Should I Trade My Geforce 2 GTS FOR a Raedon 32MB DDR?

[SpeedGod]

Well i am currently thinking about trading my Geforce 2 GTS for a Raedon 32MB DDR.

I currently play Unreal Tourny, and Some Quake 3.

My Setup would be
Celeron 566@850Mhz
320MB Ram
(2) 20GIG 34gxp HD Drive *IDE RAID*
Windows 2000


I hardly play games, so i guess 2d does kinda matter. But never had any problems with my geforce 2 gts when typing out essays and stuff.

Anyone know which one should i keep? And what are the pros on cons of each video card?

If anyone can direct me to reviews like Geforce 2 GTS VS Raedon 32MB DDR. That would be great.

And 1 more thing. WINDOWS 2000 DRIVERS DO MATTER!

THanks.

 

[Hawk]

If you don't play games, or well, hardly, then the Win2k drivers for the Radeon should keep you satisfied. You can probably still play UT at 1024x768 32bit with pretty good fps (~60?).

 

[SpeedGod]

anyone else?

 

[HaVoC]

With the current sad state of affairs of the ATI Radeon drivers, NO WAY! Stick to your stable Win2K OS with the GF2. You'll lose quite a bit of performance going to the Radeon. Until ATI learns to write some good Win2K drivers, nVidia remains the king of Win2K gaming.

 

[Moving Target]

Stick with the GTS. ATI's 2000 drivers seem to have problems, and the GTS 2D looks just as good as the Radeon's.

 

[I'm Typing]

I believe Anand has had a thing or two to say about those two cards, in particular when it comes to running a system with a 566mhz Celeron...you will not see a big increase (or decrease) in performance. I say, unless you can make money on the deal (by selling the old card and getting the Radeon cheap), you might as well keep the card.

Do a search on the card, looking in the AnandTech articles section...

 

[Mem]

If you are happy with your GTS,why waste money you will probably get slightly better 2D with the Radeon but apart from that is it really worth paying all that money for?

 

[lsd]

If games are not important, why not just get a maxtrox G400?
It will save you money. But you said at first you play ut and q3.. well then stick with your gts because none of the other vendors has figured out how to make win2k drivers yet

 

[networkman]

Keep the GTS! I've already been down the ATI road with the Win2K drivers.. what an aggravating experience... :|

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

If you play quake 3 and ut then BY ALL MEANS STICK WITH YOUR GF2. The GF2 scores better than the radeon does in both games. If you switch, you will see a decrease in performance, but a slight increase in image quality.

 

[lifeguard1999]

You know, sometimes it pays not to upgrade and instead be satisfied with what you have. A GeForce 2 GTS is an excellent card (as is a Radeon as is a 3DFX 5500).

 

[han888]

i am not sure about radeon, but i just swap mu asus v7700 with voodoo5 5500, and i am really feel satisfy, my conclusion is geforce2 is just the damn faster card, but the image quality and the 2D quality is very worst! and then with my voodoo5 5500 i always play a game with 32 bit colour with 4 X 4 FSAA, and it's look great here! actualy i am still have a geforce2 MX on my other system, who want to swap the card with me?

======================================
p3-800@1Ghz 1.75v alpha pal30t
asus cusl2 1003.004
256Mb hyundai sdram pc133
64Mb Voodoo5 5500 1.03 driver ( havent try the new driver with HSR)
Sony 17 Inc E200

p3-700@882mhz 1.70v artic cooller
asus cuv4x 1005
256Mb sdram pc133
asus V7100 denator 6.47
19 inch CTX VL950

 

[audreymi]

Just a few points:
1) You see your 3D through 2D. Radeon has better 2D although
you may not see it if you are running at or below 1024x768
2) 3D has better color accuracy
3) Games such as UT have been shown to run faster and with
less frame rate fluctuation with the Radeon.

If games are important to you and you insist on running
Win2K(???) you should dual boot between Win98 (games) and
Win2K(business apps). It works for me until everybody sorts
out Microsoft's identity crisis with Win2K.

 

[TCool]

I've read a lot of messages from people saying the 2d quality on the gforce2 cards is bad. Its convinced me to never buy a gforce card.

 

[CandyKid]

Or you could put out the extra 20 dollars to get the 64 meg ddr Radeon... Then you're getting approximately equivalent performance with better image quality. get the version with vivo and you got some multimedia capabilities...

 

[StickHead]

Why trade when you will notice no difference. Stick with the GTS and save yourself a possible upgrade nightmare.

 

[Bartman39]

Hummm... no difference eh??? I just swapped off a CL Geforce 2 GTS 64meg for a Radeon 64meg VIVO and let me tell you the difference, its Unreal (had to throw that one in there). For the features and future aspects of this card it was a true upgrade... W2K holds nothing for me anyhow so with W98SE I get very good performance plus a lot more... 2D is a lot sharper and the difference between 16 & 32 bit color performance in games is almost none... Stickhead I can very easy tell you that a Geforce 2 MX cant even compare (had every Nvidia, 3dfx, Matrox card there is with the exception of a V5... and will try one in the wife`s machine here soon). ATI is releasing new drivers more often now and will more than likely fill in the area for Matrox (sad to see them getting away from gaming). My thoughts are why not try something new for change you might find it is a lot better than you ever thought it was... If you want sheer speed and dont know or mind what your missing then stick with the GF otherwise try a new world you have never seen before...

 

[SleepyTim]

I agree that the Radeons in general, are better [/i]all-around[/i] cards than the GF2's.

However, if he is talking about going from the 32MB GF2 to the 32MB Radeon, there won't be an improvement in performance. In fact, he would lose some 16-bit performance as the GF2 is much faster than the Radeon in 16-bit. Also, the Radeon's Win2K drivers have improved quite a bit, but the Nvidia's Win2K drivers still perform better. He would still get better image quality and better features with the Radeon though.

Now if the question was about a Win98 machine then I would say make the trade. The Radeon is fantastic for Win98. And if you can get your hands on the elusive 64MB Radeon VIVO, then you would have IMO the best all-around card available today (performance, features, image quality, some DX8 support, DVD playback, VideoIN-VideoOUT, etc.).

To sum it up..... If you are going to stick with Win2k, stick with the GF2. If you are willing to dual-boot Win98/Win2K or just run Win98, then the Radeon would make you very happy.

They are both excellent cards.

 

[SpeedGod]

thanks everyone for replying. I have decided to keep my geforce 2 gts.

THanks.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

you could always get your geforce modified. With the mods, costs like 30 bucks, you get 2D performance that is equal to the voodoo 5500. go over to avsforums.com and search for it.