Radeon vs GeForce

[Jo]

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

Hi
I would like to know what Radeon card would be the approximate performance
equivalent of a GeForce 4 card (I think there are several GF4 card versions
so let's say the lowest GF4).
Thanks!

 

[Guest]

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

On 4/23/2005 11:06 AM Jo brightened our day with:

>Hi
>I would like to know what Radeon card would be the approximate performance
>equivalent of a GeForce 4 card (I think there are several GF4 card versions
>so let's say the lowest GF4).
>Thanks!
>
>
>
>
Maybe a 9600 Pro, except when you start playing DirectX 9 games, then
the 9600 Pro is a good deal faster. Playing an older game the Ti4200
sometimes is a little faster than the 9600. The GeForce 4 series
doesn't have DirectX 9 stuff in hardware as the 9600 cards do.

--
People of the United States! We are Unitarian Jihad! We can strike without warning. Pockets of reasonableness and harmony will appear as if from nowhere! Nice people will run the government again! There will be coffee and cookies in the Gandhi Room after the revolution.

Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
www.inglostadt.com

 

[Jo]

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

Thanks a lot for your answer, I'll check that out!

"Inglo" <ioo@??.¿¿¿> a écrit dans le message de news:
Vmwae.4135$Xb4.1048@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
> On 4/23/2005 11:06 AM Jo brightened our day with:
>
>>Hi
>>I would like to know what Radeon card would be the approximate performance
>>equivalent of a GeForce 4 card (I think there are several GF4 card
>>versions so let's say the lowest GF4).
>>Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
> Maybe a 9600 Pro, except when you start playing DirectX 9 games, then the
> 9600 Pro is a good deal faster. Playing an older game the Ti4200
> sometimes is a little faster than the 9600. The GeForce 4 series doesn't
> have DirectX 9 stuff in hardware as the 9600 cards do.
>
> --
> People of the United States! We are Unitarian Jihad! We can strike without
> warning. Pockets of reasonableness and harmony will appear as if from
> nowhere! Nice people will run the government again! There will be coffee
> and cookies in the Gandhi Room after the revolution.
>
> Steve ¤»Inglo«¤
> www.inglostadt.com

 

[augustus]

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

"Jo" <123@123.net> wrote in message
news:19wae.30627$M85.1161285@wagner.videotron.net...
> Hi
> I would like to know what Radeon card would be the approximate performance
> equivalent of a GeForce 4 card (I think there are several GF4 card
> versions so let's say the lowest GF4).

A full Radeon 8500 128Mb is about the equivalent of a Ti4200. The Ti4200 is
a bit faster in OpenGL type acceleration. They're both DX8.1 cards. They
both have 4 pipelines and 2 TMU per pipeline. I briefly had a Geforce4
Ti4600 card and it was faster overall than my old 8500 128Mb. The Radeon
produced a nicer images in 2D and 3D in my opinion, so I stayed with it
until my 9800 Pro 128Mb card.

 

[Jo]

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

Thanks for your detailled answer!

"Augustus" <augustus@wrtt.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
K6Aae.46133$yV3.23781@clgrps12...
>
> "Jo" <123@123.net> wrote in message
> news:19wae.30627$M85.1161285@wagner.videotron.net...
>> Hi
>> I would like to know what Radeon card would be the approximate
>> performance equivalent of a GeForce 4 card (I think there are several GF4
>> card versions so let's say the lowest GF4).
>
> A full Radeon 8500 128Mb is about the equivalent of a Ti4200. The Ti4200
> is a bit faster in OpenGL type acceleration. They're both DX8.1 cards.
> They both have 4 pipelines and 2 TMU per pipeline. I briefly had a
> Geforce4 Ti4600 card and it was faster overall than my old 8500 128Mb. The
> Radeon produced a nicer images in 2D and 3D in my opinion, so I stayed
> with it until my 9800 Pro 128Mb card.
>