What to get: ANNIHILATOR 2 GTS, Asus V7700 GTS, or Radeon 64MB????

[CraZyDayZ]

I can get the 3 of these for around the same price. I was wondering what you guys would recommend. I play alot of games....mostly FPS's. Some coding in Visual Basic and Access, web surfing and that's about it..
My system:

PIII 700e @ 1 gig FOP32-1 cpu HSF
256mb Crucial 133 Cas 2 Ram
AMK OCD-3344-300 24" Tower Case (Many fans)
45 gig IBM GXP 75 ATA/100
18 gig IBM GXP 35 ATA/66
ASUS CUSL2-C MB
Monster MX300 soundcard
10/100 MB Ethernet Card
Desktop Theatre 5.1 Surround Sound Speakers
Creative Blaster 6X4X24 Burner
Creative 48X CD-Rom
Creative 6X24 DVD-Rom and DX3 Decoder
3dfx Voodoo 3 3000 (For now!)

 

[vm]

I have an anmihilator 2 GTS, so far i've loved it..you can OC the mem on those suckers to 400-410 mhz 🙂
Keep in mind that board is almost like the reference board..no tv out or anything, it's "just" the card, but it's components are very good quality.
Asus' perform bout the same, and they have stuff that come with it (like games), but cost more.But just bc u can OC the creative one much better i'd choose the Annihilator over the Asus.

And the Radeon well, it's less of a speed demon but image quality is better.

so pick between FPS or image quality really.
I'd go with fps if u play shooters like me 🙂

 

[Nozomi]

I have both an Anniholator 2 and a Retail Radeon 64meg VIVO. I'm trying to decide the exact same thing. The Anniholator absolutely slaughters the ATI in win2k. If you are going for raw frame rate then stay away from the Radeon. One particular problem for the Radeon is smoke. For example if you ever snipe with a railgun in quake 3 when people are shooting rockets at you your frame rate becomes sludge. The smoke gets it every time. The Anniholator on the other hand experiences let say a 20 frame drop, but mind you it's normally pushing 90 FPS to begin with. So the big question is whether ATI can get us some good drivers. If they can then maybe the Radeon will live up to its name.

As for image quality? Personally I cannot tell them apart. 2d or 3d.

BTW I play at 32 bit everything, lightmaped, high geometric detail, trilliniar, and 1024*768

 

[duragezic]

If you run Win2k a lot, then that might be a reason alone not to get the Radeon. The drivers are really bad, and they aren't very good for win98 systems... yet.

Just recently, I chose a Radeon64 over a GTS because of 2d quality, the video capture and video out stuff, cheaper, and it is almost as fast as a GF2. In 16bit it is actually quite a bit slower but in 32bit it suffers only a few fps performance hit than 16bit, which in that case is faster than a gf2 gts.

 

[Playitagainsam]

Actually, I'm pretty pleased with my ASUS 7700 Deluxe. The price has been recently reduced, and I think it does an excellent job. I'm not even an overclocker, so I'm not interested in that, but I'm impressed with the quality of the work, and the extras really make it worthwile.

 

[Untamo]

Honestly - This is not a biased opinion [least not too much] - I would go with the GTS. I've heard more good as far as stability & problem free operation under all OS's than the others. And great if you can get 3 -10 more FPS's out of it, but no one wants an OS that crashes or a game that will only work 1/2 the time.