Radeon9800pro Vs Gforcefx?
<div class="IPBDescription">Witch is better?</div> Hello, i'm planing on building a new computer and i'v heard alot about the GforceFX and the Radeon9800Pro video cards but i can't seem to find any proof that one is clearly better then the other. Dose anyone know a site or have info about witch card i should get? I will be getting a AMD system if that helps.
Comments
We can argue which one is more powerful but we can't argue for your ears.
ati fanboys: 9800 pro
they're about equal imo with the 5800 slightly ahead
P.S. I heard ATi leaked HL2 so if they did then valve will most likely pull a id and goto nvidia
ati fanboys: 9800 pro
they're about equal imo with the 5800 slightly ahead
P.S. I heard ATi leaked HL2 so if they did then valve will most likely pull a id and goto nvidia <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
very true, nvidia forever, id wait out for the 5900 ultra though, we can only hope that valve does a ID and switch to nvidia, that would be great lol
On ATI drivers, go for Catalyst 3.1... the 3.2 and up drivers are more 'beta', but 3.1 runs next to flawlessly. The later revisions they tried to add in new stuff, instead of just fixing the existing bugs.
In either case, I'd go for the ATI both because they're going more toward an open standard rather than following in 3Dfx's footsteps with Cg, they don't require a NOISY cooling system to operate, and they stay nice and compact in their ONE allocated slot, rather than hanging over and taking up the one to two PCI slots beside them. They also don't have to resort to cheating to try and boost their benchmark scores (which is why nVidia is saying that the 5900 is faster.. they manually added clip-planes to the 3DMark2003 sequence. Not dynamically generated, HARD-CODED clip planes to tell the card what to render and what NOT to render so they could boost their performance in that ONE benchmark.. in truth the 5900 was only rendering approximately half to one-quarter of what the 9800 was handling.. and the 9800 STILL managed to do decently against it)
Sorry... nVidia currently seems to be going the way of 3Dfx in many things. Especially the rabid fanboys. Hopefully ATI will be more intelligent, and NOT buy them up when they hit bankrupt.
And it's odd... I've not even heard about a leaked copy of HL2 yet. Not even a single-path optimized demo.
You guys might like this: <a href='http://www.bjorn3d.com/files/nvidia/CoolingFan_FUN_small.wmv' target='_blank'>http://www.bjorn3d.com/files/nvidia/Coolin...n_FUN_small.wmv</a>
Glad to see nVidia knows how to make fun of themselves. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
On ATI drivers, go for Catalyst 3.1... the 3.2 and up drivers are more 'beta', but 3.1 runs next to flawlessly. The later revisions they tried to add in new stuff, instead of just fixing the existing bugs.
In either case, I'd go for the ATI both because they're going more toward an open standard rather than following in 3Dfx's footsteps with Cg, they don't require a NOISY cooling system to operate, and they stay nice and compact in their ONE allocated slot, rather than hanging over and taking up the one to two PCI slots beside them. They also don't have to resort to cheating to try and boost their benchmark scores (which is why nVidia is saying that the 5900 is faster.. they manually added clip-planes to the 3DMark2003 sequence. Not dynamically generated, HARD-CODED clip planes to tell the card what to render and what NOT to render so they could boost their performance in that ONE benchmark.. in truth the 5900 was only rendering approximately half to one-quarter of what the 9800 was handling.. and the 9800 STILL managed to do decently against it)
Sorry... nVidia currently seems to be going the way of 3Dfx in many things. Especially the rabid fanboys. Hopefully ATI will be more intelligent, and NOT buy them up when they hit bankrupt.
And it's odd... I've not even heard about a leaked copy of HL2 yet. Not even a single-path optimized demo. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Or you could spend $500 and watercool your card, and make it noiseless <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
overclock that beast!
<a href='http://www.tech-report.com/etc/2001q4/radeon-q3/index.x?pg=1' target='_blank'>http://www.tech-report.com/etc/2001q4/rade...q3/index.x?pg=1</a>
I'll be buying nVidia for my next box, personally. I've yet to hear anyone say that the cards that are actually on the market are any noisier than ATI's; the ones that everyone makes fun of never actually saw the light of day because nVidia has a decent quality control process. And in any case, I tend to play games with headphones on, so a little bit of noise from the fan firing up to do heavy-duty rendering... big deal.
I've already mentioned Dawn and the ogre in another thread. The bottom line for me is that nVidia seems to have a much better grasp of the fact that video cards are supposed to make pretty pictures, and as a consequence they actually spend time writing cute little demos that make pretty pictures. It gives me a great deal more confidence in them as a company.
Noise? The "dust buster" has been removed, and a larget heat sink installed.... it will probably be a little louder than a standard 5000rpm cpu fan. If you don't like it, get a 3rd party like the <a href='http://images2.newegg.com/productimage/14-122-171-03.JPG' target='_blank'>LeadTek</a> monster... the dust buster appears absent from that 5800 model.
As for an AGP+PCI slot..... Ummm who cares? My mobo has like 6 PCI and 1 agp slot, I'm using one for sound and one for a SPIDIF output... one slot isn't gonna hurt anything more for most people. If it does, then your computer as a whole proabably isn't ready for a more powerful card, upgrade the mobo first.
But wait. The 9800 performs better than the nVidia. So not only is it smaller, but it runs better too?! Well looky here. We've got a winner.
Anyway, more reading material for people who don't automatically associate themselves with a company brand name:
<a href='http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030512/index.html' target='_blank'>http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030...0512/index.html</a>
The Radeon 9800 Pro seems like a better deal, so I'll go for that.
Also note that the 5900 is only 'inaudible' in 2D mode. The 3D modes, they called the noise level 'acceptible'. The 9800 Pro stays at 'inaudible' _all_ the time.
by the way, i really don't like tom's (due to the sell-out effect).