ati or nvidia??

how do the cards compare i mean as

7500, 8500le,8500pro,9000le,9700 pros

to
nvidia's
gf2, gf3 and tis, gf4 and tis.
just wanted to know so i can find out how much more value i can get for the cards the ati seems to be a heck of a lot cheaper.

cards

GF2, GF4MX are DirectX 7 cards. The Radeon 7500 is also although it does feature a small bit of Direct X 8. The upper model GF2's and GF4 Mx's are generally a little bit faster than a 7500.

GF3, GF4 Ti, 8500, 9000, are Direct X 8 cards. The Radeon 9000 pro is the best value card in this category, but GF3 Ti's and 8500's are a little bit better and only a few dollars more. GF4 Ti's are the king of this category.

The Radeon 9700 is a Direct X 9 card and it is also AGP 8x capable (if you get one with the correct bios). It is the best card out at the moment.

The two most important factors would be how much do you want to spend and what will you use it for.

mad gaming is wat i want to use it for. i'm deciding if the extra 100 aussie is worth it for going from 8500 pro to a gf4 ti4200

is the 9000 128meg le versions any good? its selling for 220 aussie wat is that compared to? price wise it equal to a gf3 ti200 is it better or worst then the gf3?

9000 vs Ti200

I have a 2100+ at home with a Ti200 & W2k. I have a 2100+ at the office with a 9000 Pro & W2k.

I consider the boards to be equivalent, speedwise. At stock speeds I get similar 3DMark 2001 score ranges (7000 to 7500).

If I were to buy another today I'd get the 9000 Pro. If for no other reason than because it plays the new UT 2003 Demo better. The anistrophic at 16x does not impact the 9000's speed by more than 10% and the picture is just plain better.

I play UT2003 at 1024 with high settings with no problem at all. At 1280 I occasionally get a frame-rate problem (short-term).

Hope that helps.