If you guys read the thread he is on a budget of $100 to $150. If he had the money Im sure he'd try to buy the 9800 Pro or XT.
All he has to do is go to a compusmart and trade in his old card. In the long run spending an extra $50 to get the 9800 Pro as opposed to a 9600 varient is really worth it!
It is the fastest graphics card for home user right now. A FX 5950 Ultra.
Actually the clock rates are 50 Mhz higher than shown there, so it has a 555 Mhz Chip and 1050 Mhz RAM clock. It also features watercooling.
When Microsoft releases DirectX 9.1 (or better 9.0c) they say that FX cards will get a 60% performance boost.
So I suggest wait until the new era of cards is released and save some mor money, until this baby only cost 250$ or less. Then buy it!
"I want a medium size with bacon and extra cheese."
Last edited by the_move; March 22nd, 2004 at 05:52 AM.
When Microsoft releases DirectX 9.1 (or better 9.0c) they say that FX cards will get a 60% performance boost.
And supermodels will jump out of your computer and give you lapdances!
In order to get that kind of performance increase Jesus himself would have had to code the drivers! Whenever a company says that drivers are going to give you an XX% increase it's always prudent to divide it by 4, nvidia or otherwise!
Besides by the time that's even 1/2 affordable PCI express will be the industry norm.
Last edited by Blistex; March 22nd, 2004 at 05:59 AM.
All he has to do is go to a compusmart and trade in his old card. In the long run spending an extra $50 to get the 9800 Pro as opposed to a 9600 varient is really worth it!
who said anything about a 9600? And where is compusmart never heard of them?
Uhm... yeah, move.
nVidia builds cards with really nice specs that don't perform worth a damn. Sure, those cards have got really nice, high numbers... but if they're all that hot, why did nVidia go and optimise their drivers for a higher 3DMark03 score? The simple fact of the the matter is that nVidia has been making that same damn claim for the last three years now ("just wait until [technology X] is released, then you'll see!"), and they've failed to deliver on any of them yet. Unfortunately for nVidia and their supporters, both the FX5950 and the Radeon 9800XT perform well beyond what any game currently needs, but the 9800XT is both more efficient and produces better image quality. And at 95fps, that's all you'll notice.
Anlushac~ I've been touting the 9600XT, but Blistex makes an excellent point... if you can get the price driven down on a 9800 Pro, that's definately there you'd want to put your money. I just can't bring myself to ditch old hardware.
Would it be so easy that we could all have 9800 Pro's. I sure wouldnt turn one down.
If you go back and lookat one of Blistex's posts there is a link to a .jpg of different cards running BF1942:SW0WW2.
The test machine was some high end P4 with 512MB RAM and was running FRAPS to show the frame rate.
The highest end ATI card was the Radeon 9800xt. The best Nvidia card was a Geforce FX 5950 ultra.
The difference was 7 fps. I dont consider that a significant difference when they cards were pulling down over 200fps.
The 9800XT scored 212.1
The 9800Pro scored 209.6fps
The FX 5950 ultra scored 204.9 fps.
My point is that this is a real world test using a game we all know. And the performance was comparable. The 9800 Pro did not leave it smoking or walk all over it. You would not be able to see a difference of 7 fps in a game running over 200 fps
The difference was 7 fps. I dont consider that a significant difference when they cards were pulling down over 200fps.
The 9800XT scored 212.1
The 9800Pro scored 209.6fps
The FX 5950 ultra scored 204.9 fps.
My point is that this is a real world test using a game we all know. And the performance was comparable. The 9800 Pro did not leave it smoking or walk all over it. You would not be able to see a difference of 7 fps in a game running over 200 fps
And the moral of the story is... the top end video cards, despite their cool factor, are horrible values and should not be considered unless you've either got a corporate credit card or a very rich family.
Also, once you hit about 80fps, additional gains in framerate aren't particularly noticeable. Certainly, 5fps (when running in excess of 200fps) won't make any difference at all.
In all honesty, the "midrange" gaming offering from ATI--the Radeon 9600XT--will run FH with 6xAA/16xAF at 1042x768x32 @ 85Hz and all video options maxed at a fairly consistent 90-100fps, hence my advocacy.
