Geforce 4 Ti/FX

[Zero-Ex]

wats a better card Geforce 4 Ti- $189 or Geforce FX 5200 $89, Witch is better for FFXI

[Brayden]

geforce 4 ti will perform better, here's a link to benchmark tests on UT2003 http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/...ournament_2003 there are some other benchmarks there also, but its more or less the same

[Lavix]

GeForce4 Ti (4200 - 4400 - 4600)

Any of them will outperform the 5200, which is the new equivalent of the old MX440. Dont bother with an FX card unless you want to get a 5900. By the way $189 is WAY too much for any Geforce4 card. You can pick them up on Ebay for $75 - $125
at most. If you want to spend between $125 - $200, pick up an ATI Radeon 9500 PRO or 9600 PRO.

[replica]

stay away from 9600 pro -_- 9500 pro is more expensive for a reason..

i've seen some of the Ti cards on ebay go for cheap, but the nicer ones usually hit the 130-150 mark right about now (good overclockers and whatnot) =\ still worth it for DX8 games if you don't have the 200

[Lavix]

The ATI 9600 is a very good card. I am running a Tyan 9600 PRO in my system now and i couldnt be happier with it. It runs every game i have at the highest resolutions and settings without a glitch. It is more than sufficient for 95% of the games out there. But it is true that it runs about $30 - $40 cheaper than the 9500.
Most people wont notice a difference.

There is also no need whatsoever to overclock any videocard for 99% of all gamers. Why would you risk frying a brand new video card for an extra 10% - 15% performance gain you wont even see in day to day applications?

[replica]

O.o why would anyone OC their card for 'day to day applications' ? it's that 15-20% difference that can be a rather large one when it comes to the high resolutions and AA / AF settings.

[Lavix]

The answer to that is simple. Most people, day to day that is, dont run their monitors in anything greater than 1280 X 960. Mainstream video cards....such as the 9600 PRO or Ti4400....can easily handle games at that setting with all the options set to Ultra High. That is forgetting the fact that most games available dont even come with options to set Antialiasing or Anisotropic Filtering.

The only reason to O'C a card like that is if you really care about squeezing every last point out of your benchmarks for personal satisfaction. If ego and benchmarks are your thing, go waste the money on a FX5900 Ultra or 9800 PRO.

It makes no difference in 90% of the games....especially not in FFXI. If a person wants to risk fryin the card, be my guest......all i'm sayin is that it certainly isnt necessary.

[Rubik]

Replica -

Can you share why you feel people should stay away from the 9600PRO? As for overclocking, the 9600PRO is basically underclocked by the factory. Some people like to overclock it because it can be done safely and the card performs better. I would assume that the The 9500PRO costs more than the 9600PRO because it offers a more expensive to produce 8 pixel pipeline architecture compared to the 9600PRO's 4 pixel pipeline (although out of the box the 9600PRO outperforms the 9500PRO).

There is nothing wrong with stating a preference of one card over another but could you provide more information to substantiate your statements rather than just saying to stay away from a particular card?

[ZeroRadius]

get the Ti4200 I have it and love it,

now if you excuse me I have to hide form aero before he kills me for suggesting a NVidia card.

[replica]

Originally posted by Rubik
Replica -

Can you share why you feel people should stay away from the 9600PRO? As for overclocking, the 9600PRO is basically underclocked by the factory. Some people like to overclock it because it can be done safely and the card performs better. I would assume that the The 9500PRO costs more than the 9600PRO because it offers a more expensive to produce 8 pixel pipeline architecture compared to the 9600PRO's 4 pixel pipeline (although out of the box the 9600PRO outperforms the 9500PRO).

There is nothing wrong with stating a preference of one card over another but could you provide more information to substantiate your statements rather than just saying to stay away from a particular card?

..lol, find me one full benchmark showing a 9500 pro getting bested by a cheaper version of itself~ or i'll find you 3-4 showing the 9500 pro passing it up =\ lets start off with one, ok?

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/...cked/page3.asp

before you jump on it and say "blah blah overclock", note that they also show the stock speeds (where the 9500 beats it by an even greater percentage.)

that's not even a great example though, i could find worse. point is - the 9500 pro is a better card, and it's worth the little extra money to get one over a 9600 pro. or as i'm sure aero would like to say, just "get a 9700 pro". I'm not gonna argue my opinion, or facts. 9600 pro isn't bad, but it's just not worth the money to me.

[Rubik]

Actually I have read reviews where the 9600 Pro outperformed the 9500 Pro out of the box with factory settings. But I'll grant you that the 9500 Pro should perform better and I don't dispute that you found benchmarks to back that up. Thanks for giving the reasons behind your statements

And in all honesty, I misread your earlier post. I thought you said that you didn't know why the 9500 Pro cost more than the 9600 Pro. Sorry about that.

[replica]

it's no problem =D i'm always glad to show people that info because i myself owned a 9600 pro when i first built this computer. i did my research too late and the one i bought was a poor overclocker so i ebay'd it and bought a ti4600 for 100.. few days ago i saw a deal on a 9800 pro ($250) so i ebayed my ti4600 for 130 (lol) and bought the 9800 pro XD there will be no more spending on this computer unless it's for cooling stuff~ i'm finally happy with it

[Rubik]

$250 for a 9800PRO? Nice - by any chance is that deal still available? I am still within my return policy on my 9600PRO...