Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 53

Thread: Direct X 9

  1. #11
    CadeLaguana's Avatar Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Waco, Texas
    Age
    39
    Posts
    614
    OK good point....Ok damn good point.



    Well the point is...



    Spend a little more, to get something better B) . The geforce 5600 sucks


    It would be a bad investment, in other words...



    Then again, I have never used it myself...so who am I to judge. Damn it

  2. Software & Hardware   -   #12
    Originally posted by CadeLaguana@19 December 2003 - 18:49
    OK good point....Ok damn good point. 



    Well the point is...



    Spend a little more, to get something better  B) .  The geforce 5600 sucks 


    It would be a bad investment, in other words...



    Then again, I have never used it myself...so who am I to judge.  Damn it 
    i agree but im still having a debate as to whether or not i should get a 9600xt cuz sometime i ask my self if i play game enough to spend 170 dollars on a video card...and other, i find my self hunting deals for a 5900( ) after i download games like halo or kotor.....but then again after playing those games, i go gameless for several weeks and wouldnt that be a waste of money to buy those expensive card in my situation? so im probably just gonna get a 9600 or a 5600 for about $100.....but then again for 50 usd more i can get a 9600xt....arg what am i goin to do

    so right now im still kinda unsure if i want to spend all that money for a 9600xt

  3. Software & Hardware   -   #13
    CadeLaguana's Avatar Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Waco, Texas
    Age
    39
    Posts
    614
    Go for the 9600xt. Man there is a fireblade version with a core speed of 533 and memory speed of 650 I belive. It is a hell of a card. Besides, your not thinking 4th dimentionaly!(damn I sound like doc brown )


    Next year comes DOOM 3, Half-life 2, Sims 2(errr...for the girls :-" :"> )



    What else...


    Well tons of new games that will use the doom 3 and half-life 2 egine. The 9600xt is a great investment. A card that will run perfect for a couple of years at decent settings.


    Go for it dude! Don't waste money on a cheap ass card, when you can spend a little more, for a great one!

  4. Software & Hardware   -   #14
    4th dimension??????????

    yea, i guess ill go for a 9600xt.....a 15yrs old boy like me buy a 160 dollars card

    oh well, my mom going to give my 700 dollars when here tax refund come so

  5. Software & Hardware   -   #15
    Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    588
    Im sorta swaying fron Nvidia, this ATI Radeon 9600 looks very promising.
    What I dont understand though, is that how is it any different from nvidia, how can ATI be this good compared to nvidia, or is this just a personal preference. Ive been using nvidia cards for ages, havent switched, but i think i may well do soon.

  6. Software & Hardware   -   #16
    CadeLaguana's Avatar Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Waco, Texas
    Age
    39
    Posts
    614
    Same here man. I have been a loyal Nvidia fan all the way untill recently...



    I just have been seeing so many reviews of radeon cards. They usually compare them to nvidia cards that are...what are the words...in the same boat?


    Example: Geforce 5600 ultra is like the radeon 9600(though the 9600 and geforce 5600 aren't that close to be compared...but I digress). Anyway...


    In most of these reviews, the radeon cards kick the nvida cards asses. I don't personally have any experience with radeon cards, but from what I hear(and trust me, my ears are sore ), Radeon is the way to go. Hell, Radeon is the preferd card for half-life 2. Its powerful use of DX9, its high core and memory speeds for cheap cards(ok they're not that cheap...). I also hear that new drivers 4.0 or some shit(don't quote me on it, I just take this crap from sites...sometimes don't even pay attention ) are really going to kick ass. Though I do have to say that Nvidia's drivers have never really given me a problem, and in most cases, improve the card noticibly. Maybe only 2 fps here, or 3 there, but a little counts.

    I have heard bad things about Radeon's drivers. But I am a man that knows what he is doing. I know the Radeon 9600xt will go into my computer when I get it. I'll get the drivers working, and the card will perform beautifuly....I hope..

    Nvida needs to get thier act together. A geforce 5200 256mb PCI! Ha! POS


    This is Baxton signing off saying: Nvida, they'll ass fuck you!

