Printable View
Im building a system for a friend and was wondering which one was better. When I look on Tigerdirect.com the clock speeds and memory speeds look better for the 5700 Ultra. I dont know a TON about graphics cards...so which one do you think?
Thanks for your help!!!
w/ the money of the 5700ultra, use it on a 5900 non ultra. ive heard positvie feedbacks from it. and why would you want to buy at tigerdirect? the price, i think, is a little high. and shipping is screw up too.... a cable which cost 99 cents, cost 10 dollars to ship ;)
go to newegg and see if you can find ne better deals
with that money, go to a reseller or ebay and get urself a radeon 9500 pro. if u can't then stick with the ati. i heard the 9600 pro is better than the 5700. although, i might be wrong. i know the 5700 is a very strong card.
u decide... <_< :rolleyes:
Yeah im using newegg, Its just very organized on Tigerdirect so I can see the speeds faster. The 5700 Ultra cost around $200. The 5900 non ultra cost like $250 or $300.
Yeah, I mean just looking at the speeds the Nvidia looks faster. What is so good about a 9500 PRO??? Isnt it the 8 Pipelines that makes it equvilent to a 9800 Pro or something? I dont think he would go for a card off of ebay newayz.
is it just me???...?....??...?
http://www.chinkii.com/uploads/album/cars/vidcard.JPG
:lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally posted by TheFilePirater@5 December 2003 - 23:48
is it just me???...?....??...?
http://www.chinkii.com/uploads/album/cars/vidcard.JPG
yep. the graphx card has gotten too important
thats why yalls should have posted ur issues in my semi-designated topic
the 9500pro is the equiv to a 9600xt
the 5700ultra is the equiv to a 9600xt
for 200, a 9500pro, 9600xt, or a 57ooultra
for 300, a 9700pro, a 9800 regular, or a noisy 5900 regular
for 400, 9800pro, 5900ultra
for 500, a 9800xt or a 5950 ultra
noisy, but VERY good:
5800 for 300 on ebay (maybe 400 as it is not being made)
the 5800 has the performance equiv to a 5900 ultra
i say 5700pro, as it has the patented 2xq antialiasing, which is close to 4xfsaa, but is as fast as 2x
actually, thats on all nvidia cards
i say 9500pro, 9600xt or 9800 xt or 9700pro. cuz the 9700pro is the same as 9800 pro, but so much cheaper. almost same performanceQuote:
Originally posted by atiVidia@5 December 2003 - 23:58
thats why yalls should have posted ur issues in my semi-designated topic
the 9500pro is the equiv to a 9600xt
the 5700ultra is the equiv to a 9600xt
for 200, a 9500pro, 9600xt, or a 57ooultra
for 300, a 9700pro, a 9800 regular, or a noisy 5900 regular
for 400, 9800pro, 5900ultra
for 500, a 9800xt or a 5950 ultra
noisy, but VERY good:
5800 for 300 on ebay (maybe 400 as it is not being made)
the 5800 has the performance equiv to a 5900 ultra
i say 5700pro, as it has the patented 2xq antialiasing, which is close to 4xfsaa, but is as fast as 2x
actually, thats on all nvidia cards
If you guys have done any reading you would read the same thing over and over again. Every review draws the same conclusion. It does not matter which one you read it seems as there is no argument.
Yes, the 5700 ultra is a very powerful graphics chip. However, it is not optimized for DirectX9. Even though the core and memory for the geforce 5700 ultra are clocked far higher than the Radeon series 9600 pro and 9600 XT, and even though the 5700 ultra kicks ass in some benchmarks, it would do you well to read between the lines and see that the only benchmarks where the 5700 ultra (for that matter all of Nvidia's cards) fares well are the ones with little or no AA or AF.
In comparison to the Radeon 9X00 series, once eye candy is turned on (which is what gaming is all about) the 5700 ultra and all Nvidia cards totally suck ass compared to the lower clocked Radeons.
Personally, computer gaming I like to be as convincing an alternate reality as possible. And ATI makes that a reality. I am sorry Nvidia. Maybe you have a shot to redeem yourself in Direct X 10?
nicely said. in other words, ati rules! it's true. the only reason i got my gfx was cuz it's cheap. then i got the ati, and i'm happy. btw, do u think 20808 is a good aquamark3 score for my rig, adamp2p?Quote:
Originally posted by adamp2p@6 December 2003 - 00:38
If you guys have done any reading you would read the same thing over and over again. Every review draws the same conclusion. It does not matter which one you read it seems as there is no argument.
Yes, the 5700 ultra is a very powerful graphics chip. However, it is not optimized for DirectX9. Even though the core and memory for the geforce 5700 ultra are clocked far higher than the Radeon series 9600 pro and 9600 XT, and even though the 5700 ultra kicks ass in some benchmarks, it would do you well to read between the lines and see that the only benchmarks where the 5700 ultra (for that matter all of Nvidia's cards) fares well are the ones with little or no AA or AF.
In comparison to the Radeon 9X00 series, once eye candy is turned on (which is what gaming is all about) the 5700 ultra and all Nvidia cards totally suck ass compared to the lower clocked Radeons.
Personally, computer gaming I like to be as convincing an alternate reality as possible. And ATI makes that a reality. I am sorry Nvidia. Maybe you have a shot to redeem yourself in Direct X 10?
nicely said. in other words, ati rules! it's true. the only reason i got my gfx was cuz it's cheap. then i got the ati, and i'm happy. btw, do u think 20808 is a good aquamark3 score for my rig, adamp? [/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by abu_has_the_power+6 December 2003 - 06:42--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (abu_has_the_power @ 6 December 2003 - 06:42)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-adamp2p@6 December 2003 - 00:38
If you guys have done any reading you would read the same thing over and over again. Every review draws the same conclusion. It does not matter which one you read it seems as there is no argument.
Yes, the 5700 ultra is a very powerful graphics chip. However, it is not optimized for DirectX9. Even though the core and memory for the geforce 5700 ultra are clocked far higher than the Radeon series 9600 pro and 9600 XT, and even though the 5700 ultra kicks ass in some benchmarks, it would do you well to read between the lines and see that the only benchmarks where the 5700 ultra (for that matter all of Nvidia's cards) fares well are the ones with little or no AA or AF.
In comparison to the Radeon 9X00 series, once eye candy is turned on (which is what gaming is all about) the 5700 ultra and all Nvidia cards totally suck ass compared to the lower clocked Radeons.
Personally, computer gaming I like to be as convincing an alternate reality as possible. And ATI makes that a reality. I am sorry Nvidia. Maybe you have a shot to redeem yourself in Direct X 10?
You should be able to get 30,000 abu. Can you overclock to the speeds of 9600 pro?
if you can you should be able to get at least 25,000 with the free test.
You should be able to get 30,000 abu. Can you overclock to the speeds of 9600 pro?Quote:
Originally posted by adamp2p+6 December 2003 - 00:45--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (adamp2p @ 6 December 2003 - 00:45)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Quote:
Originally posted by abu_has_the_power@6 December 2003 - 06:42
<!--QuoteBegin-adamp2p
Quote:
@6 December 2003 - 00:38
If you guys have done any reading you would read the same thing over and over again. Every review draws the same conclusion. It does not matter which one you read it seems as there is no argument.
Yes, the 5700 ultra is a very powerful graphics chip. However, it is not optimized for DirectX9. Even though the core and memory for the geforce 5700 ultra are clocked far higher than the Radeon series 9600 pro and 9600 XT, and even though the 5700 ultra kicks ass in some benchmarks, it would do you well to read between the lines and see that the only benchmarks where the 5700 ultra (for that matter all of Nvidia's cards) fares well are the ones with little or no AA or AF.
In comparison to the Radeon 9X00 series, once eye candy is turned on (which is what gaming is all about) the 5700 ultra and all Nvidia cards totally suck ass compared to the lower clocked Radeons.
Personally, computer gaming I like to be as convincing an alternate reality as possible. And ATI makes that a reality. I am sorry Nvidia. Maybe you have a shot to redeem yourself in Direct X 10?
nicely said. in other words, ati rules! it's true. the only reason i got my gfx was cuz it's cheap. then i got the ati, and i'm happy. btw, do u think 20808 is a good aquamark3 score for my rig, adamp?
if you can you should be able to get at least 25,000 with the free test. [/b][/quote]
oh. those numbers are easy to get to. i'm running on stock #s rite now. the stupid thing is ati built 9600's don't have a fan on the hs. that's really annoying. and i don't wanna go out and buy one. also, i've tried the two good ocers, the radlink thingy, and that other one. ffor some weird reason, after i click ok, and open up advanced again, it's back at the same default clock settings. wtf?
oh. those numbers are easy to get to. i'm running on stock #s rite now. the stupid thing is ati built 9600's don't have a fan on the hs. that's really annoying. and i don't wanna go out and buy one. also, i've tried the two good ocers, the radlink thingy, and that other one. ffor some weird reason, after i click ok, and open up advanced again, it's back at the same default clock settings. wtf? [/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by abu_has_the_power+6 December 2003 - 06:56--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (abu_has_the_power @ 6 December 2003 - 06:56)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Quote:
Originally posted by adamp2p@6 December 2003 - 00:45
Quote:
Originally posted by abu_has_the_power@6 December 2003 - 06:42
<!--QuoteBegin-adamp2p
Quote:
Quote:
@6 December 2003 - 00:38
If you guys have done any reading you would read the same thing over and over again. Every review draws the same conclusion. It does not matter which one you read it seems as there is no argument.
