Which Video Card for around $175.00?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

GAMBILL

Member
Jun 11, 2003
100
0
0
Hello All,
I'm thinking of buying a new Video Card I have a Geforce 4 MX440 128MB that came with my pc, I'm ready to upgrade an want to spend around $175.00 on it which one do I buy?
Thanks Gambill
 
Jeff7181

Jeff7181

Lifer
Aug 21, 2002
18,368
11
81
Bah... 9600 Pro sucks... spend another $20 and get a 9500 Pro or about $30 more and get a 9700
 
C

Corporate Thug

Lifer
Apr 17, 2003
37,622
0
76
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Bah... 9600 Pro sucks... spend another $20 and get a 9500 Pro or about $30 more and get a 9700
Click to expand...

no it doesn't performance is identical when both are OCed
 
Jeff7181

Jeff7181

Lifer
Aug 21, 2002
18,368
11
81
The Radeon 9600 Pro is the perfect example of bigger numbers not necessarily meaning higher performance; as we noted in our overview of the RV350's technology, the Radeon 9600 Pro is actually more like a regular Radeon 9500 than a Radeon 9500 Pro.
Click to expand...
As you can see, the Radeon 9500 Pro was quite a fluke in that it was basically a slightly detuned Radeon 9700 Pro whereas the Radeon 9600 Pro is much more castrated, which is what you would expect from a $150 - $199 mainstream card.
Click to expand...
As we mentioned in our original article however, expecting the Radeon 9600 Pro's core improvements and higher clock speed to overcome the lack of rendering pipelines and outperform the Radeon 9500 Pro may very well be wishful thinking - a question we're looking to finally answer today.
Click to expand...

All taken from this article. Take a look and judge for yourself. I see the main difference being the number of rendering pipelines... 9600 Pro has 4, 9500 pro has 8... which is why the 9600 Pro has to be clocked 125 Mhz higher to achieve the same performance without AA or AF... and it's simply no contest with AA and AF turned on... 9500 Pro is clearly the better choice for only about $25 more.
 
Jeff7181

Jeff7181

Lifer
Aug 21, 2002
18,368
11
81
Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
but you can o/c it like a .....

/suddenly hit by reality
why am i defending an ati card. am i slowly being curropted?
Click to expand...

That doesn't show the performance of an overclocked 9500 Pro... looks like a pretty stupid test to me... that's like saying my Ti4200 is faster than all Ti4600's because I have it overclocked to 325/650... overclock the Ti4600 and it will be faster than my overclocked Ti4200.
 

Radeon 9500 pro definately. 9600 pro only has half the pipelines and is clocked much higher from the factory to compete and be about 85% as fast as the 9500 pro. Im sure if you look around, you will find the 9500 pro for your 175.00 or less.

You wont regret it. The most power you can get for that money.

GM
 
C

Corporate Thug

Lifer
Apr 17, 2003
37,622
0
76
jeff, if you read the article @ firing squad, when both are OCed, the performance is IDENTICAL


EDIT: "As you saw in our test results, the overclocked RADEON 9600 PRO is quite a performer. In some cases, not only is it capable of outperforming the overclocked, 8-pixel pipeline RADEON 9500 PRO, it can even give the RADEON 9700 PRO a run for its money!"
 
GullyFoyle

GullyFoyle

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2000
4,362
11
81
Originally posted by: GAMBILL
Looks like a 9500 Pro, I figured I might get a few NVidia lovers?
Click to expand...

You can love Nvidia all you want, but they have nothing you can recommend against ATI's current line up, in the price range you mentioned. ATI 0wnes the range from $150 - $500 (the FX 5900 Ultra holds it's own against the 9800 Pro)
Now if your price range was around $100, then Ti4200 all the way!

 
Schadenfroh

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
Originally posted by: GAMBILL
Is the 9500 Pro out preforming the TI 4600?
Click to expand...

in non FSAA/AF/DX9 situations a 4600 outperforms a 9500, i think it matches it in 2x fsaa tho
 
B

bluemax

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2000
7,182
0
0
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Bah... 9600 Pro sucks... spend another $20 and get a 9500 Pro or about $30 more and get a 9700
Click to expand...

Well guess what Jeffy? There's quite a few reasons for going with 9600 over 9500. Most notably is that it runs much, much cooler. It's also more stable and guaranteed to work in all the new motherboards coming out. There's been some compatibility issues with 9500/9700 cards and the latest motherboard releases.

A 9600 is a safer bet on many levels. It may not be quite as fast but it's really darned close right out of the box. I'd take a sub-10% hit in order to gain good compatibility and cool running!
 
B

Blastman

Golden Member
Oct 21, 1999
1,758
0
76
If you go with the 9600pro and want to overclock, make sure it has the 2.8ns Samsung memory and not the 3.3 stuff. The 3.3 memory won?t make it much past 310 ?315mhz.
 
Jeff7181

Jeff7181

Lifer
Aug 21, 2002
18,368
11
81
Originally posted by: bluemax
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Bah... 9600 Pro sucks... spend another $20 and get a 9500 Pro or about $30 more and get a 9700
Click to expand...

Well guess what Jeffy? There's quite a few reasons for going with 9600 over 9500. Most notably is that it runs much, much cooler. It's also more stable and guaranteed to work in all the new motherboards coming out. There's been some compatibility issues with 9500/9700 cards and the latest motherboard releases.

