro?

[cindy22]

which card do you think is more futureproof?

 

[modedepe]

:Q A thread by cindy that doesn't start out by bashing nvidia? Shocking!

I'd say for the most part the 9800 pro would be. There will probably be a few games that nvidia will be faster at, such as doom 3, but generally ati will be ahead.

 

[Corporate Thug]

the 9800 pro IMHO

 

[BenSkywalker]

Likely won't make a big difference either way. People have been saying for a year and a half now this big wave of shader heavy games is right around the corner and they haven't been seen yet. HL2 looks to be pushed back to the end of this year(if it hits this year) which is the only title we have seen that looks real good and is very shader limited. On the other side, the DooM3 powered games are nowhere in site yet negating where the 5900U should have an edge.

Looking out to this time next year the R9800Pro should be holding a sizeable lead in HL2 powered games(if they are out yet) while the reverse will be true for DooM3 powered games(if they are out yet).

 

[videoclone]

Cindy22 Did you read the posts about NV40 having 16 Pipelines .... its looking like nvidia is cheating again and not playing fair because ATI's R420 only use's 8 Pipelines ... hehe lol

Ohh back to your flame bate forum topic whats more future proof ATI9800 or FX5900 well... both suck and in about 2 months they will be what the Geforce4 and ATI8500 are today !!! Crap ! .. but that?s how the computer industry has always been like ~ Nothings ever future proof ! but if i was to say what one would be the better buy RIGHT NOW !! id say 9800 Pro

 

[Manzelle]

Originally posted by: videoclone
Cindy22 Did you read the posts about NV40 having 16 Pipelines .... its looking like nvidia is cheating again and not playing fair because ATI's R420 only use's 8 Pipelines ... hehe lol

Ohh back to your flame bate forum topic whats more future proof ATI9800 or FX5900 well... both suck and in about 2 months they will be what the Geforce4 and ATI8500 are today !!! Crap ! .. but that?s how the computer industry has always been like nothings ever future proof !

I wouldn't call them crap...the 9700 Pro has been out for a long time and is still a very attractive card...

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: cindy22
which card do you think is more futureproof?

if someone had a crystal ball, they could answer this question correctly. until then, there is no "right" answer. that being said, by the time dx9 apps are commonplace, either card will probably be average, at best.

 

[CaiNaM]

I wouldn't call them crap...the 9700 Pro has been out for a long time and is still a very attractive card...

that's because games have not changed in the last year and a half since the 9700's release. also, there isn't a significant hardware change from the 9700 to the 9800. not sure the same will hold true from today's cards to the next gen cards. only time will tell.

 

[Manzelle]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

I wouldn't call them crap...the 9700 Pro has been out for a long time and is still a very attractive card...

that's because games have not changed in the last year and a half since the 9700's release. also, there isn't a significant hardware change from the 9700 to the 9800. not sure the same will hold true from today's cards to the next gen cards. only time will tell.

I concur but where is the software that justifies the need for these next generation cards...but hey, I suppose if someone is willing to throw down $400-600 for a 20-30fps (or less) increase on an old game...so be it...

 

[RussianSensation]

whats more future proof ATI9800 or FX5900 well... both suck and in about 2 months they will be what the Geforce4 and ATI8500 are today !!! Crap ! .. but that?s how the computer industry has always been like ~ Nothings ever future proof ! but if i was to say what one would be the better buy RIGHT NOW !! id say 9800 Pro

I wouldn't say Geforce 4 and 8500 suck. I bet they can still play most games at 1280x1024 with all high detail settings enabled (except AA and AF) and they can play some games at 1600x1200 and ALL GAMES at 1024x768. Crap would be something like Radeon 7000 or Geforce 2 MX. Personally, my 8500 lasted me since 2001 and it's now 2004. So that's 3 years and only now it's starting to show its age (my opinion). That would mean that 9700Pro and 9800 Pro still have 1.5-2 years of life in them. There are very few games that put them at their limits, besides there is always an option to play at 1600x1200 without AA and AF since at that high resolution jaggies are almost invisible anyway so they should last even longer than 8500 lasted me.

I think 9800 is more futureproof due to better Anti-aliasing performance in the first place and better pixel and vertex shader peformance which could become more significant for the upcoming direct x 9 games.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker
Likely won't make a big difference either way. People have been saying for a year and a half now this big wave of shader heavy games is right around the corner and they haven't been seen yet.

the question is about future proof-ness, so it doesn't really matter when they come out just the fact that shader heavy games are bound to run a lot better on ati hardware. besides, far cry is quite an atractive shader heavy game coming out in less than a month.

 

[VIAN]

Welcome back Cindy22. I missed you. BTW I have a 9700 Pro now, from a 5900.