Yes, the 5700 ultra is a very powerful graphics chip. However, it is not optimized for DirectX9. Even though the core and memory for the geforce 5700 ultra are clocked far higher than the Radeon series 9600 pro and 9600 XT, and even though the 5700 ultra kicks ass in some benchmarks, it would do you well to read between the lines and see that the only benchmarks where the 5700 ultra (for that matter all of Nvidia's cards) fares well are the ones with little or no AA or AF.
In comparison to the Radeon 9X00 series, once eye candy is turned on (which is what gaming is all about) the 5700 ultra and all Nvidia cards totally suck ass compared to the lower clocked Radeons.
Personally, computer gaming I like to be as convincing an alternate reality as possible. And ATI makes that a reality. I am sorry Nvidia. Maybe you have a shot to redeem yourself in Direct X 10?
nicely said. in other words, ati rules! it's true. the only reason i got my gfx was cuz it's cheap. then i got the ati, and i'm happy. btw, do u think 20808 is a good aquamark3 score for my rig, adamp?
You should be able to get 30,000 abu. Can you overclock to the speeds of 9600 pro?
if you can you should be able to get at least 25,000 with the free test.
Have you installed the Omega drivers and is your system tweaked? I am going to bed. I have finals next week. I need to wake up early tommorrow and study.
B)
Have you installed the Omega drivers and is your system tweaked? I am going to bed. I have finals next week. I need to wake up early tommorrow and study.Quote:
Originally posted by adamp2p+6 December 2003 - 01:00--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (adamp2p @ 6 December 2003 - 01:00)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Quote:
Originally posted by abu_has_the_power@6 December 2003 - 06:56
Quote:
Originally posted by adamp2p@6 December 2003 - 00:45
Quote:
Originally posted by abu_has_the_power@6 December 2003 - 06:42
<!--QuoteBegin-adamp2p
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
@6 December 2003 - 00:38
If you guys have done any reading you would read the same thing over and over again. Every review draws the same conclusion. It does not matter which one you read it seems as there is no argument.
Yes, the 5700 ultra is a very powerful graphics chip. However, it is not optimized for DirectX9. Even though the core and memory for the geforce 5700 ultra are clocked far higher than the Radeon series 9600 pro and 9600 XT, and even though the 5700 ultra kicks ass in some benchmarks, it would do you well to read between the lines and see that the only benchmarks where the 5700 ultra (for that matter all of Nvidia's cards) fares well are the ones with little or no AA or AF.
In comparison to the Radeon 9X00 series, once eye candy is turned on (which is what gaming is all about) the 5700 ultra and all Nvidia cards totally suck ass compared to the lower clocked Radeons.
Personally, computer gaming I like to be as convincing an alternate reality as possible. And ATI makes that a reality. I am sorry Nvidia. Maybe you have a shot to redeem yourself in Direct X 10?
nicely said. in other words, ati rules! it's true. the only reason i got my gfx was cuz it's cheap. then i got the ati, and i'm happy. btw, do u think 20808 is a good aquamark3 score for my rig, adamp?
You should be able to get 30,000 abu. Can you overclock to the speeds of 9600 pro?
if you can you should be able to get at least 25,000 with the free test.
oh. those numbers are easy to get to. i'm running on stock #s rite now. the stupid thing is ati built 9600's don't have a fan on the hs. that's really annoying. and i don't wanna go out and buy one. also, i've tried the two good ocers, the radlink thingy, and that other one. ffor some weird reason, after i click ok, and open up advanced again, it's back at the same default clock settings. wtf?
B) [/b][/quote]
ok. wait, tomorow's sat isn't it? where do u live? i thought finals are on the weekdays. well, anyways, i've tried the omega drivers, but it's the same thing, maybe i have to restart every time. plus, i really don't need to have crazy graphx until hl2 and doom 3 come out. for now, this card is way more than enough to play all the top games
Thanks for all the help guys...this is the first time ive seen anything say that ATI is alot better..but I trust Adam so..ATI I go.
and u don't trust the loym? (lord of your mom). i stick with ati all the way.Quote:
Originally posted by bigdawgfoxx@6 December 2003 - 01:11
Thanks for all the help guys...this is the first time ive seen anything say that ATI is alot better..but I trust Adam so..ATI I go.
So ok...ATI is better at higher resolutions I hear..what does that mean?!?! Like I know what it means with monitors, but what with games?? Like the higher the resolution the more you can see or what?
the higher reso, the higher quality the game is. try running halo at 640x watever reso, and compare that to running at 1280x # reso. a huge difference. in kotor, even more significant.Quote:
Originally posted by bigdawgfoxx@6 December 2003 - 01:18
So ok...ATI is better at higher resolutions I hear..what does that mean?!?! Like I know what it means with monitors, but what with games?? Like the higher the resolution the more you can see or what?
and u still don't trust the loym huh? (loym is abu, read the thing under my avatar)
Nooo of course i trust loym! So the higher the resolution the better and smoother everything looks?
correct