thx. I found you guys because im researching on which to get the 9800 pro or the 5900 fx ultra. I think im gonna get the 5900fx ultra, since I think its the best for future dx9 games. I own a ti4600, but now that i got fs2004, i got a lil envious.
0
Geeky1University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
edited July 2003
9800 has better image quality than the fx. Also, they aren't that much faster than the ti4600. I was looking @ both myself... I decided to wait until the R420/NV40 come out and just replace the Rage 128 with a Ti4200/4400/4600 for the next 6 months... the Radeon 8500 in my other system is plenty fast enough for anything out there, and it's about as fast as a Ti4600 (it's been OC'd to 320/295 core/ram) so a ti4600 for the dually system should hold me over until the next generation of cards... unless you have to play HL2 or something @ max detail, I suggest you wait, since the Ti4600 is still a very fast card.
true, but if you are going to use AA or AF filtering, the perfomance gap diminishes between the 9800Pro and 5900. Plus, the 9800Pro is much cheaper than the 5900 Ultra. The 256MB 9800Pro is still a little less. If you're getting a card at this end of the spectrum you shoudl be using AA and AF, so the 9800Pro is a better choice for less money.
Geeky1 said 9800 has better image quality than the fx. Also, they aren't that much faster than the ti4600. I was looking @ both myself... I decided to wait until the R420/NV40 come out and just replace the Rage 128 with a Ti4200/4400/4600 for the next 6 months... the Radeon 8500 in my other system is plenty fast enough for anything out there, and it's about as fast as a Ti4600 (it's been OC'd to 320/295 core/ram) so a ti4600 for the dually system should hold me over until the next generation of cards... unless you have to play HL2 or something @ max detail, I suggest you wait, since the Ti4600 is still a very fast card.
I think he wants to play games, not Pacman.
The 5900 Pro are ,according to all reviews a lot faster than any other card so far.
Geeky, have you tested both the 9800 Pro and the 5900 Ultra since you know which has the better quality?
With videocards in this league, price doesnt matter.
FYI dont buy an eVGA fx5900 ultra. They had stability problems because of the core overclock. It's possible that they fixed this problem, but at the moment if i was to buy an fx5900ultra i would definetly not purchase one from eVGA.
No 3dmark yet, i havent found 3dmark 2003 yet. I got the evga, it works very well, it doesnt matter if they come overclocked, mine only came with 50mhz more on the memory, i just ran the NVIDIA test which determines the best clock for your card, and im at 504 core, and 960 memory. I got the directx 9b and the 45.20 detonator drivers. This card gets me 35-50fps in "ultra high" quality in Flight Sim 2004 . Im also using a 19 inch monitor, and a 34inch HDTV Zenith as a second monitor (it comes with RGB), the card has no problem, the only thing it can do better than my older yi4600 is DX9 games. I also captured some video from my tv using the card, and its great.
Only thing is... my pc is kinda old, and the agp slot is only 4x!!! damnit!, (2ghz 768ram also). Darn, how is that affecting me? will it be twice as fast if i had an 8x slot?
0
Geeky1University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
edited July 2003
Mackanz said
Geeky1 said 9800 has better image quality than the fx. Also, they aren't that much faster than the ti4600. I was looking @ both myself... I decided to wait until the R420/NV40 come out and just replace the Rage 128 with a Ti4200/4400/4600 for the next 6 months... the Radeon 8500 in my other system is plenty fast enough for anything out there, and it's about as fast as a Ti4600 (it's been OC'd to 320/295 core/ram) so a ti4600 for the dually system should hold me over until the next generation of cards... unless you have to play HL2 or something @ max detail, I suggest you wait, since the Ti4600 is still a very fast card.
I think he wants to play games, not Pacman.
The 5900 Pro are ,according to all reviews a lot faster than any other card so far.
Geeky, have you tested both the 9800 Pro and the 5900 Ultra since you know which has the better quality?
With videocards in this league, price doesnt matter.
Sorry for the long lag... for some reason, I didn't get automatically subscribed to the thread...
Anyhow, there's a typo in that... I meant that the 5900 Ultra and 9800 Pro aren't really that much faster than the Ti4600s... they're certainly faster, but I don't think that they're fast enough to justify a $500 upgrade. Which is why I'm waiting...
I haven't tested them, but I've seen reviews, and the 9800 has much better IQ in all the reviews I've seen than the 5900... and, since ATi cards have had much better image quality than nVidia cards for some time, this doesn't surprise me. The most dramatic illustration of just how big the difference in image quality is that I've come across is <a href="http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDcyLDE=">this review</a> over @ HardOCP... I went ahead and put two screenshots of the cards in-game IQ @ their respective maximum ssettings next to each other and attached it... In addition to the image quality, take a look @ the FPS at the upper right hand side oof each screenshot...
Geeky1University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
edited July 2003
GTac... not even close. AGP 8x is (for now) a marketing gimmick, even more so with the 256MB of RAM on the card... AGP 8x has no impact on performance whatsoever. All of the tests I've seen put any advantage/disadvantage it has well within the range of benchmark error.
One other thing... what resolution are you runing Flight Sim @?
As a side note, im currently looking for every single HACK/TWEAK/improvement/review/people's overclocking reports on the fx5900 ultra. If you got anything, gimme a link. Thx.
Comments
Rivatuner.
Read HardOCP's overclocking experience with their BFGTech 5900 Ultra article at the top of the page.
Not 5600.
And the 5900 Ultra is the best card available currently.
I think he wants to play games, not Pacman.
The 5900 Pro are ,according to all reviews a lot faster than any other card so far.
Geeky, have you tested both the 9800 Pro and the 5900 Ultra since you know which has the better quality?
With videocards in this league, price doesnt matter.
You crank out any 3DMark2001 & 3DMark2003 scores yet?
The Story: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=10542
Sorry for the long lag... for some reason, I didn't get automatically subscribed to the thread...
Anyhow, there's a typo in that... I meant that the 5900 Ultra and 9800 Pro aren't really that much faster than the Ti4600s... they're certainly faster, but I don't think that they're fast enough to justify a $500 upgrade. Which is why I'm waiting...
I haven't tested them, but I've seen reviews, and the 9800 has much better IQ in all the reviews I've seen than the 5900... and, since ATi cards have had much better image quality than nVidia cards for some time, this doesn't surprise me. The most dramatic illustration of just how big the difference in image quality is that I've come across is <a href="http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDcyLDE=">this review</a> over @ HardOCP... I went ahead and put two screenshots of the cards in-game IQ @ their respective maximum ssettings next to each other and attached it... In addition to the image quality, take a look @ the FPS at the upper right hand side oof each screenshot...
One other thing... what resolution are you runing Flight Sim @?
bah look at this guy complain:
http://216.239.37.104/search?q=cache:FQR0VZPJXgkJ:www.computing.net/cpus/wwwboard/forum/6570.html+3dmark+scores&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
His is a :
Win XP Home
AMD 2400XP @ 138MHz
GeForce FX 5900 Ultra @ 476/904MHz
512MB PC2700
MSI 6590 KT4 Ultra
Mine is a:
Xp Home
P4 1.9ghz
GeForce FX 5900 Ultra @ 504/960MHz
768MB
You got a link @ FutureMark.com we can compare to? Don't feel bad, I pushed less than 1300