Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

NVidia Vs Ati Round 1! Fight!

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
April 3, 2002 2:41:36 AM

About this conflict with Nvidia and Ati and who is better. Ok there are 2 thing Ati and a few other companys have done better than Nvidia.

1)They have made better Tv-out and S-video outputs,

2)I don't know to much about the Geforce 4 but nvidia has been cursed by cards that have a bottleneck effect.

3) well i know i said to but this is something i am bitching about but What i don't get is why Nvidia released the geforce 3 ti cards at lower clock speeds. It doesn't make much sense since faster Ram and Core Clock speeds make faster transfer,fill rates and what not, I do understand that it kept the price down. But I would rather pay for a card that has a longer shelf life. I just bought a geforce ti500 only to see a geforce 4 is coming out. ACK!

But I have noticed something about people and how they feel towards certian thing. ALOT OF YOU PEOPLE ARE VERY VERY BIAS! You defend Ati so bad lol. Its not a bad thing ati has done alot of successful things, Cheap price for a decent card, nice bundle packages with there cards and working TV-out lol. But the point being their cards have alot of Driver issues.

Now nvidia is not the be all end all of Video Card companys but they are on top. I see more people bidding on Geforce products then on ati cards. Here is a link for it but i can buy a Ati video card ending in 13hours for under 100 bucks!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2013...

Now i look for a geforce card yes the gts can be easly bought for under 70 bucks but a geforce 4 has 30 bids and is over $300.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2014...

People have their money in on Nvidia. I don't know if it is just me but it is showing that the general people want a powerful card and Nvidia is doing it. If you look at time so far it has been this


Radeon 7200-> Geforce GTS/Pro-->Radeon 7500--->Geforce 2 Ultra--Geforce 3--->Radeon 8500---> Geforce ti200/500---->Geforce 4

Nvidia has been 1 step ahead of Ati the whole time. Anyone saying they seen the radeon 8500 outpreform a geforce 4 is full of poo, because right here at toms hardware it shows benchmarks of the Geforce 4 killing the Radeon 8500 and so what they release a new card by then the Geforce 4 will already have a bigger brother.

More about : nvidia ati round fight

April 3, 2002 3:07:25 AM

[chorus]<font color=blue>to the tune "Proud Mary"</font color=blue>[/chorus]


Trollin'... Trollin' on a river ...
lagger

<b><font color=blue>Checking under my North<font color=red> AND</font color=red> South bridges for <font color=green>Trolls</font color=green></font color=blue>
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
April 3, 2002 3:42:13 AM

^_^ i would also like to add i like both cards i think they both are very powerful cards. Its just the ati cards seem to be rushed alot more then the geforce cards. Its like ati trys to counterattack with a card they think will be the better but in the end the whole time Nvidia is waiting for them to do this so they can drop the next better and faster card. I read someones post a few post backs and it said that "Ati keeps playing catch up" And i can only say they are true. But in the end this card is to do one thing. To Play video games and they both do them well. I haven't ran into one game i can't play. Besides aquanox man that game cranked on full detail takes a toll on the card but that game sucks anyways lol it is only pretty ^_^.
Related resources
April 3, 2002 4:16:42 AM

both ati and nvidia have their strengths and weaknesses...sometimes one more than another...but its all depends on price and preference...ie...people buy AMD cuz they're cheap and fast (faster than P4's too)...people buy P4's cuz they like intel's commercials (ie...them stupid aliens and blueman group)...im not sure why people buy nvidia over ati and vice versa....but id suggest you not continuing/starting another thread like this...we dont wanna start a flame war w/ trolls and all...

<b><font color=red>ATI</font color=red>'s drivers are like a broken faucet, they both keep on leaking...</b> :cool:
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
April 3, 2002 11:33:53 AM

I just hate ATI cards. It's for people how like to do video stuff with their pc. i don't.

my money is on a GeForce 4. I still have my geforce256 DDR and i'm not scared to put money on their newest technology.
April 3, 2002 12:01:38 PM

Quote:

Radeon 7200-> Geforce GTS/Pro-->Radeon 7500--->Geforce 2 Ultra--Geforce 3--->Radeon 8500---> Geforce ti200/500---->Geforce 4

Actually, if that's in order of performance then that's incorrect.


Radeon 7200-> Geforce GTS/Pro-->Radeon 7500--->Geforce 2 Ultra--Geforce 3--->Geforce ti200/500---->Radeon 8500---> Geforce 4

That's more accurate.


I support ATI because I love their drivers, the new unified drivers are so flexible and so easy to program tweaks for.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
April 3, 2002 12:01:38 PM

Quote:

Radeon 7200-> Geforce GTS/Pro-->Radeon 7500--->Geforce 2 Ultra--Geforce 3--->Radeon 8500---> Geforce ti200/500---->Geforce 4

Actually, if that's in order of performance then that's incorrect.


Radeon 7200-> Geforce GTS/Pro-->Radeon 7500--->Geforce 2 Ultra--Geforce 3--->Geforce ti200/500---->Radeon 8500---> Geforce 4

That's more accurate.


I support ATI because I love their drivers, the new unified drivers are so flexible and so easy to program tweaks for.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
April 3, 2002 2:40:28 PM

you double posted...lol...

<b><font color=red>ATI</font color=red>'s drivers are like a broken faucet, they both keep on leaking...</b> :cool:
April 3, 2002 2:58:00 PM

Okay i love Nvidia, i'm a nvidia fanboy but i try to be fair. I love Nvidia's constantly updated unified driver architecture thats never given me ANY problems, note thought that i only use the officially released versions. I'm on 28.32 now. So here's my Nvidia pitch:

1600x1200, 32bit color, anisotropic filtering, 4xS super AA @50+ fps in perfectly brilliant color in Renegade, Max Payne, Jedi Knight 2, and F1 2001. Oh, god, help us all only on the Geforce 4 TI 4600-)))))))))

"OOOOO Shiny things. I can make powerful equipment with shiny things!" - The imp Butler from BGII<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by williamc on 04/03/02 11:01 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 3, 2002 3:19:19 PM

Hey! I'm the one who's suposed to be doing troll songs!!! :wink:

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 3, 2002 3:33:58 PM

Quote:
Radeon 7200-> Geforce GTS/Pro-->Radeon 7500--->Geforce 2 Ultra--Geforce 3--->Radeon 8500---> Geforce ti200/500---->Geforce 4

Even with the inital drivers, the 8500 outperformed the TI200, and with current drivers, the 8500 outperforms the TI500. And, on slower computers, the 8500 beats out the GF4 in some cases (Search the boards for a post about it. It was a P4 1.5GHZ system, and the 8500 outperformed the GF4 4600 in Serious Sam with the 6043 drivers.)

But, in general, the GF4 is a more powerfull card. However, I look for what I can get for my money, and I see the 8500 as a low priced, high performance videocard solution. I've had less problems with their drivers than I have with Nvidia drivers (I can't get them to work for my old TNT card, and had stability problems with them for my GF2 MX).

Image quality is something that I look at too, and I've found my 8500 to have a superior immage quality to some of the Nvidia products I've seen. However, this is a VERY subjective area.

You want the top performance? The GF4 is where to get it. However, I personaly don't feel it's worth the extra over an 8500 for the performance difference. (at the moment, it's about a $120 price difference between the retail 8500 64MB and the GF4 TI4400, and another $100 over the GF4 TI4600)

What THG should do, is a roundup of all the GF4 TI cards and compair them (4400 benchmarks would be nice as well as 4600), and throw in the retail 8500 with the 6043 or 6052 drivers.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 3, 2002 4:26:19 PM

Nvidia is faster but ATI's has allways had a better Picture quality and more Direct X 8.1 support etc... And U pay more for the name NVIDIA being on the box ...

