What's new

Another dreaded video card thread.

blizz

New member
I'm all for a getting a new graphics card, I can't find a 9500 Pro for love nor money in the UK

so it seems that it's going to be a 9600 Pro (maybe an AIW). as long as it's got heat sinks on the ram chips this time...
 

jollyrancher

New member
Maybe everyone in this forum just wants to blow whatever money they have on $300 graphics cards.... and there's nothing wrong with that if that's what works for you.. it's just how many programs show a huge increase from a GF4 MX to a Radeon 9800.... I mean publishers are putting out these piddling games that work on a PII.... I mean name 5 games that don't work on a GF4 MX... like those are the only 5 games he has or something... you've seen these Doom 3 formus???? it apparantly runs amazing on a P4 with a GF2... So wait and see.... unless you want to flush that money down the drain like a freaking cockroach...
 

blizz

New member
I'm using an ATI Rage Fury Maxx, I need a decent graphics card! ;)

and yes 300 quid is too much for a card.
 
OP
Hexidecimal

Hexidecimal

Emutalk Bounty Hunter.
Yeah, well, i am mainly buying a new video card because 1) It's my birthday in about 3 weeks, and 2) this one is dying (one of the VGA Adapters died about a month ago, down to one monitor! *cries*) as for the 9500 Pro, i will agree, I like the looks of the card, and if it drops in proce a bit, I'll buy that, but I won't be able to con my parents into 200 dollars for a birthday present, and I refuse to ask for it for xmas, (i wants me a 12 string guitar) so it comes down mainly to price, i MIGHT be able to afford the 9500 Pro, should someone be overly generous with birthday money giving, but otherwise I'm gettiv the 9800SE, though now that you people have mentioned it, those 4 rendering pipelines are bugging me, *twitch*
 

vampireuk

Mr. Super Clever
jollyrancher said:
Maybe everyone in this forum just wants to blow whatever money they have on $300 graphics cards.... and there's nothing wrong with that if that's what works for you.. it's just how many programs show a huge increase from a GF4 MX to a Radeon 9800.... I mean publishers are putting out these piddling games that work on a PII.... I mean name 5 games that don't work on a GF4 MX... like those are the only 5 games he has or something... you've seen these Doom 3 formus???? it apparantly runs amazing on a P4 with a GF2... So wait and see.... unless you want to flush that money down the drain like a freaking cockroach...

What on earth are you rambling about? Care to try and play Unreal 2 at a playable rate with a GF2? ;)
 

AlphaWolf

I prey, not pray.
As a rule of thumb, never pay more than $200 for a video card.

$200 is usualy where the price/performance/longevity of the card are all in balance, plus, when you pay more than that, generaly you are paying for a card that is designed for games that aren't even out yet, and by the time they come out, that card drops below the $200 range.
 

vampireuk

Mr. Super Clever
That rule of thumb didn't really apply when I was buying, the 9700 Pro was the best card out and I wanted the best ;)

Hell it was still the best when NVIDIA released the NV30 :D
 

pj64er

PJ64 Lubba
can someone just clear this up...whats the order of Radeons 9x00's from good to bad? 8,7,5,6,2,1,0?
 

AlphaWolf

I prey, not pray.
vampireuk said:
That rule of thumb didn't really apply when I was buying, the 9700 Pro was the best card out and I wanted the best ;)

Hell it was still the best when NVIDIA released the NV30 :D

Well, when you pay $350 for a video card, then only 6 months later its down to $200, then your paying $25 a month to own a card that you technicaly can't even use.

If you buy a $200 card, and it lasts you two years (which they usualy last slightly longer than that for me), you are doing pretty good. In fact, on my last two cards, I have spent under $150, and both lasted about 30 months before I replaced them.

Just let me sum it up in another way: the best card isn't always the smartest.
 
Last edited:

blizz

New member
the 9600 is dx9 capable (wtf would be the point of releasing it if it wasn't?)

but it isn't as efficient as the 9500 was, problem was the 9500 cost a hell of a lot more to make so they jumped to 9600 earlier than expected.

anyway I've decided to preorder the "Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600XT 256MB DDR TV-Out/DVI & Half Life 2 Bundle - Retail (GX-040-SP)" comes out in november
 

pj64er

PJ64 Lubba
So speaking strictly from a performance point of view, the 9500 is better card as compared to 9600. Is there any more funky mix up amongst the 9200 - 9000?
 

Tagrineth

Dragony thingy
pj64er said:
So speaking strictly from a performance point of view, the 9500 is better card as compared to 9600. Is there any more funky mix up amongst the 9200 - 9000?

From the previous generation of ATi cores:

8500 -> 9100 -> 9000 -> 9200, from highest to lowest performance. Feature set is the same throughout, except TRUFORM not in 9000/9200.

Current generation - this time more in-depth:

9800 XT -> 9800 Pro -> 9800/9700 Pro -> 9700 -> 9500 Pro -> 9600 Pro -> 9600 -> 9500. I'm not sure offhand where the 9600XT fits in, I'd have to look it up... but IIRC it's probably level with the 9500 Pro except with heavy shaders.
 

FloW3184

Emu_and_Mobile_Freak
he should buy a radeon 9500 nonpro with 128MB of ram and the ram in L-Form on a red platine!
my brother has one and his system is a AMD Barton 2500+ ~2000Mhz with ASUS A7N8X and 512 MB PC 3200 DDR ram (400Mhz) and his system blows mine away! My 3Dmark03=4202 His 3DMark03=5595
(with a normal 9500 softmodded to 9700 Pro)without this softmod he gets only 3698Points.
 

Top