Should I get a Radeon 9800 np or XFX FX 5900?

[Mysteriouskk]

Both have a good price right now at cc and newegg?

I also want to overclock the card, so which will do the best job?

I also heard that you can flash the 9800 np to an XT. Does it work well, or give a good performance boost?

Thanks

 

[splice]

Before ppl start flaming you, this post should be in General Hardware and not Hot Deals.. welcome to AT

 

[Corporate Thug]

this should prolly go in video forum

 

[Mysteriouskk]

k, sorry, next time I'll post it their

 

[austin316]

you should really post it there now. but in Video, not GH. btw, if you use the search button, there is a thread for this already.

 

[austin316]

here are some links

linky

Linky 2

Linky 3

Linky 4

just use the search next time so you don't get flamed. and welcome to AT.

 

[kellybrf]

and now to answer the question...ati hands down. you could do better with a 9600pro than the 5900

 

[MadScientist]

By now the $199. 9800's at CC are probably all gone. Go for the XFX 5900 at Newegg for $189.99 shipped. And I agree, your question should have been posted in the Video forum.

 

[pxc]

Originally posted by: kellybrf
and now to answer the question...ati hands down. you could do better with a 9600pro than the 5900

That's a pretty retarded statement. I have both a 5900 and a 9800 right now and I'm considering putting the 5900 back in my main system instead of the 9800. Nothing wrong with either card. Your warped sense of reality is entirely wrong.

 

[Fritzo]

No...he's pretty much on the mark. Check out Anand's benchmarks of these cards. 5900's suck at DX9 games.

 

[schuang74]

Kind of like a "Taste Great!" "Less Filling!" type question. In these forums you might as well ask which company makes a better CPU?

Anyhow I have a FX5900 and it runs great. I think either one is a good choice, I would go with the least expensive since from most benchmarks the performance is dead even in most cases with each card slightly out performing the other in certain tests (comparing a 5900 and a 9800PRO, however most people have been able to get thier 9800 at pro speeds). For a while NVidia was lagging a bit, however after the recent driver releases, the 5900 has gained performance significantly. Anyhow like I said either one is good. Cheaper is better!

 

[warzer]

well i must vote for 5900 as nvidias drivers rock and don't crash as often. many friends try the ati but they always return it do to either incompatability or crashing often in certian games. now ati's drivers have VASTLY improved, but not sure if well enough. i still see beta notes saying fixed for ati vid cards, or release notes for patches for games saying they had to fix something with ati cards. i don't see that for nvidia cards. so even if the hardware is a bit slower its still safer to get nvidia.

Warzer

PS also wrong Forum.

 

[sonicworld]

Newegg lists the graphics memory speed as 800MHz (for the XFX FX 5900)...everywhere else I look lists the memory frequency as 850MHz (including the link Newegg provides for the one they have posted for $189 shipped)...is this a typo or are the specs I'm looking at for two different cards?

 

[pxc]

Originally posted by: Fritzo
No...he's pretty much on the mark. Check out Anand's benchmarks of these cards.

Excellent suggestion, you should try it. I don't think you have bothered to read it.

 

[pxc]

Originally posted by: sonicworld
Newegg lists the graphics memory speed as 800MHz (for the XFX FX 5900)...everywhere else I look lists the memory frequency as 850MHz (including the link Newegg provides for the one they have posted for $189 shipped)...is this a typo or are the specs I'm looking at for two different cards?

It's 850MHz default on the XFX 5900. It's a typo.

 

[RideFree]

It's 850MHz default on the XFX 5900. It's a typo.

A Newegg typo??? I'm shocked! Like, totally in shock.

 

[MrCodeDude]

Are we supposed to be supporting posts in the wrong forums? I mean, because if people see OT topics getting good replies in incorrect forums, they'll follow in suit?

 

[Buz2b]

Let's make this simple. Bless this thread into the video forum and leave it at that. Lock this sucker here though. AND, as long as it has not been locked, peeps need to take a look at recent reviews with DX9 games. ATI rocks; nVidia is left wimpering. nuff said!
Move or lock/delete this thread though!

 

[Dacalo]

Tried both, ATI wins hands down.

 

[QuicknDirty]

I'd say go with the Nvidia, "performance" be dammed-

For the last couple of years, I'd used a ti4400 Golden Sample. When it crapped out, I slapped a Nvidia Quattro in, and used that for a few months. With all of the negativity concerning the Nvidia line and DX9 games, when it was time for my upgrade, I decided to try out the ATI line.

Now, I went thru and used a driver cleaner, took out all of the Nvidia vid drivers and files, etc etc that "might" have caused problems with the ATI 9800Pro I was trying to install. Great. Install went like a breeze. HOWEVER. Ever since the ATI has been in my PC, I've had random crashes, lockups, etc etc playing Call of Duty (the only game I've been playing since I installed the 9800 Pro) At first I thought it might just be because I had everything cranked up on it, so I turned it all back to default...however just crashed to the desktop again about 10 mins ago.

Soooo. In a nutshell, Nvidia is STILL the rocksolid choice when it comes to drivers. Irregardless of what the fanboys say, ATI is NOT the end all be all of the video card world, and IMO, their drivers STILL SUCK as bad as always. This $300 pig goes back soon, and it will be my final stray from a solid product line...ATI no more!

 

[Pete]

The Call of Duty problems are a known issue with ATi. Solutions:

1. You should disable FastWrites via SmartGART.
2. If that doesn't fix things, download ATi's hotfix for CoD. It's basically a beta (non-WHQL'ed) version of the Cat 3.10. It should be on ATi's site.

 

[Xenon14]

The 9800 will last longer... it is more capable in DX9 games, and since games will start to become predominantly DX9, the 9800 is a logical investment. If intend to play older/current games.. then you should get a cheaper card period; 5700 or 9600.

 

[schuang74]

Actually the 5900 does just fine in DX9 games (it should since it is a DX9 card). Anyhow do some research of your own, you may be surprized. A lot of the information given by the PRO ATI side stems from poor performance of the older NVIDIA cards (FX 5800, and 5900 pre 52.16 drivers). The FX 5900 still suffers a bit from pixle shader problems, however that is improving with each new driver release. Anyhow if you want to "read the Anandtech article" you can get at it here. As you can see it all depends on what game you play.

Keep in mind that the 5900 is easily over clocked to 5950 speeds and is still competitive with the 9800XT. Not bad for the price point concidering how much a 9800XT costs.

Just to remain somewhat impartial on the subject, you may also want to check out the Hard OCP review here. Yes they give the FX 5900 and 5950 a bit of a reaming, however keep in mind they were using a reference card, and not a production card.

Either way, like I mentioned before, you won't go wrong buy getting the least expensive of the two.

 

[ams30gts]

geforce cards arnt too good i my opinion. i would go with the radeon 9800 anyday over nvidia

 

[spwango]

Who cares about 3D performance--if it's on par with Nvidia, I'm off that boat--fact of the matter is, I've yet to use an nvidia card with acceptable 2D performance. Bought my radeon yesterday.