Just like an intel - AMD thing -----Intel Is faster but amd has more perfomance and is cheaper... you don't pay 100+ for the name intel on the box

:p 

:cool: <font color=blue>The Hardware Junkie</font color=blue> :cool:
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
April 3, 2002 5:25:19 PM

But see everyone is doing the fanboy thing here. Intel vs Amd well intel also has a nice way of keeping their cpu from frying if the fan falls of while the t-bird goes up in smoke along with the durons. And a PIII Just hangs,while the P4 clocks down to prevent cookage. Now on the Nvidia thing i play EQ alot and i hear alot of people complain that the 8500 cause flickering in menu screens. Also how can you really compare a MX to a Ati 8500 or even a 7500 because the MX cards are budget cards that can be bought for less then $150 bucks! and they give alot of bang for the buck i would have to say.
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
April 3, 2002 5:36:51 PM

But really if you check out here at this site about card preformance in the new benchmarks for the Geforce 4 cards the ti200 beats the 7500 the radeon 8500 beats thes ti200 and the ti500 beats the radeon 8500 and the geforce 4 kill all else. If ya don't believe check em out. But anyways this is why i started the post i want to see everyones general opinion about this to video card titans
April 3, 2002 6:06:05 PM

in reply to: "Nvidia is faster but ATI's has allways had a better Picture quality" -The_Neon_Cowboy

That just isnt true anymore dude, with the GF4 i get amazingly good quality in the picture and color. Better than any Radeon i've seen in my opinion. Was shocked when i switched from GF3 to GF4 4600 at the huge increase in picture quality i got.

"OOOOO Shiny things. I can make powerful equipment with shiny things!" - The imp Butler from BGII
April 3, 2002 7:04:24 PM

Which reviews are you looking at? I've not seen one reciently where the 8500 was outperformed by a GF3 of any type.

Ultimately, as with every computer purchase, feeling good about what you bought is what is best. Some people feel better buying Intel or AMD, for whatever reason. Same thing with ATI or Nvidia. If you need to have a particular brand of product in your computer (Hey, I usually try to avoid non-western digital HDs) to feel comfortable about it, then go for it. Just make sure you do your research and know what you are getting.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 3, 2002 7:47:08 PM

Western Digital's same way for me-) tried one maxtor 60gig when i was building my new p4 rig while back, it just burned out literally in 6 months, motors wore out on it and it just....died.... Went back to western digital with a 100gig drive...works way better thant he Maxtor ever did...Been reading bout lots of problems with IBM drives burning out in 3 to 6 months too.

"OOOOO Shiny things. I can make powerful equipment with shiny things!" - The imp Butler from BGII
April 3, 2002 8:28:32 PM

Thing is R8500's Pixel shader is 1.4 and the GF4 Ti's Pixel shader is 1.3 . The GF4 isnt a DX 8.1 video if you think about it. DX 8.1 require's Pixel shaders 1.4. Nvidia says GF4 is DX 8.1 card but its not.

Thats just to prove your wrong....

---------------

Also dont start Troll Threads here like the CPU forum.

I invented ctrl-alt-del but Bill [Gates] made it famous - Dave Bradley IBM PC designer
April 3, 2002 9:11:35 PM

Hmmm, I can tell you haven't tried an R8500 with the latest drivers. :wink:

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
April 4, 2002 1:03:46 AM

Where did i see the benchmark of the geforce 3 beating an ati radeon 8500 ok right here ^_^

http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/02q1/020304/geforc...

the only benchmark it beats a geforce 3 in is the 3dmarks which isn't even real world preformance. To say the least do research before posting on these ^_~
April 4, 2002 1:05:13 AM

Hmm, I suggest you do the research. They were using outdated drivers.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
April 4, 2002 1:57:22 AM

Ah yes, the magical speed increase of a billion perecent that even outclasses the GF4. Of course.

Sig of the week.
April 4, 2002 2:02:29 AM

I dont need research, proof is in the pudding baby.

I was about to order a 8500 for myself, I think its important everyone reads this as its the case 9/10times...


Got myself a shiny Geforce 3 (the original one)... plugged it in, ZERO problems since then.. NOTHING...I love it, its fast, a great upgrade from my GF2 GTS. I can even use the 4XS AA of the G4 with it!!!
I'm a happy gamer.

now lets go to a co worker of mines story, he bought a 8500. He was previously using a TI200. He pops in the 8500, BAM! Motherboard incompatibilitys, goes, checks into it, he was using a bios revision with a fix SPECIFICALY FOR radeon 8500s... he flashes BACK to one without the RADEON FIX, works better but still does not work correctly..
He is considering a motherboard upgrade (he has a KT266 chipset board now).. Thats ATI boys.

I told him if I could test the board on my PC I might trade him straight up for my visiontek GF3. He said he would do that in a minute.

So go ahead, enjoy your 3dmarks but I have great performance in both direct3d and opengl (I've seen the radeon doing poorly in opengl).
And I also have great AA.
This is JUST a GF3... I say, take your chances on ATI but I could tell they were trouble from all the fuss I put up with my ATI TV Wonder<-JUNK.
8500s are great for those willing to have to put up with some problems and have time to spend on messing with it.. I consider it experimental still, buggy and not evenspread on performance(much like the Kyro2 was).

Only one true big dog left in town IMO.

First round K.O.

"dude your getting a dell", is that kid trying to say he wants to stick his 'dell' in you?
April 4, 2002 2:12:41 AM

Ding Ding Ding! Round 2 begins!

Sig of the week.
April 4, 2002 2:07:37 PM

are you sure your coworker COMPLETELY removed all the old nvidia drivers from the Ti200 before installing the 8500? We all know how ati and nvidia drivers don't get along...



----
A newbie is only a newbie for as long as you allow him to be.
-Anonymous Veteran
April 4, 2002 3:44:47 PM

I have the ATI Raedon 7200. Its a cool VIVO card for the price. But for games it's gotta be NVidia. There's no debate or even a battle. This is the end all.

For games- Nvidia
For Video-ATI

I should know..my azz is still sore from playing unreal online against all those NVidia folks. Next paycheck it's Nvidia for me and I'll put this ATI card in my backup 1GHz PC.
April 4, 2002 3:45:53 PM

Quote:
now lets go to a co worker of mines story, he bought a 8500. He was previously using a TI200. He pops in the 8500, BAM! Motherboard incompatibilitys, goes, checks into it, he was using a bios revision with a fix SPECIFICALY FOR radeon 8500s... he flashes BACK to one without the RADEON FIX, works better but still does not work correctly..
He is considering a motherboard upgrade (he has a KT266 chipset board now).. Thats ATI boys.

Actualy, that's a Via problem.

Different people have different experiences. I have yet to have a problem with my 8500 other than a single bios tweek (AGP fastwrites).

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 4, 2002 3:52:58 PM

Actualy, the 6043 and 6052 drivers do add a few frams just about everywhere, and TRIPPLED the performance of the card on some tests (OpenGL).

Nvidia used to make a big deal when they released their new drivers and claimed (and sometimes actualy had) large performance increases. ATI is releasing drivers that are doing similar things.

Remember, the 8500 is VERY programable, and can be streamlined to do specific things by different games and drivers. Speeds will get even better as people learn how to work with it.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 4, 2002 3:58:56 PM

Quote:
Nvidia says GF4 is DX 8.1 card but its not.

Nvidia has not claimed that the GF4 is DX8.1 compatable.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 4, 2002 4:18:30 PM

But it is... as are the GF3, GF2, Radeon 8500, 7500.
It is compatible, but that does not mean the it is a full DX8.1 card (in the sense that it supports every DX function in hadware)

How terrible is wisdom when it brings no profit to the wise
April 4, 2002 5:14:18 PM

Love their drivers? Have you gone mad, man?

I can't think of a good signature so I'll use this one.
April 4, 2002 6:42:54 PM

Quote:
But it is... as are the GF3, GF2, Radeon 8500, 7500.
It is compatible, but that does not mean the it is a full DX8.1 card (in the sense that it supports every DX function in hadware)


Radeon 8500 is the only card right now that support every DX function in hadware.

Also hell cat im Tri-Booting in Win98, Win2k, WinXP all my Radeon 8500 drivers for all the OSes are fast and stable.

I invented ctrl-alt-del but Bill [Gates] made it famous - Dave Bradley IBM PC designer
April 4, 2002 7:38:11 PM

No, I've never had any problems with any of the drivers. They're fast and stable. They're also flexible beyond belief. It's extremely easy to mod the driver set to include files from other versions of the unified driver. Also, ATI releases drivers extremely fast. There's nothing wrong with ATI drivers, if you believe otherwise then either something is wrong with your system's hardware, or you need ATIMax, hehe. :wink:

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
April 4, 2002 8:08:23 PM

Quote:
But it is... as are the GF3, GF2, Radeon 8500, 7500.
It is compatible, but that does not mean the it is a full DX8.1 card (in the sense that it supports every DX function in hadware)

I'm sorry, compatable wasn't the correct word. Fully DX8.1 enabled is more accurate. Only the 8500 is that. The GF3 and GF4 TIs are all DX8.0 compatable, and the 7500, GF2s, Radeons, and GF4 MX cards are all DX7.0 fully enabled.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 4, 2002 8:59:54 PM

Well, I've tried 2 different 8500 in my system and neither worked/works as it should. So...

BTW, which drivers are better (for XP)? - I'm using the 6052 (IMHO they are the better drivers so far)

How terrible is wisdom when it brings no profit to the wise
April 5, 2002 6:13:55 AM

I agree. I keep learning over and over you get what you pay for, this goes for computer parts like motherboards, gpus, cd/dvd drives, whatever.. sure you can pull a fast one and get lucky with the right hardware configuration but most of the time, most of the users of the cheaper stuff get burned.

Its not that I dont like ATI, I could care less. But I'm going to definitly get my word out about this, because I have firsthand experience that people should know, and it isnt fanboy stuff so its valid.

People defend what they buy but I defend the truth.

A small update, he is slowly getting the system working but he still wishes he hadn't wasted a week doing it and does still want a geforce again simply for fear of future problems and for peace of mind.

I took out the GTS, put in the Geforce3, turned on the comptuer, the 28.32 det4's detected the card and it worked immediately.

Athlon XP 1700+,KT266A,Geforce3
April 5, 2002 6:26:17 AM

about the DX8.1 thing, does it even matter? If nvidia doesnt use ps 1.4 in the gf3/4 cards then no games are going to use ps1.4 because the majority of the gaming public are going to have geforce3/4s if they have a DX8 card at all!

What I'm saying is, I think nvidia sabotaged your 8500 party by keeping suit with the GF4 only being a DX8 card instead of DX8.1.. smart move in my opinion. if devs know that 95% of DX8 cards out there are only DX8 and not DX8.1 why program for DX8.1 for such a small minority?

Its sad but true.

Athlon XP 1700+,KT266A,Geforce3
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
April 5, 2002 6:39:39 AM

i have bought 2 ATI cards (still use one) and i don't like either one of them. the only nvidia card i've had was a TNT2 pro and that one was good. a friend of mine had a pricey Ati card that never did work quite right. next card i buy is going to be a geforce3.
oh yeah the integrated ATI in my brother's imac (which i am currently using) is pathetic also.
April 5, 2002 7:05:46 AM

And they keep on coming in.... :-)

I would suggest a Geforce 4 4200 64MB card (it has the faster memory on it) if you are on a budget Jose. They will be available within a month and be around $160.. they are faster than my Geforce 3 also and have better anti-aliasing, better 2D quality, lots of goodies, you'll be happy with that.

Athlon XP 1700+,KT266A,Geforce3, Audigy.. 'nuff said.
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
April 5, 2002 7:27:34 AM

thats a good suggestion but way out of my price range. the geforce3 is barely in it. i have to use almost all the money on the MB and processor.
April 5, 2002 11:28:54 AM

ATI has had problems with drivers in the past, but people saying that the R7500 and R8500 still have several problems probably either have an EPoX 8KHA+ or have a driver conflict, or have Fast Writes enabled.

Now, the EPox 8KHA+ isn't really ATI's fault as some other nVidia cards have problems on that board as well.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
April 5, 2002 3:37:08 PM

My freind just got an Ati card, and guess what, it won't work well at all. He's spent 2 weeks on it (and he is competent, and doesn't have a KHa+). He's been having tons of problems w/ it, so he's arranged for to be returned, and is gonna get NV card.

Sig of the week.
April 5, 2002 4:18:31 PM

Quote:
if devs know that 95% of DX8 cards out there are only DX8 and not DX8.1 why program for DX8.1 for such a small minority?

The 8500 has more than a 5% market share for DX 8 cards.

What Nvidia did is sabatoge all DX8 cards by not making the GF4 MX DX8 compatable, hense taking a step backwards. It would have been a bit different if they marketed it as a GF3 MX... as it has some of the GF3 and 4 tech, but is still a GF2 for most purposes. The MX seems to be the Value line of the Geforces, so selling the MX as a slightly striped down GF3 would make more sense.

However, as they have the MX targeting the mainstream, and it's only a DX7 card, most games are only going to be targeting DX7 (As far as 3D features at least, there is more than simply 3D feature differences between DX7 and DX8, as the pixel shadder is not the only difference in 8.1). So, Nvidia shot themselves in the foot.

Is there a big deal with DX8 vs DX8.1? No. It's not THAT much closer to DX9, and there isn't that much of a performance difference. It's simply a different way of doing things.

Now, the Geforce cards and the Radeon cards are both nice cards. I happened to think the 8500 was the best value when I was looking for a card, and I still do for it's price class (Under $200 US).

If you look at their other areas, ATI is poised to do quite well. Both have integrated solution chipsets now. Nvidia has it's Nforce for the Athlon. ATI has 4. 2 mobile, and 2 desktop. 2 Athlon, and 2 P4. Now, I haven't seen any performance specs or anything like that, but if the chip has decient performance on both platforms, they're in a much better position than Nvidia in that market. Nvidia has a sweet deal with Microsoft for the Xbox (they get more out of it than Intel), while ATI's deal with Nintendo isn't as sweet.

Hopefully, this will be an age old debate for years to come.

Trollin' trollin' trollin', keep them doggies postin', my fingers are swollen, Rawhide!
April 5, 2002 4:22:45 PM

What type of problems?

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
April 5, 2002 6:52:33 PM

Many, but it's too late now.

Sig of the week.
April 5, 2002 7:39:08 PM

Tell me. The point of the program I've trying to make is to resolve/prevent driver conflicts.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
April 6, 2002 3:41:19 PM

Best bang for the buck as usual goes to ATI while Nvidia cards rips the cash out of your wallet faster than a two legged hooker. IQ to me is a toss up, TruForm in SeriousSamSE using the Radeon8500 series eats alive the GF4 IQ in the models while the high resolution usuable antialising ability of the GF4s eats the Radeon8500's for usable framerates. Still a Radeon8500 at 1600x1200x32 using max anistropic filtering would compared favorably to any GF4 Ti4600 with its max anistropic filtering in FPS and who would needs FSAA in that case anyways?? My opinion is if you want a top notch and high performing DX8 card for under $200 then the Radeon8500LE with 128mb is in a class of its own.
April 6, 2002 11:12:47 PM

Well reading the recent review of the GF4 Ti4200 at firing squad gives me hope in the upcoming cards using the GF4 Ti4200 chip.

<A HREF="http://firingsquad.gamers.com/hardware/ti4200/default.a..." target="_new">http://firingsquad.gamers.com/hardware/ti4200/default.a...;/A>

Maybe Nvidia can give a card that is best bang for the buck in the near future, except ATI will probably lower their prices and maintain the crown. Either card as I see it (Radeon8500LE or GF4 Ti4200) are great buys for the money except you can buy the Radeon8500LE now.
April 6, 2002 11:29:08 PM

Seems to me they are using pre-9017/6043 drivers for the R8500 therefore, that review doesn't show the R8500's true potential.

AMD technology + Intel technology = Intel/AMD Pentathlon IV; the <b>ULTIMATE</b> PC processor
April 7, 2002 1:16:48 AM

agreed

I invented ctrl-alt-del but Bill [Gates] made it famous - Dave Bradley IBM PC designer
!