-
11-23-2003, 04:32 AM
#1291
For the games I play the Ti4200 was better especially in Americas Army and Falcon4. The latter is an extremely old flight sim from 1998. It seems these newer cards are filled with technology that will be great in the future but however are less powerfull with older games. Unless you get the high end cards. The thing that frustrates me is being used to the power of the GF4Ti series line of cards and the price points of them. Whether you got a 4200, 4400 or 4600, all had the same technology. The only difference was the clock, and all could run any game just fine. Not so with these new cards. I dont feel like I'm getting my money's worth anymore. Going from a Ti4200 to an FX5600 isn't the same as going from a GF3Ti to a GF4Ti.... No what I mean? However, this FX5900 for $229.00 is getting closer......
BTW the 9500 is Fully DX9 while the 9200 and lower are not.
Slapshot
Last edited by Slapshot; 11-23-2003 at 04:36 AM.
-
11-23-2003, 05:50 AM
#1292
Member
I wasn't saying nvidia is better ...just happy with my FX.
I stopped doing 2001 when I got the fx cards (5900 ultra first card)
My best 2001 score was 17851 with my 9700 pro & amd 2700+
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5718428
best score 16152 with the leadtek ti 4600 & old P4
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=6193158
I have always used both... ati has always seemed fast until the 5800 & 5900 nvidia cards. But nvidia has always had better drivers and worked ........without problems in all my games.
My most recent vid cards
Leadtek winfast 4600 ti ultra 128 (my favorite for gaming no problems always worked with all my new & old games)
Ati 9700 pro 128 megs (wolfenstein & bf1942 need to dis-able a few things to make it look right)
ATI 9800 pro 256 megs (didn't start the apple display)
pny 5900 ultra 256 megs
ATI 9800 XT 256 megs (wouldn't start the apple display)
Asylum 5950 ultra 256 megs (need to under clock for old games)
Pre to those cards you know G 2,3 & rage, rage pro, all in wonder, voodoo.
I even called ATI in Canada...about the apple display on the adc-dvi .........and their brilliant answer was use another monitor! What the he11 kind of answer was that! The XT will be last ati I will ever buy.
Last edited by Beast_USA; 11-23-2003 at 05:52 AM.
-
11-23-2003, 05:55 AM
#1293
Member
Originally posted by Slapshot
For the games I play the Ti4200 was better especially in Americas Army and Falcon4. The latter is an extremely old flight sim from 1998. It seems these newer cards are filled with technology that will be great in the future but however are less powerfull with older games. Unless you get the high end cards. The thing that frustrates me is being used to the power of the GF4Ti series line of cards and the price points of them. Whether you got a 4200, 4400 or 4600, all had the same technology. The only difference was the clock, and all could run any game just fine. Not so with these new cards. I dont feel like I'm getting my money's worth anymore. Going from a Ti4200 to an FX5600 isn't the same as going from a GF3Ti to a GF4Ti.... No what I mean? However, this FX5900 for $229.00 is getting closer......
BTW the 9500 is Fully DX9 while the 9200 and lower are not.
Slapshot
You hit that nail on the head...the new cards are more (money) for less
-
11-23-2003, 03:14 PM
#1294
Ultimate Member
That's one place where ATI users have had an advantage over Nvidia. The 9500/Pro and the 9600/Pro are both faster than the DX8.1 parts they replaced, so for a DX8.1 user staying with ATI the new cards did mean a solid overall upgrade.
Since ATI's DX9 parts came out first, that set the pattern for what people were going to expect.
Nvidia's DX9 cards, especially the even numbered models, were more about expanding the feature set than improving performance. The Ti4200 had been too good a card for them, cannibalizing sales from the higher end cards, and they wanted to avoid this. So only the top models had higher overall or raw performance, while the 5600 series settled for rough parity with the Ti4200 it was meant to replace. The goal was to boost the features more than speed, and the newer cards are more capable than their predecessors when using AA and AF.
If you aren't playing with AA and AF all the time then only the top models from either Nvidia or ATI is going to beat out a Ti4600.
"Dude you're getting a Dell." Obscure curse from the early 21st Century, ascribed to a minor demon-spirit known as "Stephen?" [sp].
-
11-24-2003, 12:02 PM
#1295
Member
I have the top end 5900 ultra & 5950 ultra....they go fast
But the ti 4600 I had was still the best card...for put it in.....oc the system where ever you wanted....and no problems playing
Even my 9700 pro got pissy when you oc'ed your system to far you would need to oc the 9700 to keep the games stable.
-
12-04-2003, 05:19 PM
#1296
Ultimate Member
Score: 18,555
System:
3200 XP oc'd at 2315 w/ vantec aeroflow
1 gig corsair 3200
ATI 9800 pro 128 meg with Iceberg 4 cooling system oc'd at 410 & 360.
BTB, still love my TI 4200, have it in one of my other systems. The TI series is one of the best.
-
12-04-2003, 06:04 PM
#1297
Ultimate Member
Why even bother anymore? Wanna read a story? Right Here.
