good potential config?
- Thread starter sheik124
- Start date
In most cases the 256MB Radeon 9600 Pro wins over a 256MB GeForceFX 5600 in PC games. The GeForce will have better compatibilty with emulators, and beats the 9600 non-pro most of the time.
If you want a nVidia card with comparable performance to the Radeon 9600 Pro and is not be expensive, it's the GeForceFX 5600 Ultra or 5700 Ultra.
In response to an earlier post, the 256MB GeForceFX 5600 is NOT a bad card! Don't make me post Dusk Ultra screenshots @ 8xAA + 8xAF! Oh, the GeForce 4200Ti does not support DX9 in hardware so no Dusk for you, Maxx77!
If you want a nVidia card with comparable performance to the Radeon 9600 Pro and is not be expensive, it's the GeForceFX 5600 Ultra or 5700 Ultra.
In response to an earlier post, the 256MB GeForceFX 5600 is NOT a bad card! Don't make me post Dusk Ultra screenshots @ 8xAA + 8xAF! Oh, the GeForce 4200Ti does not support DX9 in hardware so no Dusk for you, Maxx77!
Last edited:
CyrylTheWolf
\/\/4ND3RING \/\/0LF
Don't feel like typin' much in this thread. So I'll offer this...
http://www.pcstats.com <-- My favorite tech reviews site. I rarely ever sign up for newsletters of any kind but I signed up for theirs. I suggest you do the same. They have GREAT and VERY informative, unbiased reviews. An excellent source of information.
http://www.pricewatch.com <-- Watch the prices as they change. It's a good way to find out what is working well for people and what isn't. If the price drops quickly either the company is coming out with new crap or users are hating the products. If the prices stay the same or drop slowly then the parts are getting good recommendations. Just watch this on the side.
All-in-all it seems like a decent system to build. Although think about your Athlon64 idea... We're not likely to see the 64-bit scene hit the mainstream for a few more years yet. For a damn decent CPU with an excellent price I suggest an AMD XP 2500+ or higher. (Look at the FSB speeds and the L2 cache sizes of them. Look for something in the 333-400 FSB range with a cache 384KB or higher. The XP 2500 is a unique chip in the XP series for it's cache.) Pay attenting to the cores.
Hope this helps.
http://www.pcstats.com <-- My favorite tech reviews site. I rarely ever sign up for newsletters of any kind but I signed up for theirs. I suggest you do the same. They have GREAT and VERY informative, unbiased reviews. An excellent source of information.
http://www.pricewatch.com <-- Watch the prices as they change. It's a good way to find out what is working well for people and what isn't. If the price drops quickly either the company is coming out with new crap or users are hating the products. If the prices stay the same or drop slowly then the parts are getting good recommendations. Just watch this on the side.
All-in-all it seems like a decent system to build. Although think about your Athlon64 idea... We're not likely to see the 64-bit scene hit the mainstream for a few more years yet. For a damn decent CPU with an excellent price I suggest an AMD XP 2500+ or higher. (Look at the FSB speeds and the L2 cache sizes of them. Look for something in the 333-400 FSB range with a cache 384KB or higher. The XP 2500 is a unique chip in the XP series for it's cache.) Pay attenting to the cores.
Hope this helps.
The Khan Artist
Warrior for God
Personally, I'd wait for about 6 months for AMD to make a few revisions to the 64-bit line, and then I'd go for an Athlon FX over an Athlon 64. Actually, if I had that kind of money, I'd go for a dual Opteron box, but that's because I do a lot of digital video encoding.