Being that the 9800Pro from Newegg is $90 cheaper than the FX 5950 Ultra I would get the 9800Pro but if your a diehard Nvidia fan I dont think your giving up a whole lot performance wise. Pricewise the ATI is a better buy.
I have stated before in the past and on another thread that I will go for the best performance in a set price range. For high end the 9800 Pro is a good buy. But since the original thread starter stated he wanted to keep at $100-$150 I was pushing the 980SE since it has 256 bit datapath and performs almost even with the 9600XT.
In my paticular case I would still go with the 9800SE over the 9600 XT since I think it has better overclockability. Yes I know overclocking is bad and evil but sometimes I just cant help myself.
How a card does in the bf1942 engine is important here.....so here is a test that did that (source : www.tomshardware.com)
Btw : They noted nvidia cards had strange huge drops in fps while doing a sudden turn in bf1942. As the former owner of many Geforce cards and still of a GF 4600 ti ultra i can say i recognise that happening with nvidia cards.
I need a new graphics card too, but because FH and BG42 are the games i play most i am reluctant to buy a Geforce again and still have that sudden turn huge framerate drop.....
Is there any owner of top segment nividia card that can say the doesn't happen anymore with the latest nvidia cards ?
Last edited by Beast of War; March 22nd, 2004 at 12:09 PM.
Uhm... yeah, move.
nVidia builds cards with really nice specs that don't perform worth a damn. Sure, those cards have got really nice, high numbers... but if they're all that hot, why did nVidia go and optimise their drivers for a higher 3DMark03 score? The simple fact of the the matter is that nVidia has been making that same damn claim for the last three years now ("just wait until [technology X] is released, then you'll see!"), and they've failed to deliver on any of them yet. Unfortunately for nVidia and their supporters, both the FX5950 and the Radeon 9800XT perform well beyond what any game currently needs, but the 9800XT is both more efficient and produces better image quality. And at 95fps, that's all you'll notice.
Not so fast!
1. It´s not only a matter of the grafx cards, but of their support.
Right now the ATI are better, because computer games still use 24-bit shaders, which Nvidia cards, do not have. Instead nvidia cards can handle 32-bit shaders which are a big difference to 24-bit (at least for an grafx designer). If the game developers switched to 32-bit shaders ATI needs a new lineup of grafx cards.
2. Further some of those nice benchmarks, which put nvidia down featured pixel shader 1.4, which is ATI only and not supported by Nvidia. Nvidia uses either 1.3 or (FX) 2.0 or even 2.1 (the newer stuff). Anyway ATI has been really active in "cheating" and corrupting either by not only optimizing their drivers (which still suck as BFV proofs), but by those unfair benchmark specs and they gave a lot of money to valve for their Halflife 2 hype. It´s just like policy, it´s all about money.
And DirectX 9.0b is far not optimized to Nvidia.
There were quite some interviews about it and yes, DX 9.1 or better 9.0 c will boost Nvidia cards greatly.
AND 9800Xt may be faster in general, but the fastest Grafx card currrently is and Nvidia card. This one:
Btw : They noted nvidia cards had strange huge drops in fps while doing a sudden turn in bf1942. As the former owner of many Geforce cards and still of a GF 4600 ti ultra i can say i recognise that happening with nvidia cards.
I need a new graphics card too, but because FH and BG42 are the games i play most i am reluctant to buy a Geforce again and still have that sudden turn huge framerate drop.....
Is there any owner of top segment nividia card that can say the doesn't happen anymore with the latest nvidia cards ?
That framerate drops came with the 1.45 patch. Before that I never noticed any kind of framerate drops.
So this should proof that this is a matter of coding and not about the performance of those cards. DX9.0b is dipshit anyway as 9.0a has been.
"I want a medium size with bacon and extra cheese."
Last edited by the_move; March 22nd, 2004 at 01:33 PM.
This site is part of the Defy Media Gaming network
The best serving of video game culture, since 2001. Whether you're looking for news, reviews, walkthroughs, or the biggest collection of PC gaming files on the planet, Game Front has you covered. We also make no illusions about gaming: it's supposed to be fun. Browse gaming galleries, humor lists, and honest, short-form reporting. Game on!
Forgotten Hope General Yib-Yab (Off Topic) 
Re: Getting a new video card 
"I want a medium size with bacon and extra cheese." 
Linear Mode