  7. Software & Hardware   -   #17
    atiVidia's Avatar ^would've been cool.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,522
    a while back I sed 5900 ULTRA! not 5900.

    only the 5700 ultra can be compared to the 9600 xt

    ATI has a great reputation when it comes to fsaa and antisotropic filtering (asf) but if u get a 5900 ultra and play ur games at 1600 x 1200 resolution, fsaa and asf dont really matter, and can be turned off. in which case the nVidia card will horribly FUCK ATI in its tiny little hole, tearing its innards apart. this is what people do not realize.

    so, if u have a 19+" monitor and play your games at 1600 x 1200, get an nVidia 5900 ultra

    if u play ur games any lower than that, get an ATI 9800 pro (unless u dont care for jaggies)

    --------<edit>--------.
    also, if u get a 9800 pro, be prepared to swap the fan (its stock fan is useless when overclocking)
    ------<edit end>------.

    yes, the 5900 ultra can be found for less than 250, and gives you a true ass fucker in terms of performance

    --------<edit>--------.
    same with the mainstream cards. if u want to play ur games at 1600 x 1200, get an nVidia 5700 ultra. otherwise, get a 9600xt. this is the simple god damned truth
    ------<edit end>------.

  8. Software & Hardware   -   #18
    racer II's Avatar Poster
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Age
    43
    Posts
    483
    Originally posted by atiVidia@19 December 2003 - 22:53
    ATI has a great reputation when it comes to fsaa and antisotropic filtering (asf) but if u get a 5900 ultra and play ur games at 1600 x 1200 resolution, fsaa and asf dont really matter, and can be turned off. in which case the nVidia card will horribly FUCK ATI in its tiny little hole, tearing its innards apart. this is what people do not realize.

    Thats just bs
    I got a 21" monitor, still at 1600x1200 fsaa and asf does alot good.
    System:
    LANPARTY UT NF4 SLI-DR Expert
    AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+
    Xfx 7900gt extreme
    2x Maxtor 250gb sata
    2x Maxtor 80gb (p)ata
    2x 512mb mem , dual channel
    Tagan 580w psu
    Coolermaster stacker case
    Zalman reserator 1

  9. Software & Hardware   -   #19
    atiVidia's Avatar ^would've been cool.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,522
    Originally posted by racer II+19 December 2003 - 16:58--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (racer II @ 19 December 2003 - 16:58)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-atiVidia@19 December 2003 - 22:53
    ATI has a great reputation when it comes to fsaa and antisotropic filtering (asf) but if u get a 5900 ultra and play ur games at 1600 x 1200 resolution, fsaa and asf dont really matter, and can be turned off. in which case the nVidia card will horribly FUCK ATI in its tiny little hole, tearing its innards apart. this is what people do not realize.

    Thats just bs
    I got a 21" monitor, still at 1600x1200 fsaa and asf does alot good. [/b][/quote]
    the higher your monitor size, the bigger your game res should be.

    asf does not strain an nVidia card and can be enabled


    its the fsaa which cant, and believe me, anyone who gets a 21 inch monitor is insane. thats just fucking sad, no offense.

    19 inch is understandable. any higher, and u guys will have no life

    the 21 incher that im hearin about better be displaying your games at 1800+ x 1400+ res, otherwise, u got a bullshit monitor

    if u think it does alot of good to have fsaa on a 19 inch monitor at max res, u pay attention to detail with a fucking big magnifying glass, and your eyes r probly suffering from radiation sickness

  10. Software & Hardware   -   #20
    Originally posted by atiVidia@19 December 2003 - 21:53
    a while back I sed 5900 ULTRA&#33; not 5900.

    only the 5700 ultra can be compared to the 9600 xt

    ATI has a great reputation when it comes to fsaa and antisotropic filtering (asf) but if u get a 5900 ultra and play ur games at 1600 x 1200 resolution, fsaa and asf dont really matter, and can be turned off. in which case the nVidia card will horribly FUCK ATI in its tiny little hole, tearing its innards apart. this is what people do not realize.

    so, if u have a 19+" monitor and play your games at 1600 x 1200, get an nVidia 5900 ultra

    if u play ur games any lower than that, get an ATI 9800 pro (unless u dont care for jaggies)

    --------<edit>--------.
    also, if u get a 9800 pro, be prepared to swap the fan (its stock fan is useless when overclocking)
    ------<edit end>------.

    yes, the 5900 ultra can be found for less than 250, and gives you a true ass fucker in terms of performance

    --------<edit>--------.
    same with the mainstream cards. if u want to play ur games at 1600 x 1200, get an nVidia 5700 ultra. otherwise, get a 9600xt. this is the simple god damned truth
    ------<edit end>------.
    y do u keep making the ultra word bold....

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •