fx vs radeon

lilskitz69 · TweakNOOB Joined: 05 Oct 2003 Posts: 10

what u guys reckon are a better card... ge force fx's or radeons, this is based on most bang for ya buck...

Google · Sponsor

alexvdl · SirTweaksabit Joined: 05 Aug 2003 Posts: 311

Well since as of this VERY MOMENT only the FX 5900 is the only FX card really worth running... the 5200 and the 5600 aren'ts really DirectX 9 compliant cards. The Radeons are tending to kick ass all over the board. The current fastest 9800 XT kicks everything's ass and is really currently the performance champ at the moment. the 9600 gives GREAT performance for the money. Hell when the Xt version comes out for two hundred dollars you're picking up a car that's "on par" with the 9700 and comes with Half Life 2. That to me seems like a damn good bang for your buck scenario.
_________________
__________[(Crayola)]>_____________
Althon xp 2100+ @ 2100+, DFI LANParty nForceII Ultra Rev. B, 512 of Kingston, and an Evil Wizard Radeon 7500!

Roger · Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 9:06 am Post subject:

ATI all the way. without a doubt.
it's hard to gauge from the benchmarks sometimes, due to the fraudulent drivers used by both parties. however even once the hardware review community found out about this and found a way around it, ATI was still the clear winner. it offers a lot more for your money... and outperforms the geforce.
_________________
i'm the fool, he's the fanboy. together we are Fanboy and Fool... Tweaknews Reviewers

CooLJoE · Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2003 11:18 pm Post subject:

5900, 5600, and 5200 all have the same DirectX 9 abilities (which is close to none). I had a 5900 Ultra and sold it for an ATI 9800 Pro.

ATIs are the way to go. More specifically, get a 9800 Pro 128mb. They can be found for around $300 and perform the best (aside from the XT).

The XT is just a Pro with higher clock speeds and a different cooling setup. So skip the high-priced XT and get a Pro. 9800 Pro that is. 9600s are nice, but I wouldn't say they are the best bang for buck. 9800s will walk all over them and for only $100-150 more.
_________________
TestOC PC
P4 2.4C @ 3.29ghz, DFI LanParty 875Pro, 2 x 256mb PC3200 @ 367mhz, 40gb WD, 52x LiteOn CD-ROM

-verTo- · SirTweaksabit Joined: 29 Oct 2003 Posts: 271

ahem, after the nvidia forceware has came out, nvidia is almost in the directX9 race. As soon as they are fully compliant with dx9 they are going to actually be able to use their mad high clockfrequencies, and pass the radeons. Right now, the FX5950 is faster than the XT.. and the fx5900 non-ultra is as fast as the 9800 pro.. Yes, give nvidia some time w/ dx9 it will pay off. U have to remember, ATI has been working with dx9 alot longer than nvidia.

also radeon 9800 pro clock frequencies are much lower than a fx5900 nonultra

great card + GREAT OVERCLOCKing = leadtek winfast a350 fx5900 nonultra, performs only slightly lower than the ultra and only slightly lower than the 9800 pro, so slight that a mere overclock can surpass the 9800 pro/fx5900 ultra.

wurd2that
_________________
Aspire X-Alien 420W
ABIT IC7 875P
SP-94 w/ 64CFM
Pentium 4 2.6 @ 3.3 255FSB
Vcore:1.60 Vdimm:2.7
OCZ PC4200 Performance Series(2x256) 1:1
Maxtor 80gb SATA
Radeon 9800 Pro

Stock Video Card w/ OC proc:
3dmark03 - 5950
3dmark01 - 19593

[TN] Nathan · ALMIGHTY PWNER! Joined: 14 Feb 2002 Posts: 7406

you have some valid points but some of them are incorrect.

First, you cannot compare two company's different cores through clock frequency. Clock speed does not make one card faster than another. Only way you can compare core speeds is while using the same company's core.

Let's set up an example case:

Company X and Company Z

for example, the Company X core may be slower, but that does not mean that it doesn't put out more frames per second as a company Z based card at higher frequencies.

Some cores are more efficient at pumping out frames per second at a lower frequency because of core construction and better engineering.

Lately, Nvidia has been getting a lot of heat due to driver cheating and reducing video quality for speed without most users realizing it. It was not until a review site found just what was going on that they were exposed for lying, cheating and trying to cover it up.

I am sure your card is great and it does indeed sound awesome cause Leadtek makes some nice products, but because you like your card, I would not start talking about how Nvidia are going to win the speed race.

Right now their forceware in under the microscope seeing if they are cheating in their driver and yes, they still are sacrificing quality for speed which is just wrong and is only there to make the benchmarking look artificially higher.

This is why the market share has made a drastic shift to ATI. They make fast cards that people can trust, while Nvidia is playing catchup for screwing over their users by falsely making them think their cards were fast.
_________________
Owner & Administrator
www.Tweaknews.net
www.Pocketbookpinch.com

alexvdl · SirTweaksabit Joined: 05 Aug 2003 Posts: 311

Plus..........

He said that the FXs are ALMOST Dx9 compliant.

How long has ATI had Dx9 compliant?

