9800pro or fx50900

AndyH8 · Jun 23, 2003

I have the chance of either of these cards as in the uk they are a similar price.
Simple question, which one?
Radeon seems good at AA.
FX seems faster.
I have nvidia at present but wondered if ATI have the edge at present.
Your opinions would be welcome.
Thanks
Andy

funnyperson1 · Jun 23, 2003

If it is the 5900 Ultra, then get the 5900, if it is the plain 5900 then get the 9800Pro.

IR1 · Jun 23, 2003

9800 pro... period

with all of Nvidias cheats and crazy underhanded crap going on... I wouldnt trust to many of the website reviews of the 5900 ultra or non-ultra...since there so much Bs being un-earthed in Nvidias drivers. Check out the latest shadermark thing. The 5900 gets crippled...

But im sure it will still play games, 9800 256 seems most solid... better AA, better but not by as much, on the IQ.

fubulg6000 · Jun 24, 2003

Yours temps may jump seeing as how the nvidia card is a little big and uses that huge aluminum cooler. Then you have the smaller, yet as powerful, ati 9800. People like it, system temps dont go haywire with it. If it were me, i'd go ati 9800 all the way.

MadBlade · Jun 24, 2003

Focus out all the other posts listen to me grasshopper:

FX 5900 ULTRA (only the ultra) > ATI 9800 Pro

Just by a little though.

Here in the states these cards are about $150 USD apart thus making the 9800 pro the better choice, but you don't have that problem.

crotale · Jun 24, 2003

IR1 said:
9800 pro... period

with all of Nvidias cheats and crazy underhanded crap going on... I wouldnt trust to many of the website reviews of the 5900 ultra or non-ultra...since there so much Bs being un-earthed in Nvidias drivers. Check out the latest shadermark thing. The 5900 gets crippled...

But im sure it will still play games, 9800 256 seems most solid... better AA, better but not by as much, on the IQ.

All cheats!? I guess you should read about it a little...

Maybe you remember when ATI cheated some time back?

I don't see how you can defend the 9800 when the FX5900 wins 9 of 10 benches... That is performance wise...
Price wise, it's up to the person, and he said they were similar...

method().man · Jun 24, 2003

Save your money and wait. There is NO game on the market right now that needs 256 video RAM so you'll basically be wasting $100 right there. In fact, you're not gonna need that much video ram until Doom III, HL2, etc. come out, but by then, the 5900s and 9800s will have gone down in price and I'm almost positive both ATi and nVIdia will be unveiling new "must have" technologies on new cards. IMO, the 9800 and 5900s seem more of a stop gap to me rather than something that must be bought.

Unless money is no object to you or you simply live for benchmarks, I would save my money.

IR1 · Jun 24, 2003

quote:

Originally posted by IR1
9800 pro... period

with all of Nvidias cheats and crazy underhanded crap going on... I wouldnt trust to many of the website reviews of the 5900 ultra or non-ultra...since there so much Bs being un-earthed in Nvidias drivers. Check out the latest shadermark thing. The 5900 gets crippled...

But im sure it will still play games, 9800 256 seems most solid... better AA, better but not by as much, on the IQ.

Click to expand...

All cheats!? I guess you should read about it a little...

Maybe you remember when ATI cheated some time back?

I don't see how you can defend the 9800 when the FX5900 wins 9 of 10 benches... That is performance wise...
Price wise, it's up to the person, and he said they were similar...

I dunno what your asking when you say "ALL CHEATS??" Im not saying everything it does is a cheat. But there have been lots and lots of cheats/optimizations dug up and discovered and Nvidia ducking and blaming everyone else, they blame FRAPS, they blame Futuremark, for the problems. Its not made up its fact. 5900 wins 9 out of 10? UHHHH .. I need to read? here read this...

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_con...=fx5900u&page=1

Just check out some real game benchmarks... the 9800 pro 256 wins most of the time. Plus they use an EVGA 5900 ultra which are already overlcocked to 500mhz.

And yes... ATI did what can be considered a cheat. However many people dont understand what happened in the incident. Also since then ATI has been straightforward and honest unlike Nvidia who would rather spend time on driver cheats than making a quality video card.

However theres a good explanation here http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=33685988&highlight=quack

Plus ATI has better AA... the anistro is a bit better on the 5900.
However ATI's image quality is still second to none.

tjh566 · Jun 24, 2003

Well, im sticking with ATI for awhile, I like the rage3d tweak thing, it makes things easy to wrok with and i just like the performance of the ATI cards

IR1 · Jun 24, 2003

Yeah I love Rage3d Tweak. Also... Welcome to the Forums!

