ATI vs. nVIDIA gfx cards

[Timormi]

the radeons have gotten mucho bettero. If you have seen some of the newest pc/gaming mags, like PCGamer and GamePro, they compared the GF4 and the Radeon 9700 Pro and the 9700 came out on top for both. Im still debating on getting the 9700 Pro or the 9500 Pro, since i dont have $300 at the moment, but with what Hamma is saying, ill just wait till i get the $300 and get the 9700.

[PR24]

0700 Pro beats the GeForce FX card in 3/4 of the test.

Thats very bad news for nVIDIA seeing they have not even released the FX card yet.

[Timormi]

actually in one test, the 9700 Pro even beat out the FX a couple times, which is pretty impressive. If the 9700 is this good, im gonna oogle at the 9800

[PR24]

I read a nice review about the FX, 9700pro and the 9800pro.

The 9800 w/ 128 ram scored just slightly higher then the 9700pro. Maybe on avergae 8-11 FPS more. I my eyes thats not worth $100.00 extra over the 9700 Pro.

However the 9800 pro with 256 DDR2 ram should be interesting to to see how that performs. Thing is though it looks like it will sell for $450.00 - $500.00 which I refuse to pay for just for a video card.

9700pro seems to be the best bang for the buck.

[TheGreatCarbini]

Ive got a Raedon 9700 Pro and my 3dmark03 score is 4696, now I'm not a doctor... but thats nice...

I don;t actualy HAVE a ti4600 to compare it with, I upgraded from my geforce3, I figured it was a good investment eh?

And just on the topic of expensive video cards... It's gotten to the point where that is almost the main component. Obviously the mobo/processer is, but having a good graphics card is SO crucial, that I really start to think of that as the main component in my box.

[Zatrais]

The 9800 is a waste of money over the 9700 so far... most tests only show a 5% (if that much) increase in performance... But ATI has promised a huge performance increase whit the 3.3 drivers so we'll see...

So far the 9800 ain't worth the money and i doubt the 256 mb version will be worth it for a long times... games simply don't need it.. hell most games dosn't even use half of the 128MB's on the 9700

[PR24]

Originally posted by Zatrais
The 9800 is a waste of money over the 9700 so far... most tests only show a 5% (if that much) increase in performance... But ATI has promised a huge performance increase whit the 3.3 drivers so we'll see...

So far the 9800 ain't worth the money and i doubt the 256 mb version will be worth it for a long times... games simply don't need it.. hell most games dosn't even use half of the 128MB's on the 9700

Yeah i agree. Thats why I said about the 9700pro being the best bang for the buck.

The 256 ram deal would be great for people that do gfx rendering all day long though.

[Zatrais]

Yeah, but people who do that generaly know what they need in a piece of hardware too hehe..

Most gamers don't nowadays, least from my experience.

[Hamma]

Unfortunatly nVidia is pulling a 3dfx

[OneManArmy]

YOU STOLE MY LINE BEOTCH!!!!!!

[powdahound]

Originally posted by Hamma
Yea i ran a 3dmark 2k3, it was 1100 or so with the GF4 and 4000+ with the radeon

Please remember, you play games, not the benchmark. And you really can't compare the ti4600 to the 9700, the 9700 SHOULD blow it away, it was released way after the ti4600 was. Compare the new FX to the 9700 and then you can say something. Also, there is a new review of the FX over at guru3d that FINALLY shows that it does do better than the 9700 in benchmarks and games. (although not by much it's still good news. Their next card should really be great with all the stuff they learned making the FX!) http://content.guru3d.com/article.php?cat=review&id=22

[OneManArmy]

FX huh.... I've always wanted to be able to fly around on my computer..!!!! (/me revs up his FX and prepares for take off)

[Hamma]

I've had better performance in all my games as well.

Soon ATI will buy out nvdia just like nvdia bought out 3dfx

[Zatrais]

Powda, the drivers used in that review are not WHQL... knowing nvidias reputation for tuning and messing whit drivers (forcing 16 fp precition for 1 thing) i won't trust anny FX review til it's done whit WHQL drivers.

But glad to see that the review and images are as good as the are in that review... Hope that nvidia gets back in the game =)

[PR24]

One thing to remember though. The GF Fx is .13 micron tech where the 9700pro is still .15 . The FX should blow the doors off of the 9700 yet it does not do so.

I am kind of sad about this I have been a loyal nVIDIA owner since the GF2 was first released. However on a side not I got my processor up to 2.85

CPU temp after running 3DMark03 was only 39 deg C (102 deg F)
and mobo is at only 80 deg F

Now I just need a new 9700 pro