I have about $150 to spend on a new video card, I am upgrading from a Geforce 2 GTS 32meg. What has better performance a Radeon 8500LE 128meg or Geforce 3 ti200?
Radeon 8500LE or Geforce 3Ti200?
- Thread starter Blammo300
- Start date
The 8500LE has a superior TV Out, 2D IQ, 3D IQ, Faster Anisotropic filtering performance, Faster overall performance. Get it over the Ti 200
Forget all of the biased 'get this' talk, Athlon4all pretty much covers it. Both perform VERY close, well once the GF3TI200 is o/c'ed to within 10% of the GF3TI500 (which is very easy to achieve). The Radeon does have better '2D' image quality, Aniso, TVout and slightly edges it in perf. The GF3TI200 is better at AA though, and also has the GF brand and should sell on more easily after use. Outside the US & Canada Radeons are usually ludicrously priced, so the GF3TI200 is a much better option. However, at $150 you should be within grasp of the GF4TI4200, 64MB cards are great, but 128MB ones are much more future proofed. 4200 o/c fantasticly, to 4400 levels, that's about 10% away from 4600 perf! 4200 also has excellent '2D' image quality, AA, TVout and obviously perf, esp compared to GF3TI200. The 4200 is the 'best bang for buck' and will age far better than any other card near its class, simply a great buy. Here's some great lionks for you bud:TomsHW XP2000+ with all manner of gfx cards
AnAnd gfx card roundup including CPU scaling
AnAnd GF4TI4200 review (Gainward)
TomsHW 4400 & 4600 roundup but also shows default perf of 4200, GF3 and Rad8500 (faster than 8500LE)
GotApex comparing all major cards
TomsHW NEW Rad9000 (below 4200 perf but better than GF4MX)
i'm also wondering the same question as the thread starter, so I will ask a question too if you don't mind...
what exactly is the difference between the radeon 8500 and 8500LE?
thanks
tyler
what exactly is the difference between the radeon 8500 and 8500LE?
thanks
tyler
the 8500le is clocked at 250/250
the 8500lele is clocked at 230/230
the 8500 retail is clocked at 275/275
the 8500 is far superior to the gf3 in every aspect, BUT, the radeon 9000 was just released yesterday and will be available on aug.7 for ~$130. it is pretty equivalent to the gf3 but at a much lower cost. i hope this helps.
--dave.
the 8500lele is clocked at 230/230
the 8500 retail is clocked at 275/275
the 8500 is far superior to the gf3 in every aspect, BUT, the radeon 9000 was just released yesterday and will be available on aug.7 for ~$130. it is pretty equivalent to the gf3 but at a much lower cost. i hope this helps.
--dave.
Don't forget the GF3 is MUCH better at AA, but other than AA and the well-reknowned GF branding, the Radeon8500/9000 has everything going for it. So long as the Rad isn't much extra it is definitely superior. The Rad9000 is more of a contender for the GF4MX cards, which are worse than the GF3 cards.
The Radeon8500LE is a very sweet card at the mo for those who can't afford a GF4TI4200 or better. The Radeon8500 is slightly faster than the 8500LE (10%ish), but the best guide for all of these cards is what the price diffs are. If you have $150 or so to spend I would strongly rec a GF4TI4200 card for the reasons stated earlier. If you can wait the Rradeon9500 is due in the next few months, a slower version of the fastest gfx card, the very new Radeon9700, much in the same way the 4200 is a slower version of the 4600. If I were you I'd buy Rad8500/8500LE over the GF3 if prices are about equal, but would much prefer the GF4TI4200 which is superior in every way (well I suppose Radeons do still have slightly better TVout, but now we are splitting hairs). The Rad9500 should be very promising, and could even rival 4600 performance, but it is only pure speculation at the mo. If you wait for the Rad9500 you will prob find yourself waiting for the new nVidia cards due out around Christmas.
