also @ TechSpot: Dell announces trio of all-in-one desktops, challenges 27-inch iMac

TechSpot

ATI Radeon 9800 XT or Geforce FX 5950 ultra?

Discussion in 'Audio and Video' started by a_bit, Jan 13, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

  1. a_bit Newcomer, in training

    opinions, and why?

    Cheers
    a_bit, Jan 13, 2004
    #1

  2. iss TechSpot Chancellor

    if you plan on playing DX9 games go with the one that the DX9 capabilities work on which would be the radeon.
    iss, Jan 13, 2004
    #2

  3. a_bit Newcomer, in training

    im pretty sure they both have dx9 capabilities. I'd hope they would for $3-400
    a_bit, Jan 13, 2004
    #3

  4. iss TechSpot Chancellor

    Nvidia's DX9 capabilities are seriously flawed and have been since the 5800. it will probably be NV40 before Nvidia fixes this.
    iss, Jan 13, 2004
    #4

  5. iss TechSpot Chancellor

    I just saw a report that says that Nvidia has taped out the NV40 at the end of december so if you really have your heart set on a Nvidia card I would wait another month or two and get a card based on the NV40 chip.
    iss, Jan 13, 2004
    #5

  6. MrGaribaldi TechSpot Ambassador

    And from what I've read, I'm afraid you'll have to wait around 6 months before you can get any of those (the chips which taped-out in dec)...

    There will be other NV40's along sooner, but the scuttlebutt says that Nvidia'll only have around 500 ready for CeBit, which again means a longer wait...


    What I'm trying to say is that if you want to buy a NV40 based card, be prepared to wait a while... (end march?)


    When it comes to how good each (current) card is with DX9, do a search...
    We've been over it before... But in short, the FX has very limited capabilities compared to the Radeon, when you factor in the speed with which the features is used....
    MrGaribaldi, Jan 14, 2004
    #6

  7. tripleione Newcomer, in training

    Is there any real reason why you would need to get a GeForceFX 5950 or a Radeon 9800XT?

    Either of the card's cheaper variants (Radeon 9800/Pro; GeForceFX 5900/Ultra) would surely give you the performance that you need for just about any application or game available today.
    tripleione, Jan 14, 2004
    #7

  8. cslord15 Newcomer, in training

    If you're willing to shell out the cash, definitely go for the 9800 XT. As ISS said, the newer nVidia chipsets have been seriously flawed. Plus, many companies releasing high-end games (ie. Valve/Vivendi for Half-Life 2) have specifically chosen the Radeon series (9700/9800).
    cslord15, Jan 14, 2004
    #8

  9. somekid007 Newcomer, in training

    preliminary tests show that fx cards are wayyyyyy ahead in doom 3 benchies. so if you want to play doom 3 more than hl2, get the 5950 ultra
    somekid007, Jan 14, 2004
    #9

  10. somekid007 Newcomer, in training

    somekid007, Jan 14, 2004
    #10

  11. ---agissi--- TechSpot Paladin

    Personally I'd get the 9800XT. the FX card's FPS drop like a brink in the HL2 benchies, and still pull well in doom3. 9800XT
    ---agissi---, Jan 14, 2004
    #11

  12. Nic TechSpot Paladin

    That doom 3 test was from May 2003, and was before any DX9 tests were run. It does not represent the current situation and is both misleading and inaccurate. It covers Catalyst 3.4 and Detonator 44.03. The Catalyst drivers were later fixed.
    Nic, Jan 14, 2004
    #12

  13. SubKamran Newcomer, in training

    ATI hands down.

    Must I keep repeating this? FOR NEW GAMES, ATI IS WINNING. I'm not a fanboy, this comes from a year of researching a new computer. nvidia just isn't offering FULL DX9. They say they do, but the image quality for ATI is the best.

    Also, in Half-Life 2, VALVe stated that nvidia cards will get degraded quality because they don't have the full DX9 feature set like ATI cards do.

    Nvidia fans can say what they like, but there's no denying that the ATI cards are already ready for the DX9 games.
    SubKamran, Jan 15, 2004
    #13
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.