|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Member (8 bit)
|
radeons better than geforces now?
i guess ive been out of touch for a while, i have a geforce 3 ti 500 now in a p3 733 with 512 ram..........building an amd 2700 with a7n8x deluxe board with 1 gig of 2700 kingston.......was just gonna swap the ti 500 into the new build, figured with all of the new speed it would be ok since its fine for gaming now.......i see everyone saying the radeons are the thing to get, i always liked geforces ........whats the deal?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Member (12 bit)
|
I guess it's kinda like the AMD v. Intel debate... You'll find loyal proponents on both sides. I like the fact that ATI spends so much time and effort upgrading their drivers to better their product. I think ATI cards may have a slight performance edge, but not really sure.
__________________
Kov Are You Foldin'? Join PCMech's Folding@Home Team and Help Save Lives! Click Here!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bakersfield,CA
Posts: 7,761
|
A lot of the benchmark site show the ATI cards to be better. I use them, and have used them for a long time, in all the biuilds that I have done since the GFOrce2 was first introduced. The reason for this is that ATI seems to keep a better handle on the quality of who builds cards based on their chips. NVidia on the other hand seems not to give a damn if someone uses their chip and builds a piece of junk, as long as the check has already cleared. ANd this means that there seems to be no fewer than a hundred unknown names advertising NVidia based cards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Member (12 bit)
|
Very true. You know you're getting a good quality ATI card from the few makers that produce them, like Sapphire and Powercolor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Red-eyed Moderator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Posts: 17,525
|
I've always felt that the Radeons had a better picture quality even when nVidia was the speed king.... but right now.. ATI has both, quality and speed.
__________________
-At Ford, quality is job #1, job #2 is making them explode. ~Norm MacDonald, SNL News -Switching to Glide..Balancing in my head..inside of me... taking the glide path instead. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Member (8 bit)
|
i was wondering why so many diff companys make a gforce chip card, makes it confusing to chose, i do however have a visiontek at this time.....i noticed alot of cheaper cards out there on pricewatch with no name brands........so think i should grab an ati card or think the ti 500 will do just fine on my build?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Member (12 bit)
|
Like morris said, nVidia doesn't seem to care who makes their cards, resulting in less than desirable quality. ATI is more strict because they want their cards to have a good reputation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Certified Audio Nut
|
The new Nvidia FX cards have been very poor performers especially in Direct X 9 games. They are also overpriced in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Member (2 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2
|
a test i seen showed radeaon to performe better at average res, but when res was push up along with fsaa or whatevr the geforce puleld ahaead. It seems geforce right now performs better at extreme graphics but radeaon performs better at average gamming at average settings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Certified Audio Nut
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Member (7 bit)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 73
|
i suggest u get a decent radeon card such as the Radeon 9600pro and get it from someone like gigabyte, ATI, Hurcules or Saphire they are the best makes. the Radeon 9600pro is around £140 but if you can get a radeon 9800pro for £300
-----The wiggster----- |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Member (8 bit)
|
i see an ati 9600 pro 128mb for $ 136 and an ati 9600 128mb for $87 on pricewatch from house of computers......whats the diff with the pro other than the price? i assume there must be
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Member (12 bit)
|
In a review of the nVidias, and pretests with HL2, it was shown that the nVidia's card could not really handle the game, because it was written for one format, that nVidia doesn't support...I can't remember exactly what it was. Yeah I suggest too, the 9600 Pro, if you are just doing a little bit of gaming. The Pro is a little bit faster, and it is a little bit better for gaming. Just go to google and search "9600 Pro reviews" or somethign to find some info on it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Member (12 bit)
|
I think the pro cards have faster memory, and in some cases more pipelines for channeling the graphics. They are more of a gaming card than the non-pro.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 36,460
|
Build with your GF3, and when you want better performance, look at the options at THAT time. The GF3 has some life left. If you buy a new card now, it's just gonna be more expensive than later - or obsolete earlier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Member (8 bit)
|
ah , thats what i wanted to hear glc
ty
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|