Ti4200 128MB to 9600XT 128MB: good upgrade?

[Gooter]

It's time to upgrade my PC again. I got a few items for Xmas (board, CPU, memory) and now I need to decide what else to upgrade. I currently have the Nvidia GForce Ti4200 128MB Ram card and would like to convert to an ATI. The 9800's are out of my price range (around $200) so that leaves the 9600's.

Do you think upgrading to the 9600XT, either 128 or 256MB, is worth it or should I wait for the higher end cards to come down in price?

If so, which version (128 vs. 256) and what brand should I get?

Thanks!

 

[Th0r]

I would wait for higher end cards to come down in price... The 9900Pro etc will be out around Feburary... So wait until then...

 

[Overclocker550]

hes right, you have an excellent card that can wait a few years

 

[Dragonprince]

Id wait a couple more months too. The Radeon 9800 Pro should be around 200-250 dollars in a couple months. If you cant wait then the 9600XT is a fine card for the money.

 

[SpaceyWilly]

I got a 9600xt for XMas, upgraded from an 8500le, and I think it's more than worth the $150 I paid for it, especially considering you get HL2 for free, a game which Im sure I would've bought anyways.

It's up to you though; if you can stand waiting a couple months for prices to drop (I was waiting for 9700s to come down, but after the 9800xt came along and they were still out of my price range, I gave up) then by all means wait.

 

[Evnas]

hes right, you have an excellent card that can wait a few years

Months at most...not years. In "years" you wont be able to play ANY new games on it...not because of poor performance, but because DX 9 hardware will be required, just like DX 8 hardware is required for new games now.

 

[bafbrian]

The Ti4200 isn't a bad card. It all depends on the video games you plan on playing. Having the R9600XT just means that you won't have to worry about games that you want to play in the future. Having that card means that your choice is "future-proof".

I think I worded that badly.

 

[Overclocker550]

itll be a long time before games "require" dx9. dx8 has been out for several years(nearly three I think) and only a handful of games require it. theres alot of life yet in those geforce4's

 

[Evnas]

itll be a long time before games "require" dx9. dx8 has been out for several years(nearly three I think) and only a handful of games require it. theres alot of life yet in those geforce4's

It wont be as long as you think. DX 9 has already been out a year now, and it made it into the gaming scene faster then any previous version of DX. It used to be just the top of the line cards would have the latest support, but with DX 9 we have an entire line, from top end to low end, of DX 9 hardware for the first time ever (even the low end GF4 cards didnt support the latest at the time, which is part of the reason DX 8 took so long to take hold). Just months after the release of DX 9, we had games taking advantage of the hardware, whereas even UT2k3 hardly makes use of DX 8 with only minor use of pixel shaders, which offer no visual additions to the game, they are merely to add performance.

Most new games in the future will have no support for DX 7 hardware, and because of the rapid expanse of DX 9 into the hardware scene, and the rapid growth of DX 9 hardware in OEM machines, i wouldnt be surprised if you see DX 8 obliterated in 12 - 18 months

 

[SpaceyWilly]

It wont be as long as you think. DX 9 has already been out a year now, and it made it into the gaming scene faster then any previous version of DX. It used to be just the top of the line cards would have the latest support, but with DX 9 we have an entire line, from top end to low end, of DX 9 hardware for the first time ever (even the low end GF4 cards didnt support the latest at the time, which is part of the reason DX 8 took so long to take hold). Just months after the release of DX 9, we had games taking advantage of the hardware, whereas even UT2k3 hardly makes use of DX 8 with only minor use of pixel shaders, which offer no visual additions to the game, they are merely to add performance.

Most new games in the future will have no support for DX 7 hardware, and because of the rapid expanse of DX 9 into the hardware scene, and the rapid growth of DX 9 hardware in OEM machines, i wouldnt be surprised if you see DX 8 obliterated in 12 - 18 months

Yeah, I couldnt agree with ya more. If you look at today's cards, there are still some DX7 cards that will suit the casual gamer, but already ATI and NVidia are categorically phasing out their dx8 cards, replacing them with DX9 counterparts.

Back on topic, directx isnt the only reason you should upgrade your card, but when I look at my 9600xt's performance in 3dmark03 compared to my old 8500le, it's clear that the dx8 cards wont be able to keep up much longer. But this doesnt mean you need to upgrade now, just dont count on your card to last til the end of '04.

 

[Dragonprince]

itll be a long time before games "require" dx9. dx8 has been out for several years(nearly three I think) and only a handful of games require it. theres alot of life yet in those geforce4's

Agreed, but the handfull that use the latest pixel and vertex shaders ala DX9 look awesome. Switching from DX8 to DX9 shaders in Halo makes the game very nice.....

 

[Alacritan]

I upgraded from a GF3, that has more power than a GF4 4200, and let me tell you, it's a very noticable difference. By mid next year, you'll REALLY wish you had a DX9 card.

I got a 9600XT myself, and it was well worth it. Especially if you have any intention of playing Half Life 2. It's free with retail cards when it comes out. So knock $50 off the price if you were going to buy it anyway. I got my retail Powercolor card (that has 2.8ns RAM instead of the normal 3.3ns that most manufacturers use) for $175 and free shipping from Allstarshop.com. Just playing KOTOR it's great. The pixel shading is very cool. I didn't even know it was there. And DX9 benchmarks show that you will need a card that has DX9 support if you want to play games with those features (that are quite cool). If you overclock it, it beats out the 9700 too. I say go for it. The 9800 won't be dropping that much in price, even with the release of the 9900. It's a great deal if you get an ASUS or Powercolor card (they have faster memory). You won't regret it.

 

[Alacritan]

Dragonprince - do you have a fullsize version of your avatar? Or at least her name? Chicks in cowboy hats are hot. And her *** is great.

 

[Overclocker550]

hahaha you perv....

 

[Steven4563]

I upgraded from a GF3, that has more power than a GF4 4200,

how do u work that one out ??

 

[Overclocker550]

he musta meant "less" cause ti4200s own

 

[newg]

...notice any performance increases with a 128mb 4200 as opposed to a 64mb 4200?.................

 

[tom10167]

I *believe* that the 128meg 4200s were a waste, people were saying that the extra 64megs helped very little, if the price difference is <$20 then I'd do it, otherwise, nahh

 

[TheFrag]

hmmm well Im kind ain the same boat. Im switching from AMD to Intel and I was also planning on changing my vid card to a 9600xt. I guess I will just pay the small amount more and get a fx 5900

 

[tom10167]

5900 over the ATI? Uh- you may want to reconsider, considering the FX line< ATI's stuff today, I would advise against the 5900. P.S. From AMD to Intel??? haha, just kidding
P.P.S.
Nice signature, realultimatepower<all