Opinion Needed on GFX Cards

RWBRWB Icrontian
edited December 2003 in Hardware
It's that time again for an upgrade, my parents and even my cousins talked me out of getting a Laptop.

Long story short, my Cousins showed me that I should just upgrade my current PC(duh) but what I am curious about is that I was told by fellow NERDS that I should buy a NVidia 5900. The benchmarks they showed me at anandtech shows that the 52.14 drivers on a 5900np vs even the new Radeon 9800XT are negligible.

On top of that, the 5900mp was of $100 lesser value than the Radeon.

So now I am atad confused, as I want to buy a card TODAY along with some other goodies so when I get back home, it will be at the front office waiting for me.

Comments

  • GnomeWizarddGnomeWizardd Member 4 Life Akron, PA Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    the new nvidia is a good card but i dunno the 9800xt is a awesome card in itself. With Nvidia dropping the ball so many times lately ill stick with ATI
  • Geeky1Geeky1 University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
    edited December 2003
    Someone just posted a 3DMark '01 of a 5900 Ultra a few hours/days ago in one of the 3dmark threads... it did ~16k. ;D

    The ENTIRE GeForce FX series is a joke. Collectively, it represents the single biggest screw up in the history of the graphics card industry, possibly even in the entire computer industry.

    The 5200-5800 cards are total crap; the 5900 cards are OK when compared to all other cards, but they're laughably slow compared to ATis 9700 Pro, 9800 Pro, and 9800XT cards.

    Then there's that whole DX9 issue. The GeForce FX cards (the 5900 included) can't handle DX9 code. The benchmark results aren't in frames/second... they're in seconds/frame.

    The extra $100 for a 9800XT will be the best $100 you've ever spent.
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    The entire GeForceFX line is, at the basic, hardware, irreversible level, unable to run direct X 9 games within 70% of the speed that the ATI cards are capable of.

    That in and of itself should be the reason you don't buy one.
  • RWBRWB Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    Laughably slower? The benchmarks shown that in various games the difference wasn't even noticable... I understand the non-DX9 stuff, yeah, that is a given fault I know of. But from what I saw it seemed the 5900np was damned near as fast at the 9800XT
  • RWBRWB Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    ok, then, which should I go for? I have a rule to never spend more than $300 on ANYTHING. Which is the best bang for the buck within the $300 range?
  • GnomeWizarddGnomeWizardd Member 4 Life Akron, PA Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    9700 pro
  • Geeky1Geeky1 University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
    edited December 2003
    ATi Radeon 9800 Pro; if you're willing to wait (which you did say you weren't, but I think you should...) and if you check Newegg's refurb section obsessively, you'll be able to pick up a 9800XT for ~$350...
  • RWBRWB Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    Wait for what?
  • Geeky1Geeky1 University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
    edited December 2003
    Newegg to get refurbished 9800XTs in stock again
  • NeoFXNeoFX Utah, US of A
    edited December 2003
    I don't care what you all say but im a die-hard nVidia fan and my FX5900 Non Ultra plays superbly... with a little overclocking my system pulled 17k (I know I know... not the best) in 3dMark 01 but a 6633 in 3dMark 03... For 203 bucks that is definately worth it :D

    *hugs his Albatron :D*
  • CyrixInsteadCyrixInstead Stoke-on-Trent, England Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    It's not just about performance though. The image quality of the Radeon is far superior to the Geforce FX, and IMO nVidia have lowered the quality to allow for better benchmarks - it's the fps that sell it for many people, not about how good-looking the game runs at high res with fsaa on.

    Go for a 9700 pro.

    ~Cyrix
  • Geeky1Geeky1 University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
    edited December 2003
    NeoFX, you're certainly entitled to your opinon. However, I'll respond with why I don't like the GeForce FX:
    -It's slow; the card cannot run DX9 code. Valve had to re-write HL2 to get it to run acceptably on the GFFX, remember?

    -The image qualty, as is typical of nVidia cards, sucks. nVidia's stuff just doesn't produce the same kind of image quality that ATi's or Matrox's chipsets do.

    -Also, with regards to speed, 17k isn't bad, but compared to what the current ATi cards are doing, it's rather sad... my 9700 Pro (my old one that I killed :(; it overclocked higher than my new one does) did 18.5k or so, as I recall, in 3DMark '01 @ the default settings & ~390GPU/340 memory. And the 9800 Pro & XT are faster than my card, so you know... 17k isn't bad, but it's not very impressive anymore, either.

    I don't have anything against nVidia as a company, but the GeForce FX is so incredibly awful that I can't recommend it to anyone, for any reason, regardless of what their budget is. It doesn't matter what they want it for, or how much they want to spend; there's an ATi-based card that's better.

