dcsimg
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 34

Thread: Ti 500 Or Ti200

  1. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Union City, California ,US
    Posts
    400
    lucky, i'm the one who shared it n i'm stuck with my gf2 gts, oh well, i didn't need the extra performance, but i wouldn't mind having it.

  2. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    67
    Buy the GF3 Ti200.Its really cheap compared to the TI500.If you overclock this card a bit(;-)) u ll be surprised:Its nearly as fast as the TI500 and faster than the "normal" GF3!!!

    Best Regards from Germany

  3. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    manchester, uk
    Posts
    242
    i have a geforce2 mx and just bought a gefoce 3 and overclocked it something bad.

    tell you what there is no difference in the speed and quality.

    apart for the 3Dmark2001 score and the quake iii demo scores are different but when your in the real world and playing a game you can't tell the difference.

    games run the same... wasted £250

  4. #19
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1
    Sorry to burst your bubble Imperion1, but the GeForce3 Ti200 is fater than a GeForce2 Ultra. Right now the Ti200 looks like the best bang for the buck.

  5. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Fulton N.Y.
    Posts
    113

    numbers

    What do you get for framerate (lets use the Quake 3 demo test@ say 1280x1024,32bits/pixel)I`m liking the sound of the ti500 g2 to hold me over `til dooms released and I get a G3<J>

  6. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Union City, California ,US
    Posts
    400
    u all r looking at the wrong benches, today's real top played games don't use programmable pixel n vertex shaders yet, they depend on raw power, that is why the gf2 ultra can oust the gf3 in ut n several other top played games. don't look at 3dmark 2k1, dronez, gunlok, or aquanox n that stuff, look at ut, serious sam, half life cs, q3, wolfenstein, black n white, max payne, etc... don't get me wrong, the only reason i aint jumping on the gf3 bangwagon (although i wouldn't mind getting a ti200 n tweaking the mother to a ti500) is because none of the games i want to play will benefit on a gf3, but will benefit on a highly clocked gf2.

  7. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Union City, California ,US
    Posts
    400
    that reminds me of a 3rd rock episode when they were excited about the amzing quality of the dvd, but they were watching revenge of the lepruachuan 2. haha.

  8. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    manchester, uk
    Posts
    242
    jeffy you are right in what you said at the moment gf3 is not really used to it's full potential. the question to get a ti200 or ti500 the answer is 42

    yes 42

    the meaning of life and everything

    would you like to play the next crop of games that use all the features of the gf3 at 42fps and that means that most of the time it will be running at 20fps


    i don't know about you but 20fps is not very good. the sooner they release a card that does a constant 60fps the better.

  9. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Fulton N.Y.
    Posts
    113
    I`m getting 38 with my MX with the updated drivers and ram oced to 195MHz.42 is all the ti 500 can get?<J>

  10. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Union City, California ,US
    Posts
    400
    Yeah i heard the gf3, with all that spiffy tech will still suck bad with future games that use that spiffy tech!

  11. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    KC KS
    Posts
    35

    what the...

    hey all... remember me?
    anyway... something REALLY weird happened to me..
    my current video card is the anceint Nivida riva TNT2 m64 pro
    yesterday i was running at 30 FPS in games like UT, and this morning i ran at 50 steady, even higher... i **** you not. i dont know WHAT happenend, it just happened... im so happy and im thikning about scraping my GF 2 ultra hopes... anybody? explain?
    --MOD--

  12. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Fulton N.Y.
    Posts
    113
    Anybody have the frame rates of the G2 Ti 500.<J>

  13. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    67
    I ve got ay SiS315 (Clockrates=175/175) and get 60 FPS at 1024x768 32bit HighQuality.
    But im looking forward to buy me ay Radeon (first 7500 and next year the 8500) coze em both are truely GeForce Killahz!!!And image quality is even better although!
    I DONT LIKE NVIDIA CARDS,THEIRE ALL RAW POWER BUT THATS ALL!ATI has Smart Technology against brute force of nvidia“s boring Cards, thats what i like!

  14. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    80
    Originally posted by Disruptor
    I ve got ay SiS315 (Clockrates=175/175) and get 60 FPS at 1024x768 32bit HighQuality.
    But im looking forward to buy me ay Radeon (first 7500 and next year the 8500) coze em both are truely GeForce Killahz!!!And image quality is even better although!
    I DONT LIKE NVIDIA CARDS,THEIRE ALL RAW POWER BUT THATS ALL!ATI has Smart Technology against brute force of nvidia“s boring Cards, thats what i like!

    But seriously when if in future you upgrade to using WinXP Pro or Home, then the drivers support for ATi is really sux! but not to nVidia...
    PIII900 GoldenOrb/AS-II
    AOpen AX3SP
    Infineon PC133 128MB CAS 2 2 2
    Hyundai PC133 128MB CAS 2 2 2
    Quantum Fireball AS 20GB +
    IBM 34GXP 13.6GB + 1.7GB FireBall
    GeForce2 AnnilhilatorII 32MB DDR
    SB Live! Hauppaugge Theatre
    Intel Pro100 LG 40x UDMA33
    PlexWriter 12x10x32A
    Lian Li PC10 "Mod" Window/CAF12
    HEC Approved 300 watts
    Altec Lansing ACS48
    LG 795ft+ MS Internet KB/Optical
    Everglide LAP/MouseSkatez

  15. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Union City, California ,US
    Posts
    400
    Hu cares about technology! No matter wut, wutever get;s the job done the fastest clearly is the best. No matter raw power or tech. It's not like nvidia has horrible image quality. Although i do like my radeon le image quality, but these recent refresh rate problems really **** me off on xp. I hate ati's drivers! I love nvidia drivers, so wut if one causes problems, just revert back. I have a radeon le that isn't disspointing, but after seeing how low prices are for a gts or just about ne other faster nvidia card, i am mad! Not only that, after seeing all the benches in many games, the radeon is just bad! The radeon is always the 2nd lowest in the following cards: Geforce 2 gts, pro, ultra, ti, 7500, 8500, Geforce 3, 3 ti200, 3 ti 500, Geforce 2 mx400, kyro2. The radeon 64 mb ddr is always the 2nd slowest just above the kyro. I'm not tlaking about one or two games, ie. Quake 3 Arena and Unreal Tournament, i'm tlaking about q3a, ut, serious sam, black n white, max payne, wolfenstein, red faction, etc... @ 32 bit color. The radeon stinks overall in the many 3d games. Wut makes you think my radeon le will fair betta than a radeon 64 mb ddr. Go get a nvidia card or those new 7500 n 8500 oem versions (at newegg really cheap) are ok, but overall, i am not gonna buy another ati product unless it is totally miraculous, i now wanna sell my radeon le for a visiontek gf2 gts v.
    Last edited by Jeffy; 11-05-2001 at 07:44 PM.

Posting Permissions

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