5900xt vs 9800pro

[ozman]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

I've narrowed my choice down to 2 New video cards either the 5900xt or the
9800pro. It seems that the 9800pro beats the 5900xt in most benchmarks but
I've been a Nvidia guy since the TNT. I've never had much luck with ATI in
the past but the 9800pro is what a lot of people recommend. My system is
currently is Asus A7N8X, 2.4 Athlon, Gainward 5600xt and 1 gig DDR.

Here are my questions:
Are any issues with an nForce board and a ATI card?
I have seen the benchmarks but how much more longer will I be able to run
the 9800pro over the 5900xt?

 

[Maniac]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Ozman <bill@phisupply.com> wrote:

> Here are my questions:
> Are any issues with an nForce board and a ATI card?

Nope.

> I have seen the benchmarks but how much more longer will I be able to
> run the 9800pro over the 5900xt?

R9800 Pro is an FX5900 Ultra/FX5950 Ultra class card.

--
maniac(at)chello.pl
BP Bemowo Team

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Ozman" <bill@phisupply.com> wrote in message
news:HVALc.31984$6t1.612@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> I've narrowed my choice down to 2 New video cards either the 5900xt or the
> 9800pro. It seems that the 9800pro beats the 5900xt in most benchmarks
but
> I've been a Nvidia guy since the TNT. I've never had much luck with ATI
in
> the past but the 9800pro is what a lot of people recommend. My system is
> currently is Asus A7N8X, 2.4 Athlon, Gainward 5600xt and 1 gig DDR.
>
> Here are my questions:
> Are any issues with an nForce board and a ATI card?
> I have seen the benchmarks but how much more longer will I be able to run
> the 9800pro over the 5900xt?
>
>
>

My system:

Athlon XP 2600+
nForce 2 with nForce drivers
Sapphire RADEON 9800 PRO 128 MB

Go the Radeon *exactly* 2 days ago.

Works perfectly

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

first of all, anything made by ATI is junk. Why such a broad
statement? Drivers, drivers, drivers. Second of all, they still have a
serious problem with recognizing monitors, especially Viewsonics.

If you want ultimate FPS, sure ATI can deliver a few more. But for the
repeated crashes, ungodly problematic driver updating, and more issues
than I have time to list - go nVidia.

I tried the 9600pro then a 9800pro and went with the Leadtek 5900xt
and can say that it beats both hands down in my book. The 9800pro had
a few more FPS but image quality was absolutely wretched compared to
the XT.

 

[NaDa]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Judge <no@where.com> wrote:
> first of all, anything made by ATI is junk. Why such a broad
> statement? Drivers, drivers, drivers. Second of all, they still have a
> serious problem with recognizing monitors, especially Viewsonics.
>
> If you want ultimate FPS, sure ATI can deliver a few more. But for the
> repeated crashes, ungodly problematic driver updating, and more issues
> than I have time to list - go nVidia.
>
> I tried the 9600pro then a 9800pro and went with the Leadtek 5900xt
> and can say that it beats both hands down in my book. The 9800pro had
> a few more FPS but image quality was absolutely wretched compared to
> the XT.

That Leadtek 5900 XT was one of the best cards for the buck I've ever
purchased. Like you said, it has an excellent image quality. My Club
3d 9800 Pro ain't too bad either, but I'd say that the Leadtek has an
advantage, though not too noticeable with when using a dinky 17 inch
monitor.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Judge" <no@where.com> wrote in message
news:7cfuf0dqlipfkopdr1v5bekicjevbcjav0@4ax.com...
> first of all, anything made by ATI is junk. Why such a broad
> statement? Drivers, drivers, drivers. Second of all, they still have a
> serious problem with recognizing monitors, especially Viewsonics.
>
> If you want ultimate FPS, sure ATI can deliver a few more. But for the
> repeated crashes, ungodly problematic driver updating, and more issues
> than I have time to list - go nVidia.
>
> I tried the 9600pro then a 9800pro and went with the Leadtek 5900xt
> and can say that it beats both hands down in my book. The 9800pro had
> a few more FPS but image quality was absolutely wretched compared to
> the XT.

I have to concur about the 9600pro. I'm switching to nvidia because of
'instability' on my ABit mobo, going with the FX5900XT too. The ATI cards
bench out impressively, but if you have to live with system crashes, what's
the use? I've read absolutely nothing but 'rave' reviews about the 5900XT;
no mentions of any stability issues. Some makers provide a protective
shroud that some users have had to take off to install...that's it as to
anything 'negative'...and that has to do with the make, not the actual chip.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Judge" <no@where.com> wrote in message
news:7cfuf0dqlipfkopdr1v5bekicjevbcjav0@4ax.com...
> first of all, anything made by ATI is junk. Why such a broad
> statement? Drivers, drivers, drivers. Second of all, they still have a
> serious problem with recognizing monitors, especially Viewsonics.
>
> If you want ultimate FPS, sure ATI can deliver a few more. But for the
> repeated crashes, ungodly problematic driver updating, and more issues
> than I have time to list - go nVidia.
>
> I tried the 9600pro then a 9800pro and went with the Leadtek 5900xt
> and can say that it beats both hands down in my book. The 9800pro had
> a few more FPS but image quality was absolutely wretched compared to
> the XT.

I have a friend who is making this choice too. I understand the 9800pro is a
better spec card and rates higher in PC Format's buyers guide but ATI have
always had game issues which for me is the ultimate decider. When you buy a
game you don't want to have to wait for a patch or the next drivers to fix
ATI issues. Example - Medal of Honor. Huge graphical glitches fixed by a
patch/driver update.

Its the ultimate decider for me - I'd rather have slightly less FPS (who
notices anyway when a game runs smooth) but have better game support.

 

[daz]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Ozman" <bill@phisupply.com> wrote in
news:HVALc.31984$6t1.612@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com:

> I've narrowed my choice down to 2 New video cards either the 5900xt or
> the 9800pro. It seems that the 9800pro beats the 5900xt in most
> benchmarks but I've been a Nvidia guy since the TNT. I've never had
> much luck with ATI in the past but the 9800pro is what a lot of people
> recommend. My system is currently is Asus A7N8X, 2.4 Athlon,
> Gainward 5600xt and 1 gig DDR.
>
> Here are my questions:
> Are any issues with an nForce board and a ATI card?
> I have seen the benchmarks but how much more longer will I be able to
> run the 9800pro over the 5900xt?
>
>
>

If you do decide to go for the 9800 Pro, make sure its got the 256bit
memory interface...theres a few out there that have the 128bit which is
considerably slower! Sapphire in particular were one of the company's that
got pulled up for advertising said 128bit crippled cards as 9800 Pro's.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Judge left a note on my windscreen which said:

> first of all, anything made by ATI is junk. Why such a broad
> statement? Drivers, drivers, drivers. Second of all, they still have a
> serious problem with recognizing monitors, especially Viewsonics.
>
> If you want ultimate FPS, sure ATI can deliver a few more. But for the
> repeated crashes, ungodly problematic driver updating, and more issues
> than I have time to list - go nVidia.
>
> I tried the 9600pro then a 9800pro and went with the Leadtek 5900xt
> and can say that it beats both hands down in my book. The 9800pro had
> a few more FPS but image quality was absolutely wretched compared to
> the XT.

Your experience would seem to differ from my own, and the majority of
users.

I am pleased with my 9800Pro.

The problems I have experienced thus far include Thief 3 not being able
to play properly with anything beyond driver version 4.4. And OpenGL
games don't run as well as they do on nVidia cards.

Not really a big issue and not something you won't experience with
nVidia cards.

And compared to a friend's 5950 the image quality on my 9800 is far
superior going by what his BFV looked like.
--
Stoneskin

[Insert sig text here]

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

>Judge left a note on my windscreen which said:
>
>> first of all, anything made by ATI is junk. Why such a broad
>> statement? Drivers, drivers, drivers. Second of all, they still have a
>> serious problem with recognizing monitors, especially Viewsonics.
>>
>> If you want ultimate FPS, sure ATI can deliver a few more. But for the
>> repeated crashes, ungodly problematic driver updating, and more issues
>> than I have time to list - go nVidia.
>>
>> I tried the 9600pro then a 9800pro and went with the Leadtek 5900xt
>> and can say that it beats both hands down in my book. The 9800pro had
>> a few more FPS but image quality was absolutely wretched compared to
>> the XT.
>
>Your experience would seem to differ from my own, and the majority of
>users.
>
>I am pleased with my 9800Pro.

I'll chime in on the side of Da Judge here...
9800pro, countless OS reinstalls and driver cleaner 3 runnings,
directX versions, chipset drivers, ATI drivers, omega drivers, starstorm
drivers,
calls to the canucks, message board postings, on and on and on...
(I'm the kinda guy who thinks most hardware install problems
are between the keyboard and the chair...LOL!!)

Got it to work in 2D, any 3D activity would lock it up.

Gave up, bought a MSI FX5900XT.

I *TRIED* to screw up the FX5900XT install by just throwing it into the
machine...
and it worked flawlessly. on a fresh OS install, slightly faster.

I'll stick with nvidia, thanks.


Ski
"The only way to find out how far is too far...
is to go there"
(remove spleen to e-mail)