SPend your money on products that work.
_________________
__________[(Crayola)]>_____________
Althon xp 2100+ @ 2100+, DFI LANParty nForceII Ultra Rev. B, 512 of Kingston, and an Evil Wizard Radeon 7500!

[TN] Nathan · ALMIGHTY PWNER! Joined: 14 Feb 2002 Posts: 7406

Alight Alexdl,

tone it down, I wasn't barking at him.

He just needs to be informed is all.
_________________
Owner & Administrator
www.Tweaknews.net
www.Pocketbookpinch.com

-verTo- · SirTweaksabit Joined: 29 Oct 2003 Posts: 271

yeah, they are both "FX compliant"...

only ATI has had more time to become 100% compliant while nvidia is 50%.

Yes, me and natedog argue over nvidia vs ati

but we both make some good points. Its always gonna be.. amd or intel.. ati or nvidia..... OR XGI volari duo v8 ultra or whatever.. it scores just as high as the FX's and 9800pro's in one category, then is WAY WAY low on another, they are very new to the game though, give em time and i think they will be a competitor as well.

http://www.xgitech.com/

anyway, im an intel/nvidia person. As of now, i do know that the athlon fx 51 is the leader, BUT the amd xp series is a waste.. being amd xp 3200 < pentium 4 2.6c.

Blah, g2g.. ill post more on this later

_________________
Aspire X-Alien 420W
ABIT IC7 875P
SP-94 w/ 64CFM
Pentium 4 2.6 @ 3.3 255FSB
Vcore:1.60 Vdimm:2.7
OCZ PC4200 Performance Series(2x256) 1:1
Maxtor 80gb SATA
Radeon 9800 Pro

Stock Video Card w/ OC proc:
3dmark03 - 5950
3dmark01 - 19593

canj · TweakNOOB Joined: 19 Nov 2003 Posts: 8 Location: NJ

ATI is probably the better buy in the end. there is like a new nV card like every month, supposably the best new card on the market. Like the FX5900, then they went to the FX5950, wtf is that? i mean, i would rather have something like, ATI RADEON eXtreme ediTion!! or something really eye catching. cause they obviously spent alot of time coming up witht he name. ATI also has better tech in my opinion, with the AA and whatnot, and since i dont think any gamer isnt gonna buy HL2,. ATI is basically the only acceptable card. for it.. : D
_________________
Epox 8rda+
AMD XP 2500+ Barton (2.3 GHZ, 415 bus)
768mb PC3200 DDR400
ATI Radeon 9600XT
Iceberg II water cooling

Maxsaint · Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2003 1:39 pm Post subject:

Need Help

well, i am thinking to but All in wonder 128 DDR 9600 pro and i was thinking that i get some opinion from u guyz that is it worth spending $ 210 bucks. and one more thing, about half-life 2, if i buy graphic card right now ( before HL 2 comes out) then am i going to get HL 2 later in mail or do i have to forget about it. cause it is a great bargain for 128 DDR video card + tv tunner and a free game.
my last question is for people who have used or seen this card running, i wanted to know that, Is TV tunner in this card has good resolusion or a bad reception. cause i am thinking of recording anime from Cartoon Network adult swim. i need help please let me know.

[TN] Nathan · ALMIGHTY PWNER! Joined: 14 Feb 2002 Posts: 7406

I have used the card and reviewed it on this website.

Did you read the Tweaknews.net review of it?

If not, here it is:

http://www.tweaknews.net/reviews/aiw9600pro/

Pricing is here:

http://tweaknews.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/masterid=1089875/prsrt=1/ut=42ba437708dcfc2f

It works flawlessly. I have never had a problem with this card and TV reception is excellent if the channel is clear. You can't expect it to be clear if the cable network you are on is bad or has some bad channels.

I love them. Best deal in Town.

The HL2 issue, when it is released, you can download it from the internet with the serial number you get with the card.
_________________
Owner & Administrator
www.Tweaknews.net
www.Pocketbookpinch.com

Maxsaint · Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2003 11:13 pm Post subject:

i also have read in review that this card doesnt support DVI so does that mean that i cant use my LCD monitor since it works on DVI. or is there is any solution for this too. if it is i am sure that i will by this card. and bu the way thanks for the help.

[TN] Nathan · ALMIGHTY PWNER! Joined: 14 Feb 2002 Posts: 7406

Most monitors that are DVI are also analog.

Yes, it only supports VGA but then again, you now have true dual display support.
_________________
Owner & Administrator
www.Tweaknews.net
www.Pocketbookpinch.com

Maxsaint · Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2003 11:21 pm Post subject:

So does that mean i am not going to able to run this video card on this monitor.
_________________
----------------------------------------
SOYO KT400 ULTRA DRAGON
AMD 2400+ (2.0 GHZ)
WESTERN DIGITAL 120 GB JB
1GB DDR 3200 Corsair RAM
ATI AIW 128MB 9600 XT VIDEO CARD
CREATIVE AUDIGY 2 ZS
KLIPSCH PRO MEDIA 5.1
DELL 2405 24"

JayDubya · Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 10:49 pm Post subject:

no, there are VGA - DVI converter connectors. i am looking at mine right now that i use for my dual monitor setup.
_________________
JayDubya aka JW Jay JD ^> ﺵ