Which card is better?

[The Lodge]

I’m putting a system together for my uncle with some spare parts I have and was wondering which one of these cards you guys think is better. The first card I have is a radeon 7500 64MB and the second one is a gf2 ultra 64MB. I’m not sure if it really matters to him since he only does web, email, and some disc burning. Which ever card it ends up being, I know it’s going to be the bottleneck of the system. Amd 2600+ 512MB ram, see what I mean? Like I said, he won’t be playing any games, maybe some solitaire. I sent him over to newegg to get the only things I didn’t have for him, xp and a burner. He was quite surprised when I told him that a cdrw would only cost $30.The other card will be going in a computer I built for ma dukes in the beginning of the year, it’s running 32MB shared right now. Figured I could pass these on since my Ti4600 will soon be my backup card. I'm coming for you GT. :D

[MJCfromCT]

http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-106-1.htm

I found this review of the 7500, it looks as though it favors the radeon card over the Nvidia. IMO its a toss-up. My family computer which I am on now has a geforce 2 MX 400, and that is just fine for what my family uses a computer for. However if I had to choose, i'd lean towards the ATi.

[otaku]

I'd go with the GF2 :t

[The Lodge]

Interesting read MJC. I take it the gf2 pro and ultra are different cards though. It’s really hard to compare these cards. All the comparisons I’ve seen use different benches. Both of these cards I got for nothing and they were never in any of my systems, so it’s hard to figure.

[MJCfromCT]

Agreed, finding a straight comparasion of the two cards is hard to come by. The 7500 seems to beat the gf2pro. There were apparently a few tweaks to the TnL engine and the per pixel shading on the ultra, however, so yeah, its hard to figure out.

[RamonGTP]

Since performance is about equal between the two cards, i'd go with the Radeon since it would have better image (especially 2d) quality.

[PacNW CE]

As I recallect, the 7500/gf2ultra days were the days that ATI had a slight lead in 2d crispness. That being said, and that yer uncle won't game, I'd go 7500 for him.:t

[The Lodge]

I guess I’ll put the 7500 in my uncles’ computer. Next time I’m in the area, I throw the gf2 in moms’ computer. When my sister comes home from school, she loves to d\l all kinds of garbage from the net, cheesy games and whatnot. From what I’m gathering these cards are pretty neck and neck, with each having its advantages. Thanks for your tips guys, the 7500\gf2 era was a little before my time. :t

[NDD]

But not before mine ;)
R7500 is the respin of the original Radeon series, the R100. GF2Ultra on the other hand is the top of the GF2 series. Still, R7500 was aimed to compete with GF2Ti, which is Ultra core paired with Pro memory, and for that time and the DX7 games, GF2Ultra is the fastest between the two.
Driver support was better for nVIDIA product, too ...
2D quality was rumored to be better with ATI, but you probably need an adequate monitor to see it - I couldn't :t

Go Ultra

[Tech^salvager]

I'm biased to the ultra. Go ultra

[WillihamS]

I guess that stuff should be behind my time but two years ago my first pc was a pentium 133 with diamond stealth 64 graphics:D