    I just hope nVidia's next generation of cards is better.
  • edcentricedcentric near Milwaukee, Wisconsin Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    I gave up a bunch of speed going from my GF4 4600 to my ATI9600pro, but the image is much better. And it will run all of the new stuff.
    If you like NV and don't care about DXC9 then get a GF4 Ti card. Faster and cheeper.
    If you want to run the new stuff and have a great picture, ATI is the way to go.
  • RWBRWB Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    hrm... last I checked, the 9600 Pro is superior to the Ti4600...
  • csimoncsimon Acadiana Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    REFURBISHED: ATI SAPPHIRE RADEON 9800 PRO ULTIMATE 256MB DVI/TV 8X AGP (OEM, BAREBONE) $310 ...you'd be nuts to pass on this ...and you better act fast because someone will snatch it up quick.
  • RWBRWB Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    I may try to get it, but I have to wait till tomorrow cuase I JUST spent $400 and I have a MAX on my debit card per dayof $500.


    EDIT:?

    Weent ahead and bought it, just to see if it will go through :D

    It did, it is charged, and it is MINE!
  • csimoncsimon Acadiana Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    awesome ...do you realize you got a 9800pro256 w/ zalman80c heatsink (I think) for the same price I paid for my 9800pro128? And then I added the zalman80c for another $29 so I think you've done well.
    IMHO get the optional zmop1 fan that goes with it if indeed you have the zm80c and also apply some AS5!

    Great job I think you will be pleased!


    In Stock: NO
    Congrats :thumbsup:

    that card sells for $439 new at newegg at the time you made your purchase.
  • TemplarTemplar You first.
    edited December 2003
    I may try to get it, but I have to wait till tomorrow cuase I JUST spent $400 and I have a MAX on my debit card per dayof $500.

    I think that max is in reference to the withdrawel of money from the account, like ATMs. Mine is like that, except I can only pull $300. Not like I have $300 in there anyway :)
  • FormFactorFormFactor At the core of forgotten
    edited December 2003
    Yes image quality on a Radeon is FAR superior to any geforce card of the same class. Playing on a geforce card is like playing on a radeon card through a screen door.

    Trust me dude. I used to be a huge nvidia fan. But the image quality of say bf1942 on a radeon is like 10x better than playing on an nvidia. Its almost breath taking. Get a Radeon and I guarentee you will be happy that you made the right purchase decision.
  • ketoketo Occupied. Or is it preoccupied? Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    Daily CASH limit is usually lower than MERCHANT spent limit, ie., I can withdraw $1000/day but spend $2500/day on my debit card if I have it on deposit. YMMV but that's a fairly common scenario. My background is 20 yrs in personal finances w banks and other lenders.
  • RWBRWB Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    I have some Arctic Silver Ceramique, is this not good enough?
  • TheDominator666TheDominator666
    edited December 2003
    Geeky1 wrote:
    Someone just posted a 3DMark '01 of a 5900 Ultra a few hours/days ago in one of the 3dmark threads... it did ~16k. ;D

    The ENTIRE GeForce FX series is a joke. Collectively, it represents the single biggest screw up in the history of the graphics card industry, possibly even in the entire computer industry.

    I think that crown may still belong to the demise of 3dfx going from owning the graphics card market to being bought by their competitor in a years time....at least Nvidia is still in business.

    -Acquiring STB and killing their OEM markets
    -Not offering 32 bit on the Voodoo 3 while the TNT2 had it (even if it was a buzz thing at the time)
    -Voodoo5.....LOLZ it is big!!!!1six
  • TheDominator666TheDominator666
    edited December 2003
    Thrax wrote:
    The entire GeForceFX line is, at the basic, hardware, irreversible level, unable to run direct X 9 games within 70% of the speed that the ATI cards are capable of.

    That in and of itself should be the reason you don't buy one.

    There are games out that use Direct X 9?
  • RWBRWB Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    TheDominator666 wrote:
    There are games out that use Direct X 9?

    Half Life 2 is suopposedly fully DX9 capable...

    I know I own a couple games that require DX9 like FreeLancer and I forget what else....
  • GnomeWizarddGnomeWizardd Member 4 Life Akron, PA Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    halo
  • RWBRWB Icrontian
    edited December 2003
    GnomeWizardd wrote:
    halo

    Isn't HomeWorld2 also on this list? I wanna get that game also...

    Ohh yes, and I believe Planetside is also another DX9 game.
  • Geeky1Geeky1 University of the Pacific (Stockton, CA, USA)
    edited December 2003
    Well, I don't know if it uses any DX9 code or not, but TR: AOD requires DX9... And the R7500m in my laptop can't run it...
Sign In or Register to comment.