-
12-04-2003, 06:13 PM
#1298
Hired Geek
Just got round to a bit of tweaking, so I thought I'd post my latest results
Score: 13644
Barton 2500+ @ 2.3Ghz (11x209)
Abit NF7-S 2.0
2x256MB Crucial PC3200
Radeon 9600 Pro @440/330
-
12-05-2003, 02:47 AM
#1299
Member
Did a 2001 on the new system in XP
20491
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=7284462
I think I could get higher just gave it one run
-
12-05-2003, 10:37 PM
#1300
Member
Best I could get is 13,576 with my Geforce4 Ti 4200 8agp 128 m/b o/c at 316/632. This appears an excellent score with a Gforce4 Ti 4200 card...
Last edited by WayneD; 12-08-2003 at 09:20 AM.
Dell Optiplex 755
Intel Q9400
6GB PC2 5400 Kingston
Radeon HD4670 1GB
Windows Vista Business
Asus A7N8X
AMD Athlon XP 3200 2.21Ghz
1.25GB PC3200
Nvidia Geforce 7600GT
Windows XP Home
-
12-08-2003, 09:11 AM
#1301
Well i downloaded the wrong 3DMark (2000 instead of 2001) anyway heres everything
Athlon xp 2400+ 2.1ghz
Asus a7n266-vm
On board graphics (for now)
Score: 3102
Not bad for basicly nothing done
-
12-08-2003, 09:30 AM
#1302
Member
Originally posted by Beast_USA
I wasn't saying nvidia is better ...just happy with my FX.
I stopped doing 2001 when I got the fx cards (5900 ultra first card)
My best 2001 score was 17851 with my 9700 pro & amd 2700+
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5718428
best score 16152 with the leadtek ti 4600 & old P4
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=6193158
I have always used both... ati has always seemed fast until the 5800 & 5900 nvidia cards. But nvidia has always had better drivers and worked ........without problems in all my games.
My most recent vid cards
Leadtek winfast 4600 ti ultra 128 (my favorite for gaming no problems always worked with all my new & old games)
Ati 9700 pro 128 megs (wolfenstein & bf1942 need to dis-able a few things to make it look right)
ATI 9800 pro 256 megs (didn't start the apple display)
pny 5900 ultra 256 megs
ATI 9800 XT 256 megs (wouldn't start the apple display)
Asylum 5950 ultra 256 megs (need to under clock for old games)
Pre to those cards you know G 2,3 & rage, rage pro, all in wonder, voodoo.
I even called ATI in Canada...about the apple display on the adc-dvi .........and their brilliant answer was use another monitor! What the he11 kind of answer was that! The XT will be last ati I will ever buy.
The ATI cards and drivers may produce better scores from time to time however, not worth their short lived claim to fame. The drivers are like a virus in your system as once in are impossible to remove. I left the ATI product line with the into of the 8500 series which did not like my mobo (A7M266) and was only able to rid the system of the drivers with a complete reinstall of the o/s.
The FX line of Nvidia cards are clearly ahead of their time. For a short while I replaced my Ti4400 with an FX5900 however, returned it as the scores in all benchmarking tests were worse than the Ti series with o/c
Dell Optiplex 755
Intel Q9400
6GB PC2 5400 Kingston
Radeon HD4670 1GB
Windows Vista Business
Asus A7N8X
AMD Athlon XP 3200 2.21Ghz
1.25GB PC3200
Nvidia Geforce 7600GT
Windows XP Home
-
12-08-2003, 09:45 AM
#1303
Senior Member
Originally posted by WayneD
The ATI cards and drivers may produce better scores from time to time however, not worth their short lived claim to fame. The drivers are like a virus in your system as once in are impossible to remove. I left the ATI product line with the into of the 8500 series which did not like my mobo (A7M266) and was only able to rid the system of the drivers with a complete reinstall of the o/s.
There are programs to uninstall even ATI drivers, but I use NVIDIA, because there drivers make less problems (I am not talking about uninstalling, but of problems w/ an installed driver w/ games or even Windows).
-
12-08-2003, 10:06 AM
#1304
Member
Yes, you are correct ATI does provide uninstallers however, non that work. I recently had a video capture card which I decided to remove, the card was easy to remove but the drivers...well that's another story. After several attempts at searching the o/s, registry and removing all related files NO LUCK they remained. On running the ATI provided uninstaller several times NO LUCK they remained....as I said a virus is easier to strip from your system than the ATI drivers. I finally rid the system of the drivers with a clean install of windows. I had similar experiences with the video drivers...
Dell Optiplex 755
Intel Q9400
6GB PC2 5400 Kingston
Radeon HD4670 1GB
Windows Vista Business
Asus A7N8X
AMD Athlon XP 3200 2.21Ghz
1.25GB PC3200
Nvidia Geforce 7600GT
Windows XP Home
-
12-08-2003, 10:11 AM
#1305
Senior Member
Originally posted by WayneD
Yes, you are correct ATI does provide uninstallers however, non that work. I recently had a video capture card which I decided to remove, the card was easy to remove but the drivers...well that's another story. After several attempts at searching the o/s, registry and removing all related files NO LUCK they remained. On running the ATI provided uninstaller several times NO LUCK they remained....as I said a virus is easier to strip from your system than the ATI drivers. I finally rid the system of the drivers with a clean install of windows. I had similar experiences with the video drivers...
You can try a third party uninstaller. I know, that there are some available for ATI.
NVIDIAs driver uninstaller also doesnt completely remove the driver, I allways use Detonator Destroyer when I want to get rid of it (i.e. when I have problems and want to reinstall it, or when I want to use an older version).
Last edited by MrBurns; 12-08-2003 at 10:40 AM.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|