They are both good, although the 256MB card could maybe give an edge in later games that utilize high amounts of textures, but you might be more GPU limited at that point. I would probably pick the 9800 Pro.

 

[McArra]

Originally posted by: shady06
the 9800 pro IMHO

 

[Pete]

I can't believe someone actually bit at this topic.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Manzelle

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

I wouldn't call them crap...the 9700 Pro has been out for a long time and is still a very attractive card...

that's because games have not changed in the last year and a half since the 9700's release. also, there isn't a significant hardware change from the 9700 to the 9800. not sure the same will hold true from today's cards to the next gen cards. only time will tell.

I concur but where is the software that justifies the need for these next generation cards...but hey, I suppose if someone is willing to throw down $400-600 for a 20-30fps (or less) increase on an old game...so be it...

the software isn't there imo, which is why i haven't spent over $200 on a card since my gf3 golden sample

the 5900/9700p/9800p runs everything pretty well, and allows you to run pretty much everything at a decent resolution and IQ settings, and all can be had for just a little over $200 or less.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Pete
I can't believe someone actually bit at this topic.

ahh. but we're all playing nice, pete

 

[nRollo]

Allow me to post some links to Shady Day results that clearlyshow the 9800Pro to be the more future proof card! All of the new games coming out will be DX9, with lots of PS 2 effects, because developers want to only market to the 5% of the market with 9800Pros that can run these effects slow, not really slow.

Cindy posts from her room in the asylum.

 

[BenSkywalker]

the question is about future proof-ness, so it doesn't really matter when they come out just the fact that shader heavy games are bound to run a lot better on ati hardware.

And shadow heavy games will be coming out, and they are bound to run a lot better on nVidia hardware. Far Cry is an interesting case, from the demo it could well end up being that ATi will perform better outside(with lots of shader overhead for the water) with nV being faster inside(lots of shadows/light sources).

Most games coming aren't going to use either extensively, developers aren't lining up too quickly for the DooM3 engine and next to noone seems interested in making a PS2.0 heavy game.

 

[rbV5]

I'd be suprised if either card will handle any game well that was unplayable on the other.

 

[Schadenfroh]

it all depends if microshaft will go to 32bit or not

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalkerAnd shadow heavy games will be coming out, and they are bound to run a lot better on nVidia hardware.

a lot beter eh? you mean becuse the 5900 can push 8pixels per clock when it comes to rendering the shadows? that just puts it on par with the 9800 on pixels per clock and the 5900 only gets a bit of an advantage due to higher clock speed which is surely negated by all the colored pixel caclulations is bound to have to do at 4 pixels per clock. a lot my ass. :disgust:

 

[Maximilian]

The 9800 PRO !!! it rules, i have one and its great.

P.S Nvidea have had 2 shots to beat the 9800 cards and they failed the first time (5800?) and drew level the second (sort of) so that shows the 9800 is a very solid performer.

 

[BenSkywalker]

that just puts it on par with the 9800 on pixels per clock and the 5900 only gets a bit of an advantage due to higher clock speed which is surely negated by all the colored pixel caclulations is bound to have to do at 4 pixels per clock. a lot my ass.

Under the overwhelming majority of titles the NV35 and R350 are neck and neck despite the R350 having eight pixel pipes as opposed to four. You can figure out the rest.

 

[cindy22]

Welcome back Cindy22. I missed you. BTW I have a 9700 Pro now, from a 5900.

They are both good, although the 256MB card could maybe give an edge in later games that utilize high amounts of textures, but you might be more GPU limited at that point. I would probably pick the 9800 Pro.

Thank you , I missed you too Vian.
Hope your experiences switching over to ati , was as good as mine .
even though I like ati right now,

I don't want ati to win in a few months with next gen cards , because I don't wan't any company to monopolize the industry, most likely even if ati wins they probably won't monopolize nvidia ,
but most consumers, nvidia and myself doesn't want to take any chances, take a look at microsoft for example , they dominate and charge insane prices for almost every product they sell. theres no competition when it comes to microsoft.

I hope nvdia's nv40 and ati rv420 will be competive in performance , 2d and 3d image quality,
I also hope nvidia will change there ways with optimisations, etc. in the next round.
so there's more competition in prices, quality,etc. and consumers will win weither they pick nvidia or ati!

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

that just puts it on par with the 9800 on pixels per clock and the 5900 only gets a bit of an advantage due to higher clock speed which is surely negated by all the colored pixel caclulations is bound to have to do at 4 pixels per clock. a lot my ass.

Under the overwhelming majority of titles the NV35 and R350 are neck and neck despite the R350 having eight pixel pipes as opposed to four. You can figure out the rest.

you mean in the most popular benchmarks they are neck and neck? why not look at a review with benchs of real world gaming and see what happens. now you figure out the rest.