Dc F-14 - Page 2

***Parakleet*** · August 25th, 2003

wankerific

***DC2002*** · August 25th, 2003

apocalypse_kid off topic - just didnt want to open a new(bie) thread for this - can you help me find a good site for geforce fx 5900 ultra 256mb vs radeon 9800 pro 256mb?

ww2boy - i totally agree with you. hate gamespy - so annoying. wont be on my computer either!

and parakleet..

btw - sorry for getting a little spammy.. i think it was just apropriate! :lol::lol::lol::lol:

***apocalypse_kid*** · August 26th, 2003

Quote:

Originally Posted by DC2002

apocalypse_kid off topic - just didnt want to open a new(bie) thread for this - can you help me find a good site for geforce fx 5900 ultra 256mb vs radeon 9800 pro 256mb?

Hi DC2002,

I quite often go to Tom's Hardware Guide for stuff like that. He has a review here comparing the 5900 PRO to the ATI 9800 PRO (but only 128Mb - however my understanding it is doesn't make a lot of difference unless you are running at stupidly high resolutions).

Also HardOCP has a review of the two together. Performance wise the 5900 seems to have the edge.

have fun

***DC2002*** · August 26th, 2003

thanks. well, for me that difference is important. im learning graphics, so i need to be on stupid high resolutions

but ill check that out.

thanks!

***apocalypse_kid*** · August 26th, 2003

Quote:

Originally Posted by DC2002

thanks. well, for me that difference is important. im learning graphics, so i need to be on stupid high resolutions

but ill check that out.

thanks!

Graphics in what way? You may be better off looking for multi-monitor support as well (of course most vid cards these days have 2 outputs, but the impprtant one is a DVI out not a TV out. If you are doing 2D graphics these cards won't change much, most video cards have basic 2D engine that is virtually unchanged since the days of the original TNT2's. If you are learning a particular application (ie: MAYA or 3DS MAX) then look for reviews that feature rendering benchmarks from these or similar programs.

Have fun

***DC2002*** · August 26th, 2003

3d - maya, lightwave, softimage bla bla

***Breadstick360*** · August 26th, 2003

Yes F14s are very nice. They have been in service since '72 thats more than 30yrs. of service. Not many combat planes see that many years of service. Track six targets at once is a very wicked ability. I belive that the super hornet will live up to it's capability.

By the way.....my girlfriend's Dad fabricates(builds) F16 cockpits.

***XO_TNRA_Nicktomcat*** · August 26th, 2003

it tracks 24 at a time but can engage only 6 from a range of 90 miles carrying the aim 94 phoenix missile. the f-14 is by far the best peice of hardware ever put into service and its radar will NEVER BE TOPPED by any other combat fighter plane in the near future with a radar of 180 nm its the best you can get these days!

***Soujiro*** · August 26th, 2003

Quote:

Originally Posted by XO_TNRA_Nicktomcat

it tracks 24 at a time but can engage only 6 from a range of 90 miles carrying the aim 94 phoenix missile. the f-14 is by far the best peice of hardware ever put into service and its radar will NEVER BE TOPPED by any other combat fighter plane in the near future with a radar of 180 nm its the best you can get these days!

Dunno about that, the F-22 (prototype), F-35 (in development), S-37 and Su-37 is expected to be the best planes in the list.

***Breadstick360*** · August 26th, 2003

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soujiro

Dunno about that, the F-22 (prototype), F-35 (in development), S-37 and Su-37 is expected to be the best planes in the list.

Yea but the radar they house isn't up to par with the tomcat's. Those other planes will totaly out perform the tomcat. But the radar of a tomcat is close to a AWACS.