A big thing to watch out for with all Radeon cards is whether or not they are built by ATI and whether or not they are retail or oem versions. True ATI cards are the fastest and use the highest quality of components, similarly retail cards are faster than oem. Generally the diffs are small, so let price be your guide.
The Radeon8500LE is a very sweet card at the mo for those who can't afford a GF4TI4200 or better. The Radeon8500 is slightly faster than the 8500LE (10%ish), but the best guide for all of these cards is what the price diffs are. If you have $150 or so to spend I would strongly rec a GF4TI4200 card for the reasons stated earlier. If you can wait the Rradeon9500 is due in the next few months, a slower version of the fastest gfx card, the very new Radeon9700, much in the same way the 4200 is a slower version of the 4600. If I were you I'd buy Rad8500/8500LE over the GF3 if prices are about equal, but would much prefer the GF4TI4200 which is superior in every way (well I suppose Radeons do still have slightly better TVout, but now we are splitting hairs). The Rad9500 should be very promising, and could even rival 4600 performance, but it is only pure speculation at the mo. If you wait for the Rad9500 you will prob find yourself waiting for the new nVidia cards due out around Christmas. A big thing to watch out for with all Radeon cards is whether or not they are built by ATI and whether or not they are retail or oem versions. True ATI cards are the fastest and use the highest quality of components, similarly retail cards are faster than oem. Generally the diffs are small, so let price be your guide.i didn't start this threat, but thanks a lot for all the response and such. Since I'm not a huge gamer (equal amounts of 2D and 3D probably), I think I may lean towards the radeon, and will probably wait to hear some results on the 9000.
thanks for the tips on OEM vs retail, i guess I'll have to be weary of that.
thanks for the tips on OEM vs retail, i guess I'll have to be weary of that.
Definitely the R8500, the GF3 Ti200 is inferior in almost every respect.
3D performance, FSAA image quality, anisotropic filtering performance, TV output implementation, 2D visual quality, DVD playback capabilities, 3D feature set... etc.
The only aspects in which the GF3 Ti200 can really match up and and beat the R8500 in are FSAA performance, and anisotropic visual quality.
The Ti200 is a solid card, but with the R8500 priced similarly there is little reason to go for it.
A better comparison to the R8500 would be the GF4 Ti4200, wherein bith cards have definite and clear advantages over the other and which is better would come down to one's specific uses.
Against the Ti200 though, the R8500 is clearly preferable.
3D performance, FSAA image quality, anisotropic filtering performance, TV output implementation, 2D visual quality, DVD playback capabilities, 3D feature set... etc.
The only aspects in which the GF3 Ti200 can really match up and and beat the R8500 in are FSAA performance, and anisotropic visual quality.
The Ti200 is a solid card, but with the R8500 priced similarly there is little reason to go for it.
A better comparison to the R8500 would be the GF4 Ti4200, wherein bith cards have definite and clear advantages over the other and which is better would come down to one's specific uses.
Against the Ti200 though, the R8500 is clearly preferable.
do you guys think this card is a good buy? Can it probably be overclocked to stock 8500 levels or do they pick really low performing parts to make these?
I am trying to decide between this card and a GF3 Ti200 for my friend's machine that I am building. Budget is under $100.
I am trying to decide between this card and a GF3 Ti200 for my friend's machine that I am building. Budget is under $100.
Yeah, being 'powered by ATI' rather than 'built' AND oem instead of retail I wouldn't anticipate much of an o/c. However 230/230 will still give great perf. However, being 'powered', oem AND 64MB would put me off, there should be better alternative Rad8500/8500LE cards for under $100. 128MB is definitely more future proof, if you are buying a new card get a 128MB and not a 64MB whereever possible (and we could be talking a couple of months not years). The GF3TI200 o/c's easily to within 10% of the GF3TI500, at these speeds it is very close in perf to Rad8500LE but sports better AA and is more competatively priced thorughout the world. At the same price I would go for Rad8500/8500LE, even a 'powered' and oem version, mostly due to Rad's better '2D' image quality, Aniso, TVout and slightly better non-AA perf.TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter