No Bullshit! What GFX Card Should I buy?
Hey guys, I'm out to replace my Geforce 3 but I'm not really all that sure what to get I'm tempted by the FX 5900 Ultra (I want the best of the best) but then I see the Radeon 9800 performing the same in a majority of benchmarks.
This topic was started by Sparkesy,
Hey guys,
I'm out to replace my Geforce 3 but I'm not really all that sure what to get I'm tempted by the FX 5900 Ultra (I want the best of the best) but then I see the Radeon 9800 performing the same in a majority of benchmarks.
Please someone give me some sound advice!
and please I want honest opinions not ATI or nVidia just cos your a fan I want your opinion because you have seen the two in a system and think one is better because.......
Cheers,
I'm out to replace my Geforce 3 but I'm not really all that sure what to get I'm tempted by the FX 5900 Ultra (I want the best of the best) but then I see the Radeon 9800 performing the same in a majority of benchmarks.
Please someone give me some sound advice!
and please I want honest opinions not ATI or nVidia just cos your a fan I want your opinion because you have seen the two in a system and think one is better because.......
Cheers,
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
I had the pleasure to test both cards...
1. Without overclocking the FX 5900U is the faster card but by not much really.
2. After max overclock the Radeon 9800 Pro almost matches the FX 5900U speed. This after both card were overclocked to the max.
3. The Radeon does have better FSAA image quality. Also it does have better speed in some cases when using FSAA. Although ATI only does 6X FSAA and Nvidia up to 12X FSAA. Nothing would run at 12X FSAA though lol.
To sum it up is not possible to have the best of the best really. ATI has the lead in image quality and Nvidia in speed. However after testing both cards I would get the Radeon 9800 Pro now and get a Heatsink and fan replacement plus add some ram sinks and then overclock it to the max.
But I would get the 128MB version as the 256MB version is a little more expensive than the FX 5900U.
really the difference in speed would be 5-10% in most cases and the image quality is noticiable when using FSAA only but hey at 6X FSAA and 16X Anisotropic filtering things look pretty damn sweet. Of course for stuff to run smooth at these setting a good overclocking will help.
That's my point of view. I really like to tweak stuff. Overclocking is just sweet if done properly.
1. Without overclocking the FX 5900U is the faster card but by not much really.
2. After max overclock the Radeon 9800 Pro almost matches the FX 5900U speed. This after both card were overclocked to the max.
3. The Radeon does have better FSAA image quality. Also it does have better speed in some cases when using FSAA. Although ATI only does 6X FSAA and Nvidia up to 12X FSAA. Nothing would run at 12X FSAA though lol.
To sum it up is not possible to have the best of the best really. ATI has the lead in image quality and Nvidia in speed. However after testing both cards I would get the Radeon 9800 Pro now and get a Heatsink and fan replacement plus add some ram sinks and then overclock it to the max.
But I would get the 128MB version as the 256MB version is a little more expensive than the FX 5900U.
really the difference in speed would be 5-10% in most cases and the image quality is noticiable when using FSAA only but hey at 6X FSAA and 16X Anisotropic filtering things look pretty damn sweet. Of course for stuff to run smooth at these setting a good overclocking will help.
That's my point of view. I really like to tweak stuff. Overclocking is just sweet if done properly.
3. The Radeon does have better FSAA image quality. Also it does have better speed in some cases when using FSAA. Although ATI only does 6X FSAA and Nvidia up to 12X FSAA. Nothing would run at 12X FSAA though lol.
thats a lie.
Personally, Id go like this, the 9800 pro, isnt worth the money your better off with a 9700 pro, because the performance to price ratio is great.
The 5900ultra would be my first choice, although BOTH cards MAVE MINUTE DIFFERENCES in quality. Proven by MANY MANY MANY Benchmarks. (REAL GAME BENCHMARKS) That the 5900 at times has a higher quality rating and the 9800 pro card has a higher quality rating. So your not paying for quality anymore, scratch that off the market. Now your looking for speed right? Which im sure your interested in mostly, right? The 5900 performs higher with fsaa and AA on than the 9800 pro, if you have a bias because your trying to get some one to buy an ATI because you like one? then you can email me, ill show you benchmarks.
Personally, im interested in a entry level DX9 card, a 5600. But, I would buy a 5900 non ultra. But since you are interested in top end performance. The 5900ultra out performs the 9800pro is most tests.
I know alot of people whom own websites with benchmarks and sponsors. Take hardOCP for example. Both editors OWN 9800 pro cards. BUT purchased before the 5900's hit the market, both of these editors BOTH stated the 5900ultra outperforms the 9800 pro.
Having OWNED a 9800 pro and saying you have an "slower" (but not by alot) card is a BIG statement.
PERSONALLY I WOULD BUY BOTH OF THESE CARDS BECAUSE THEY PERFORM OUTSTANDINGLY AND ARE BOTH TOP OF THE LINE!
My favorite manufacturer is MSI, so I am going to have to go with a 5900U because they do not make ATI cards.
thats a lie.
Personally, Id go like this, the 9800 pro, isnt worth the money your better off with a 9700 pro, because the performance to price ratio is great.
The 5900ultra would be my first choice, although BOTH cards MAVE MINUTE DIFFERENCES in quality. Proven by MANY MANY MANY Benchmarks. (REAL GAME BENCHMARKS) That the 5900 at times has a higher quality rating and the 9800 pro card has a higher quality rating. So your not paying for quality anymore, scratch that off the market. Now your looking for speed right? Which im sure your interested in mostly, right? The 5900 performs higher with fsaa and AA on than the 9800 pro, if you have a bias because your trying to get some one to buy an ATI because you like one? then you can email me, ill show you benchmarks.
Personally, im interested in a entry level DX9 card, a 5600. But, I would buy a 5900 non ultra. But since you are interested in top end performance. The 5900ultra out performs the 9800pro is most tests.
I know alot of people whom own websites with benchmarks and sponsors. Take hardOCP for example. Both editors OWN 9800 pro cards. BUT purchased before the 5900's hit the market, both of these editors BOTH stated the 5900ultra outperforms the 9800 pro.
Having OWNED a 9800 pro and saying you have an "slower" (but not by alot) card is a BIG statement.
PERSONALLY I WOULD BUY BOTH OF THESE CARDS BECAUSE THEY PERFORM OUTSTANDINGLY AND ARE BOTH TOP OF THE LINE!
My favorite manufacturer is MSI, so I am going to have to go with a 5900U because they do not make ATI cards.
OK over at http://www.custompc.co.uk they have a 5 FX 5900's vs 5 9800's. Its really worth a read if u get time. They dont rate the 5900 ULtra very highly but I personally think its a nice card. If u cant find it, I'll scan the magazine article and post it for you!
in light of the latest test in DX9 games like Tombraider AOC wich shows that the FX line has HUGE shortcommings in pixelshader 2.0, which is going to be an important part of tomorrows game - and tomorrow is already beginning with games like Half-Life 2 and Tombraider AOC. I wouldnt get a FX for anything in the world. - it might run doom 3 faster than ati, but it fails utterly when it comes to newer tech than the dx7-8 (opengl version ofcourse) combo doom3 uses.
go ati (or gf4 untill nvidia comes up with something that havent got broken pixelshaders)
go ati (or gf4 untill nvidia comes up with something that havent got broken pixelshaders)
Actually if you read my sig I do own a 5900U. The Gainward FX 5900 Ultra.
Both overclocked to the max perform almost the same. The FX is a bit faster and yeah the Radeon does have better image quality like it or not. Is actually noticeable when I tried 1964 Nintendo 64 emulator for example at 1280x960 32-bit, 6X FSAA and 16X Anisotropic filtering in OpenGL.
With the FX at the same settings well the FX 6X FSAA is not match. It has to be 8XS FSAA to actually match it and is pretty slow compared to ATI's 6X FSAA.
My bro owns a Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB and I'm running it on my system right now since I wanted to test it.
Read a few ATI vs Nvidia reviews and you'll see the scores are not that far apart and that ATI has the lead in image quality.
I said after testing both cards I would go for the Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB version since.
1. Is what $200CAD cheaper?
2. Better image quality
3. Not far behind the FX 5900U performance.
Of course there is no garantee that your video card will overclock as good as mine.
I do have good air cooling plus air conditioning.
some articles worth reading:
http://www.ocaddiction.com/articles/video/...radeon_9800pro/
http://www.hothardware.com/hh_files/S&V/r9...fx5900upd.shtml
http://www.hardavenue.com/reviews/5900u9800p.shtml
http://www.digital-daily.com/video/fx5900-vs-radeon9800pro/
Both overclocked to the max perform almost the same. The FX is a bit faster and yeah the Radeon does have better image quality like it or not. Is actually noticeable when I tried 1964 Nintendo 64 emulator for example at 1280x960 32-bit, 6X FSAA and 16X Anisotropic filtering in OpenGL.
With the FX at the same settings well the FX 6X FSAA is not match. It has to be 8XS FSAA to actually match it and is pretty slow compared to ATI's 6X FSAA.
My bro owns a Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB and I'm running it on my system right now since I wanted to test it.
Read a few ATI vs Nvidia reviews and you'll see the scores are not that far apart and that ATI has the lead in image quality.
I said after testing both cards I would go for the Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB version since.
1. Is what $200CAD cheaper?
2. Better image quality
3. Not far behind the FX 5900U performance.
Of course there is no garantee that your video card will overclock as good as mine.
I do have good air cooling plus air conditioning.
some articles worth reading:
http://www.ocaddiction.com/articles/video/...radeon_9800pro/
http://www.hothardware.com/hh_files/S&V/r9...fx5900upd.shtml
http://www.hardavenue.com/reviews/5900u9800p.shtml
http://www.digital-daily.com/video/fx5900-vs-radeon9800pro/
Nobody talked about drivers?
I own a 9700 Pro and I must say I hated it at the start. It took me about a week to get it working as it should (And seen the frame rates others get with the same card it still isn't working as fast as I think it should)
However I must say I loved the NVidia drivers. There isn't a single game I can think of that didn't function properly with NVidia drivers.
However with ATi's catalyst drivers I must say that a few games such as Half Life didn't function well at all, (Hell even Raven Shield showed artifacts and crashed repeatedly) even though I was very satisfied with the rest of the "newer" games.
All in all its your call really. If you want my advice get the cheaper card since they perform about the same. But remember that drivers are half of what you pay for in a Graphics card. If you can test these cards before buying so much the better. :P
I own a 9700 Pro and I must say I hated it at the start. It took me about a week to get it working as it should (And seen the frame rates others get with the same card it still isn't working as fast as I think it should)
However I must say I loved the NVidia drivers. There isn't a single game I can think of that didn't function properly with NVidia drivers.
However with ATi's catalyst drivers I must say that a few games such as Half Life didn't function well at all, (Hell even Raven Shield showed artifacts and crashed repeatedly) even though I was very satisfied with the rest of the "newer" games.
All in all its your call really. If you want my advice get the cheaper card since they perform about the same. But remember that drivers are half of what you pay for in a Graphics card. If you can test these cards before buying so much the better. :P
If you really really want a high end card i have another suggestion. WAIT until the next radeon cause i heard it is bundle with Half-life 2. That is the game everyone wants to have. If only you can hold the breath, you will surely get the most out of your budget. . Nvidia can't come out with another card sooner (i think) cause they have just introduce their FX 5900 ultra which is months slower then the ATI Radeon 9800. So by the time ATI released new card Nvidia can't deliver the card in the short period after introducing the FX 5900 ultra. Cause that will make the coustomers complain.
Im darn glad i made the choice of this Asus v9950....it's not the Ultra version and the reason I didnt make that choice was easy.....you dont need one...the 128 meg card performs the same........the only difference is 50 mhz in engine core and 128 megs of Ram you dont need right now anyways.The card overclocks like a dream and stays very cool when put to the nuts in crunching out the data.
I tried Spinter Cell the demo yesterday and was astounded at the graphics ..........someplace I read in doing my research before I bought the card was that it ran this game absolutely the pits....I dont know who wrote that in thier review of this card but he needs his head examined.....it's awesome!!!!
As is anything else i've thrown at this card in the past week........so as I said in the beginning...i'm very very glad i bought this one....I cant wait till the the new EA Hockey sim comes out in a few weeks.
Rally Trophy never has looked better......Nascar Racing 2003 Season runs like a charm.........GET THIS CARD!!!!!!!
Also I prefer OpenGL to D3D anyday of the week and this card runs OPenGL just fabulously as Ive read and heard in some posts and reviews that ATI doesnt.....at least in the benchmarks anyways.
bottom line......it's your choice what you get but I do give the 5900 fx it's due not just because i own one now but that it's exceeded my expectations so far and defeated any of the crap i've had to read from all those ATI cyberpunks about how bad this card is.....it's all garbage talk from those "Objective" individuals and if you have to like i did....just ignore them...it's all thier self-ego pumpin testosterone talking.
have fun!!
I tried Spinter Cell the demo yesterday and was astounded at the graphics ..........someplace I read in doing my research before I bought the card was that it ran this game absolutely the pits....I dont know who wrote that in thier review of this card but he needs his head examined.....it's awesome!!!!
As is anything else i've thrown at this card in the past week........so as I said in the beginning...i'm very very glad i bought this one....I cant wait till the the new EA Hockey sim comes out in a few weeks.
Rally Trophy never has looked better......Nascar Racing 2003 Season runs like a charm.........GET THIS CARD!!!!!!!
Also I prefer OpenGL to D3D anyday of the week and this card runs OPenGL just fabulously as Ive read and heard in some posts and reviews that ATI doesnt.....at least in the benchmarks anyways.
bottom line......it's your choice what you get but I do give the 5900 fx it's due not just because i own one now but that it's exceeded my expectations so far and defeated any of the crap i've had to read from all those ATI cyberpunks about how bad this card is.....it's all garbage talk from those "Objective" individuals and if you have to like i did....just ignore them...it's all thier self-ego pumpin testosterone talking.
have fun!!
Beep the reason you say it performs the same is maybe because you haven't "thrown" anything heavy at it. Splinter cell runs like "a dream" on a ti4600...
And the other 3 games well... you didn't need to use a 5900 for that :P
And the other 3 games well... you didn't need to use a 5900 for that :P
Have you guys completely MISSED the whole Pixel Shader 2.0 problem with the NVIDIA cards??? What ever you do... DO NOT buy a NVIDIA. Go over to http://www.hardforum.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=3 and read all the peoples advice and LINKS.. You WONT regret it!
Have you guys completely MISSED the whole Pixel Shader 2.0 problem with the NVIDIA cards??? What ever you do... DO NOT buy a NVIDIA. Go over to http://www.hardforum.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=3 and read all the peoples advice and LINKS.. You WONT regret it!
Dont Hate
Dont hate??? Who? NVIDIA?? I don't I LOVE NVIDIA if only thy had PS 2.0 FULLY working I would be buying a 5900 RIGHT NOW. I have had a GeForce 256, A GeForce 2 MX (Forgive me... i was young), GeForce 3 Ti 500 and my last card an Albatron GeForce 4 4200P TURBO... ALL of which have ceased to amaze me at how good they performed...
However the FX range made me think again! The PS 2.0 performance SERIOUSLY shoved a LOT of enthusiast PC gamers off to ATI...
For example HL2 is being developed by VALVE in conjunction ATI... Gabe Newell has publicly said that he was also a long tiem NV fan.. However now BOTH his home computers are running on Radeon 9800 PRO 128MB's... and that HL2's results were "consistant" with the results shown at Beyond3D (which showed the FX's trailing)...
Also price performance wise the 9800 PRO is STILL probably the better option than the 5900... And it is also true that ATI is a bigger company with more staff worldwide, and that the driver releases are getting better and better with each release.. (each month ISH)
So THAT is why NV cards shouldn't be bought at the moment! I dont mean to be insulting.. And I do feel sorry for all the FX card owner's out there since I know that the recent news can ONLY be taken badly..
However the FX range made me think again! The PS 2.0 performance SERIOUSLY shoved a LOT of enthusiast PC gamers off to ATI...
For example HL2 is being developed by VALVE in conjunction ATI... Gabe Newell has publicly said that he was also a long tiem NV fan.. However now BOTH his home computers are running on Radeon 9800 PRO 128MB's... and that HL2's results were "consistant" with the results shown at Beyond3D (which showed the FX's trailing)...
Also price performance wise the 9800 PRO is STILL probably the better option than the 5900... And it is also true that ATI is a bigger company with more staff worldwide, and that the driver releases are getting better and better with each release.. (each month ISH)
So THAT is why NV cards shouldn't be bought at the moment! I dont mean to be insulting.. And I do feel sorry for all the FX card owner's out there since I know that the recent news can ONLY be taken badly..
IT runs anything quite well....UNLIKE a radeon which suffers in OPENGL performance.
Why buy a card that only runs one platform well?......
I rather prefer OpenGL over d3d.For that matter I rather prefer a card that's an all round better performer.
Poor Global doesnt keep up on his tech news also......seems he hasnt heard that the owners of Ati are currently getting ready to go to court over the fact they got caught trying to manipulate the stock market thru inside trading.Using your same logic it appears you shot a hole so BIG in your foot the next time you go for a walk it had better be to a hospital.
(just teasin...hehheh)
ALso...what makes you think that they cant get this pixel shader thing working properly?I myself am glad Nvidia got itself out of the DX9/Microsoft development program.....at least they get to keep the rights to thier work on any development that the future brings unlike it appears Ati does.I'd rather have a video card company own it's stuff than give it away to a company like MIcrosoft .
Why buy a card that only runs one platform well?......
I rather prefer OpenGL over d3d.For that matter I rather prefer a card that's an all round better performer.
Poor Global doesnt keep up on his tech news also......seems he hasnt heard that the owners of Ati are currently getting ready to go to court over the fact they got caught trying to manipulate the stock market thru inside trading.Using your same logic it appears you shot a hole so BIG in your foot the next time you go for a walk it had better be to a hospital.
(just teasin...hehheh)
ALso...what makes you think that they cant get this pixel shader thing working properly?I myself am glad Nvidia got itself out of the DX9/Microsoft development program.....at least they get to keep the rights to thier work on any development that the future brings unlike it appears Ati does.I'd rather have a video card company own it's stuff than give it away to a company like MIcrosoft .
well my problems are over now guys.
I dunno if any of you saw my post in another topic but I had a great deal on a 5600 so I got it but ended up taking it back as my geforce 3 out performed it in many respecits and i didn't think spending £80 was worth it only to get poorer performance in directx 7, 8 and just get marginal increase in performance in directx 9.
So..... I found somwhere that did a great deal on a Gainward FX Powerpack 5800 Ultra. I got the pack for £190 and have sold the firewire and sound card that came in it for £70.....
Not bad I realise that the NV30 is a bit slow in some respects but I've manged to get something that outperformes anything ATI can offer at the £100 - £150 price range.
I dunno if any of you saw my post in another topic but I had a great deal on a 5600 so I got it but ended up taking it back as my geforce 3 out performed it in many respecits and i didn't think spending £80 was worth it only to get poorer performance in directx 7, 8 and just get marginal increase in performance in directx 9.
So..... I found somwhere that did a great deal on a Gainward FX Powerpack 5800 Ultra. I got the pack for £190 and have sold the firewire and sound card that came in it for £70.....
Not bad I realise that the NV30 is a bit slow in some respects but I've manged to get something that outperformes anything ATI can offer at the £100 - £150 price range.
