What are my Vid Card options.

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: iversonyin

Originally posted by: Cawchy87

Originally posted by: iversonyin
he said he dont need top of the line gaming card and for $144 you get a SE with the potential of pushing to 9800PRO without any risk, softmodd has no risk as far as i know

even if you don't softmod it, its still a good card for the value.

why bother with 9700 PRO, they are used or refurbished everywhere for $120-130, its jus not worth it

First, without any risk? Here it shows a non softmoddable 9800se is below the 9500pro and just above the 9600pro.

Second softmodding has quite a bit of risk. Softmodding allows the 4 unused pipelines to be opened thus haveing an 8 pipeline card insted of a 4 pipeline. The highest softmod percentage is in the Powercolor 9800se C3 and that only has a 67% success rate. Also, unlocking the other 4 pipes creates more heat and a need for a better cooler if you are going to over clock/flash to pro speeds.

Why bother with the 9700pro? Because it proforms almost up to 9800pro standards (within 5-10fps) for at least 30 dollars cheaper than the 9800pro. On a tight budget that is a great savings. Also, in your last sentance you demonstrated how good of a deal they are but then said they aren't worth it... hmmmm... Are you implying that because a vid card is cheap it isn't good?

and according to this guy, there almost no risk at softmodding.

sounds reputable....:roll:

 

[selfbuilt]

The 9600XT is definitely better than the 9800se at stock speeds (even the 9600pro has a slight advantage over stock 9800se in most games). Probably your best bet if you don't want to splurge for the 9700/9800pro. Avoid the 9200, or you will have difficulty with newer games (basically, it is already considered the absolute minimum for current games).

Oh, and on the subject of accurate percentages for softmods: there aren't any. First off, there's a huge postive response bias going on here (i.e. most people don't report failures, and many report successful ones that actually give artifacts once tested). Also, most results are based on a tiny sample size which is unreliable. Finally, there's little control in the specific cards used - even if one particular card, at one point in time, was reliably shown to softmod well, that could all change the next day when the manufacturer changes suppliers for one part. Simply put, the likelihood of a truly successful mod is likely quite a bit lower than generally believed (and then there's the issue of o/c anywhere close to stock speeds of a 9800pro/xt, given the slower mem typically used on 9800se). I'm not saying it can't be done - but I wouldn't recommend for anyone other than a tinkerer to start with.

If you want a good, reliable, slightly above entry level card, so go for the 9600xt.

 

[basslover1]

Thanks man. I think I'm gonna stick with the 9600XT.

 

[Corporate Thug]

i bet you can find a 9800 pro in the $150 range @ FS/FT

 

[karma4jake]

The 256-bit 9800Se is what I would get. Even if it doesnt softmod you can still oc it and the 256-bit memory will scale better. http://www.newegg.com/app/view...=14-131-248&DEPA=0

 

[rogue1979]

Originally posted by: reallyscrued
hahahah who said ti4600 was 9700pro rival! hahahahahha, are u crazy? do u remember anything from that time? it was fx5800 vs, the 9700pro. the reason people were still using Ti's is becuz that nVidia took so long to bring the FX series out. too bad the even numbered FX endings cards still suck.

The 9700Pro does beat the Ti4600.

But the Ti4600 doesn't suck. Without AA or AF it will beat a 9600Pro easily in the hardest Dx9 titles.

 

[Marsumane]

Originally posted by: rogue1979

Originally posted by: reallyscrued
hahahah who said ti4600 was 9700pro rival! hahahahahha, are u crazy? do u remember anything from that time? it was fx5800 vs, the 9700pro. the reason people were still using Ti's is becuz that nVidia took so long to bring the FX series out. too bad the even numbered FX endings cards still suck.

The 9700Pro does beat the Ti4600.

But the Ti4600 doesn't suck. Without AA or AF it will beat a 9600Pro easily in the hardest Dx9 titles.

All that i have to say is look at doom 3... GF4's get owned in doom 3. They finally show their age. Not saying they still arent good cards, but they are slowly showing their age and newer dx9 cards are proving to be a bit better then they used to be. (based on doom 3)

 

[Cawchy87]

Originally posted by: basslover1
Thanks man. I think I'm gonna stick with the 9600XT.

Nooooooo! I had a 9600xt and it sucked. I sold it and bought a 9700np, made a profit and gaming proformance on my computer took a HUGE jump! I would recommend the 9700np or 9700pro.

 

[Delorian]

here and here. Use these to judge your own price/performance ratio based on what you need the card for, which specific games/tasks. I'd get prices from newegg or ebay (if you trust that).

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: rogue1979

Originally posted by: reallyscrued
hahahah who said ti4600 was 9700pro rival! hahahahahha, are u crazy? do u remember anything from that time? it was fx5800 vs, the 9700pro. the reason people were still using Ti's is becuz that nVidia took so long to bring the FX series out. too bad the even numbered FX endings cards still suck.

The 9700Pro does beat the Ti4600.

But the Ti4600 doesn't suck. Without AA or AF it will beat a 9600Pro easily in the hardest Dx9 titles.

Um, that might be because the 4600s run DX9 games (such as FarCry and Doom3, and the upcoming HL2) in DX8 compatibility mode -- you don't get any of the DX9 shaders.

The Ti4600 will generally beat a 9600Pro at older DX8 and below games, if AA and AF are disabled. If you enable AA and AF, or start running games that use pixel and vertex shaders, the 9600Pro does better -- sometimes by a significant margin.

The 9700Pro just smacks the 4600 around. It's got significantly more memory bandwidth and pixel processing power.

 

[selfbuilt]

Originally posted by: Cawchy87

Originally posted by: basslover1
Thanks man. I think I'm gonna stick with the 9600XT.

Nooooooo! I had a 9600xt and it sucked. I sold it and bought a 9700np, made a profit and gaming proformance on my computer took a HUGE jump! I would recommend the 9700np or 9700pro.

Ah, according to the all the comparison game benchies at Tom's and Digit-Life, the 9700nonpro is only 15-20% faster than the 9600xt is regular modes, and max 25-40% faster in various higher quality AA and AF modes (which, frankly, are getting harder and harder to use due to to performance hit in newer games).

Personally, I'd opt for the 9800pro myself (about double the difference between the 9700nonpro and the 9600xt), but I understand if someone doesn't want to pay the price differential.