Dragonprince · Jun 24, 2003

I agree with IR1....the 9800 pro is cheaper (at least here in the US) and the review he linked was excellent. No BS synthetic benchmarks..just real games. The problem as I see it is nVidia has been spending too much time worrying about 3D Marks and Fraps and not enough time worrying about how there cards work under real games.

I bought the ATI 9500 (soft mod to 9700) a while back and it runs anything I have (and I have a lot of games!) with horsepower to spare even with 4x AA and 8X AF @ 1152x864 so the real issue is Image Quality and no one out there thinks that nVidia is better, so Id say the 9800 would get my money if I was buying.....

BigJk-47 · Jun 24, 2003

I'd get the 9700 pro when it comes down to about $200,card that plays anything lol.

When Doom 3 comes out the 3.0 ghz 800 FSB will be cheap,combine that with a 9700 pro and it will run ANY game .Heck,my 2500 XP and 9500 pro run anything i throw at it.

WayneDolesman · Jun 25, 2003

Actually, there's a game out that current hardware hasn't been able to 'max out' yet. Star Wars Galaxies. It automatically scales to your PC (in otherwords, you have very limited options in the graphics config). The devs have recently said that no system has come near maxing it out yet. They said it isn't possible with the current line of video cards out on the market. I believe them too. The game looks 100% better when I went from a GF4 to 9800 Pro. Then when I replaced my 2.4b with a [email protected], it looked even better - definately scaling up.

method().man · Jun 25, 2003

Spending 500 bucks for one game isn't something most people would or should do though

.

WayneDolesman · Jun 25, 2003

People tend to use a new game they're anticipating as an excuse to upgrade though. Happens all the time.

BigJk-47 · Jun 25, 2003

I usually try the demo first,i knew that it was time for an upgrade when black hawk down was giving me probs on my GF3 and so was UT2k3.My vid card will usually be the last thing I upgrade,if I can do cheaper ones or ones that will benefit me in the future more.

twenty6 · Jun 25, 2003

I'm in this situation right now. Most of the benchies I saw, 5900 Ultra lead 9800 by a good, I would say 5% - 10% or more. But 5900 is crap compared to 9800 Pro (128MB). Why is that? But on the other hand, on 9800 Pro, going from 128 to 256 doesnt make a big difference, thats if I read it correctly (dont remember where).

Price wise, if going from 128 to 256 on ATI doesnt make a huge difference, and 5900 Ultra does not justify the price even though it may or may have not outperform the 9800 Pro, the wise choice is 9800 Pro. Am I right?

Right now my money is on 128MB ATI 9800 Pro or SAPPHIRE 9800 Pro (not sure which one) unless somebody can convince me otherwise.

AndyH8 · Jun 25, 2003

My Card

I have the 9800pro now and the picture quality is better than any gforce card I have had which includes my gf4 4600ti.
great card, not spectacular increase in fps as I might expect but there is some and with the aa, af and res turned up, GREAT picture.
Andy

crotale · Jun 25, 2003

IR1 said:
All cheats!? I guess you should read about it a little...

Maybe you remember when ATI cheated some time back?

I don't see how you can defend the 9800 when the FX5900 wins 9 of 10 benches... That is performance wise...
Price wise, it's up to the person, and he said they were similar...

I dunno what your asking when you say "ALL CHEATS??" Im not saying everything it does is a cheat. But there have been lots and lots of cheats/optimizations dug up and discovered and Nvidia ducking and blaming everyone else, they blame FRAPS, they blame Futuremark, for the problems. Its not made up its fact. 5900 wins 9 out of 10? UHHHH .. I need to read? here read this...

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_con...=fx5900u&page=1

Just check out some real game benchmarks... the 9800 pro 256 wins most of the time. Plus they use an EVGA 5900 ultra which are already overlcocked to 500mhz.

And yes... ATI did what can be considered a cheat. However many people dont understand what happened in the incident. Also since then ATI has been straightforward and honest unlike Nvidia who would rather spend time on driver cheats than making a quality video card.

However theres a good explanation here http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=33685988&highlight=quack

Plus ATI has better AA... the anistro is a bit better on the 5900.
However ATI's image quality is still second to none. [/QUOTE]

I'm not gonna dig up more things about this "cheating", I guess you can see it diffrent ways.

So what do you call real benchmarks? I can give you a bunch of sites with the opposite results, which I find more reliable than the one you posted. Anandtech to bring up one...

Rage3D is an "ATI site", which I don't trust even a tiny bit...

pip · Jun 25, 2003

it sounds like this fx thing is some new chip from motorola

9800pro or fx50900

Registered

Senior Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Registered

Member

Member

Similar threads