Video card comparision run down.

[GtPrOjEcTX]

I posted this on my forums after a member was going to get a ATI 9600. Hopefully I convinced him not to. Feel free to correct me but I think this is pretty accurate as I was looking at benchmarks and decided who the the overall better card was compared to the other. I'm not including all the cards, but bunch of them. Feel free to add to the list as well, with your reasons why the card goes there (looking for benchmarks here ppl)..



last years version of Nvidia cards: GF4 line where the 4200 < 4400 < 4600.

this years version of Nvidia cards: FX line where the 5200 < 5600 < 5800 < 5900 < 5950

this years version of ATI cards: 9000 < 9100 < 9200 < 9600se < 9600 < 9500 < 9600 pro ~= 9500 pro < 9700 < 9800 ~= 9700 pro < 9800 pro < 9800xt

so the reviews are from this years cards against each other, but there are also reviews with the GF4 line with the FX line, so here is how they measure up: FX5200 < FX5600 < FX5600 Ultra ~= GF4 4200 < FX5800 ~= GF4 4400 < GF4 4600 < FX 5900 < FX 5950

So with the GF4 being about the equilvilent of the FX5800 and better than the FX5600 line.

So now compare the ATI cards with the nvidia cards:
basically the GF4 line is somewhere between the FX5600 Ultra and the FX 5800 Ultra, the ATI 9500 Pro is also in that category, which is ever so slightly better than the 9600 Pro which is considerably better than the 9600.

 

[rimshaker]

Ok so let's see, last years BF sale at BB was a Ti4200 128MB for $90AR. This years was a 9600 for $70AR... a downgrade both in price and performance.

But.... CU had a 5600 ultra 128MB for $100AR.. which is roughly the same price/performance ratio as last years deal at BB according to your logic, just the addition of DX9 support. I ended up returning that 9600 in favor of the 5600ultra last weekend.