A 9600 is a safer bet on many levels. It may not be quite as fast but it's really darned close right out of the box. I'd take a sub-10% hit in order to gain good compatibility and cool running!
Click to expand...

Well guess what Maxy? You have your opinion and I have mine. It's up to Gambill to decide who's advice he'd rather take.
 
Jeff7181

Jeff7181

Lifer
Aug 21, 2002
18,368
11
81
Originally posted by: shady06
jeff, if you read the article @ firing squad, when both are OCed, the performance is IDENTICAL


EDIT: "As you saw in our test results, the overclocked RADEON 9600 PRO is quite a performer. In some cases, not only is it capable of outperforming the overclocked, 8-pixel pipeline RADEON 9500 PRO, it can even give the RADEON 9700 PRO a run for its money!"
Click to expand...

Show me proof. PCWorld also said the XP3200 was faster than a P4 3.0C.
 
B

bluemax

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2000
7,182
0
0
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Originally posted by: bluemax
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Bah... 9600 Pro sucks... spend another $20 and get a 9500 Pro or about $30 more and get a 9700
Click to expand...
Well guess what Maxy? You have your opinion and I have mine. It's up to Gambill to decide who's advice he'd rather take.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the opinions are:
Stability, cooler temperatures, compatibility and almost the same performance, equal or better performance if you're an overclocker...

vs.

"9600 sucks!"


Keep up the good work! ;)
Click to expand...
 
P

prometheusxls

Senior member
Apr 27, 2003
830
0
0
Yeah, the opinions are:
Stability, cooler temperatures, compatibility and almost the same performance, equal or better performance if you're an overclocker...

vs.

"9600 sucks!"


Keep up the good work! ;)
Click to expand...

IMO the 9600 Really does stink. Its crippled from the factory in terms of processing pipes and clock speed. The fact that it OCs well is pretty hollow to me since you can OC the 9500P as well. When I had the 9500P mine OCed up to 9700 speeds. I am not sure why you think the 9600 would be more stable. ATI is slowly but surely working the bugs out of the unified drivers for all the cards. So stability and compatiblity are the same for all. The arguement for the 9600P boils down to pay less for less performance and then try to O/C like an SOB to try and get back even with the 9500P. Ths is a fools erand. From the benches I have seen the 9500P does much better in heavy FSAA and AF than the 9600P. As I understand this it is the result of the more gpu pipes on the 9500P. All the OC in the world won't change that. IMO the whole point of getting an ATI Card in the $175 price range is for the FSAA and AF, if you want them the 9600P will leave you feeling empty and if you don't use them then the TI4200 8x is still clearly the best choice for cheap.

For 175 Get the 9500P. But IMO the 9700 Regular is the best buy in the mid-level DX9 category. 256bit ram is a good 10-15% in videocard limited games. If you don't want FSAA and AF go nvidia GF4.
 
Jeff7181

Jeff7181

Lifer
Aug 21, 2002
18,368
11
81
Originally posted by: bluemax
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Originally posted by: bluemax
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Bah... 9600 Pro sucks... spend another $20 and get a 9500 Pro or about $30 more and get a 9700
Click to expand...
Well guess what Maxy? You have your opinion and I have mine. It's up to Gambill to decide who's advice he'd rather take.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the opinions are:
Stability, cooler temperatures, compatibility and almost the same performance, equal or better performance if you're an overclocker...

vs.

"9600 sucks!"


Keep up the good work! ;)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I can take partial quotes from you to prove my point too...

"Well... There's quite a few reasons for going with 9600... There's been some compatibility issues with... the latest motherboard releases. It may not be quite as fast but... I'd take a sub-10% hit"
 
B

bluemax

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2000
7,182
0
0
I can take partial quotes from you to prove my point too...

"Well... There's quite a few reasons for going with 9600... There's been some compatibility issues with... the latest motherboard releases. It may not be quite as fast but... I'd take a sub-10% hit"
Click to expand...

Difference here is all you said was, "It sucks. Get a 9500 or 9700."
No reasoning, just that.
"Bah... 9600 Pro sucks... spend another $20 and get a 9500 Pro or about $30 more and get a 9700" to be exact.

I stand by my statement, the 9600, while only SLIGHTLY slower at stock speed, will provide good speed at a lower cost with less power consumption and less heat. AND does not have the (mostly) well known bug with the i865 and i875 motherboards. It's not a driver issue, it's hardware-level. I don't know who's to blame, but the two simply will NOT work together. nVidia fans would like to use this as flame bait, but the FX boards have an issue with an SiS chipset too. :)

I'm saying it's SAFER to get a 9600 Pro, and it just happens to run plenty darn fast - without getting hot.
I think it's fast enough stock - I'd rather just unplug the fan and run it at stock than overclock it to the moon.
Of course, Zalman allows both without fan noise. :p
 
C

Corporate Thug

Lifer
Apr 17, 2003
37,622
0
76
Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Originally posted by: shady06
jeff, if you read the article @ firing squad, when both are OCed, the performance is IDENTICAL


EDIT: "As you saw in our test results, the overclocked RADEON 9600 PRO is quite a performer. In some cases, not only is it capable of outperforming the overclocked, 8-pixel pipeline RADEON 9500 PRO, it can even give the RADEON 9700 PRO a run for its money!"
Click to expand...

Show me proof. PCWorld also said the XP3200 was faster than a P4 3.0C.
Click to expand...

jeff, i'm not trying to sell the card here. you can find the full review @ firing squad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom