5900 Ultra 256MB vs. ATi Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Genx87
The 5900 is barely playable on the same modes.

Didnt you just say 40 FPS was just fine?!?!?!?!?!? And where did you get the 40 FPS with AA\AF turned on? I didnt see any AF\AA scores. Or are you just making it up? Oh anyways back to the topic. You said 40 FPS is just fine. Last I checked even before the Det 50s the 5900 Ultra was getting around 45-50 FPS. So by your own defintition the 5900 ultra is just fine for HL2.

Too bad the FX won't have all the effects on.

Originally posted by: Genx87
If the numbers Anand posted are correct and the FX with the Det 50.xx turns in a performance equal to the 9800 Pro. Then I guess this whole argument is moot.

You're right, Detonator 50.xx is a magical ether out to fix everything, and all those articles on "reduced video quality" are lies.

Originally posted by: Genx87
I'm a silly Nvidia fanboy who can't concede anything whatsoever to ATI and thinks that Nvidia will always magically crank out a new driver to crush whatever ATI has in store, despite what logic and factual information may prove.

Well, at least you admitted to your ways. I'm proud of you for that. And such a well written concession, I might add .

 

[nRollo]

Half life runs just fine on a 9800PRO...60FPS average in DX9 mode, 40FPS w/ 4X AA on. That is more than enough for most people.

ON what cpu? At what resolution? That is more than enough for YOU, I will buy a card that will run the game WELL when it comes out, rather than wish I had a card that runs the game well when it comes out.
I'll have my 9800 Pro, but it won't be good enough. I'll sell it to someone who thinks it is. I'd do the same if I had a 5900 Ultra.

BTW it's interesting how the what's acceptable and what isn't seems to depend on what suits the poster's argument:
If we're talking Pre-HL2:"It has to be 16X12, 6X16X or it's butt ugly!
But for HL2: "10X7 is just fine! HL2 will magically look great at lower settings and framerates than I've seen in two years!"

 

[nRollo]

Too bad the FX won't have all the effects on.

Pffft. When 32 bit color first came out, all the nVidia and ATI guys(myself included) said the same thing, even though 16 bit looked about the same in most games. When T/L came out we all said, "You've got to have it! Those V5s are primitive backwards thinking cards!" and I can't remember how long it took for T/L to amount to a hill of beans. When bump mapping came out, we all said "Wait till Giants comes out and you see the bump mapping!" I don't remember if that EVER caught on, it kind of fell off my radar*. When the Radeon VIVO came out with triple texturing, we all thought that would be the next big thing. LOL

Sheep led by the nose to the slaughter/lightening of the wallet.

The only smart gamer buys his equipment for the games that are out and matter to him. Fools buy cards in hopes they'll have some magic "future proof" card.


*which is not to say it didn't, it could be in every game now, I just haven't noticed much made of it of late

 

[lordtyranus2]

Not for us working gamers who actually care if the games run right

Game runs "right"? What is "right"? You don't decide "right" for everyone.

(unless you consider 12X10 no AA/AF at 50fps on a 3GHz cpu "good")

And what if I consider this to be decent? Should I get decent or bad?

So you see LordTyranus, it just doesn't really matter what you buy now, because you'll be buying again THEN. Still think it's bad logic, Big Chief?

For you, perhaps not. If you choose to replace cards every few months, all the more power to you. But the majority of gamers do not do that so often.

1 year from now, I would rather play HL2 at 1024 with 4x8x than have to go down to 800 no AA/AF to maintain a similar framerate.

The fact is (from what I gather here), they are both similar performers for current games, while 1 is inferior in future games. Clearly, 1 is not equal to the other.

I see the bad logic as the doofus who looks at those benchmarks and says, "Both of these cards run this game like crap. I'm going to buy the less crappy of the two in hopes that less crappy will satisfy me in the future when this game comes out".

This is certainly not good logic, but buying the 5900 because its only slightly crappier than crap is even worse. The best logic would be to buy nothing right now. That's why I am holding out with my 9100 ATM.

There are two cards that will run current games approximately the same, the card he'd be trading for may even have a higher resale value right now.

This is certainly a valid point. To original poster: If you want to go through the hassle of trading cards, then selling it, you'll profit off the deal. Newegg currently has refurbished 9800 pros for ~$270.

The only smart gamer buys his equipment for the games that are out and matter to him. Fools buy cards in hopes they'll have some magic "future proof" card.

Also valid. But there is no real reason ATM to buy a FX card, unless you ONLY want to play a game that works better on FX AND aren't planning on playing other games with this card. If you plan to play Homeworld 2 for the next year or so, by all means, buy an FX.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Half life runs just fine on a 9800PRO...60FPS average in DX9 mode, 40FPS w/ 4X AA on. That is more than enough for most people.

ON what cpu? At what resolution? That is more than enough for YOU, I will buy a card that will run the game WELL when it comes out, rather than wish I had a card that runs the game well when it comes out.
I'll have my 9800 Pro, but it won't be good enough. I'll sell it to someone who thinks it is. I'd do the same if I had a 5900 Ultra.

BTW it's interesting how the what's acceptable and what isn't seems to depend on what suits the poster's argument:
If we're talking Pre-HL2:"It has to be 16X12, 6X16X or it's butt ugly!
But for HL2: "10X7 is just fine! HL2 will magically look great at lower settings and framerates than I've seen in two years!"

that may not be enough for you but the bottom line is that 9800 pro is currently faster in HL2 than 5900 ultra. so if the 9800 pro is too slow, you will be deeply dissapointed in the 5900 ultra. also, people bought the 9800 pro to run current games as well

 

[nRollo]

Game runs "right"? What is "right"? You don't decide "right" for everyone.

Hey, why not? I've had 800-odd ATIdiots tell me you "have" to run HL2 in DX9, and that less than 6XAA and 16XAF is "butt ugly", so if I want to say 10X7, no AA/AF isn't where I want to be gaming in 2004, I will.

And what if I consider this to be decent? Should I get decent or bad?

I tried to tell this to a guy when I said I preferred running UT2003 at 11X8, 4XAF for faster fps, but found out that ONLY 6X16X is "playable". That same guy says now that HL2 is going to be great on a 9800Pro. Where's the consistency?

1 year from now, I would rather play HL2 at 1024 with 4x8x than have to go down to 800 no AA/AF to maintain a similar framerate.

You could run it in DX 8 ?

The best logic would be to buy nothing right now

Agreed, but this thread was about trading.

 

[lordtyranus2]

I tried to tell this to a guy when I said I preferred running UT2003 at 11X8, 4XAF for faster fps, but found out that ONLY 6X16X is "playable". That same guy says now that HL2 is going to be great on a 9800Pro. Where's the consistency?

Don't ask me. I'm stuck at 10x7 with nothing on. But the textures and such in HL2 are better, so perhaps that makes up for some of the resolution gap.

I've had 800-odd ATIdiots tell me you "have" to run HL2 in DX9, and that less than 6XAA and 16XAF is "butt ugly", so if I want to say 10X7, no AA/AF isn't where I want to be gaming in 2004, I will.

"Right" isn't the right word. Try acceptable. Just because fanATIcs are being stupid doesn't mean you have to be.

You could run it in DX 8 ?

I don't know the details, but wouldn't that look as nice? It ends up not being behind the ATI card anyway. Besides, what's the fun in that? We have DX9 cards to run DX9 games in DX9.


The fact is, NVIDIots aren't any better than fanATIcs. They just have nothing to talk about ATM. You're not bowing before ATI lands you in the NVIDIot category for some reason. fanATIcs are like starving dogs who have just found a dead deer on the road. Better to avoid them.

 

[lordtyranus2]

to original poster:

1. How long do you plan to use whichever card?
2. Are you planning on playing DX9 games while you own this card?
3. Are you opposed to trading, selling the product, and buying a new card?
4. Do you play Homeworld 2?
5. Does the trader have solid heatware?


Answer those questions, and you have your answer. Don't let anyone else decide, choose what you want to do.

 

[Genx87]

Too bad the FX won't have all the effects on.


Which effects wont it have on?!?!?!?!?!?!?

You're right, Detonator 50.xx is a magical ether out to fix everything, and all those articles on "reduced video quality" are lies.


51.75s had issues.....not having seen the 52.xx we are just guessing.

Well, at least you admitted to your ways. I'm proud of you for that. And such a well written concession, I might add

Is that what you ATI fanbois have to resort to now?

Pathetic....................................

 

[Instigator]

For you, perhaps not. If you choose to replace cards every few months, all the more power to you. But the majority of gamers do not do that so often.

Serious gamers replace there cards approxiamately once every 12 months. Some sooner. You have to if you want to run games at decent FPS.

1 year from now, I would rather play HL2 at 1024 with 4x8x than have to go down to 800 no AA/AF to maintain a similar framerate.

Then you won't be doing it on a 9800 pro. Maybe on the R400 if you are lucky.

The only smart gamer buys his equipment for the games that are out and matter to him. Fools buy cards in hopes they'll have some magic "future proof" card.

One of the best statements in this thread. No such thing as future proof.

Also valid. But there is no real reason ATM to buy a FX card, unless you ONLY want to play a game that works better on FX AND aren't planning on playing other games with this card. If you plan to play Homeworld 2 for the next year or so, by all means, buy an FX.

No real reason huh. Hmm, I kinda like playing just about every game out with 4x FSAA and 8x AF. Guess that's not a good reason.

The fact is, NVIDIots aren't any better than fanATIcs. They just have nothing to talk about ATM. You're not bowing before ATI lands you in the NVIDIot category for some reason. fanATIcs are like starving dogs who have just found a dead deer on the road. Better to avoid them.

What planet are you on? Have you been reading any posts in this forum in the past 2 months. If you even hint that the 5900 is a good card the ATI freaks come out. If your read most of the so called Nvidiots replies, they don't slam the 9800 at all. They know it's a good card. There is a VERY big difference between ATIdiots and Nvidiots.

 

[Corporate Thug]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For you, perhaps not. If you choose to replace cards every few months, all the more power to you. But the majority of gamers do not do that so often.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Serious gamers replace there cards approxiamately once every 12 months. Some sooner. You have to if you want to run games at decent FPS.

thanx fpr defining serious gamer on behalf of the rest of the world

 

[Instigator]

thanx fpr defining serious gamer on behalf of the rest of the world

How often do you upgrade your video card?

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: Instigator

thanx fpr defining serious gamer on behalf of the rest of the world

How often do you upgrade your video card?

i do mine once every 8 months or so but my bro does his once every 18 months and he games just as much as i do if not more

 

[Instigator]

i do mine once every 8 months or so but my bro does his once every 18 months and he games just as much as i do if not more

Hehe, damn you burned yourself. So, every 8 months for you and 18 months for your brother. Simple math:

8 + 18 = 26 divide by 2 = 13 months

So, on an average serious gamers upgrade their video card every year. Thanks for clearing that up.

ummm, if i paid a large amount of money for a video card that is advertised to be DX9 i would be pissed if it cant run ALL games in an acceptable manner in DX9.

umm, thanks for speaking on behalf of all gamers.

And it looks like you are going to be pissed then when Doom III comes out.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i do mine once every 8 months or so but my bro does his once every 18 months and he games just as much as i do if not more
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Hehe, damn you burned yourself. So, every 8 months for you and 18 months for your brother. Simple math:

8 + 18 = 26 divide by 2 = 13 months

So, on an average serious gamers upgrade their video card every year. Thanks for clearing that up.

no no, my point was i am no more of a serious gamer than my bro because i upgrade more often

also, i'm not speaking on behalf of all gamers thus the "I"

 

[Instigator]

In the context of your statement, "if I" implies that you and other consumers would be mad if they purchased an expensive card and it couldn't run all the games they wanted. But if you want stick with "I" meaning just you, then your arguement is that you are the only one who would be mad if you purchased an expensive card and it couldn't run all the games you wanted. Huh,Ok? So you and only you would be mad and nobody else? Not much of an arguement. That would mean 99.9% of the consumers wouldn't be mad if they purchase an expensive card and it couldn't run all the games they wanted. Which is it? So you are not implying other consumers would be mad? Please clarify.

What do you think about the HL2 delay? And you wonder why I posted that you never buy a video card based on one game. I believe your quote was alot of people build their machines specifically to play HL2. I think we know why I said that's stupid and the delay proves my point. Looks like you will be waiting 7 months for HL2. What games will be coming out in the next year that will be using the HL2 engine? Looks like you will be luck if you see HL2 within a year let alone other games based on it. Huh, I believe I also posted we would be thru 2 new versions of ATI and Nvidia before that happens. Funny how all that works out.

 

[Corporate Thug]

i was speaking for myself, i dont know if other would be pissed or not and quite frankly i dont really care whether or not others are pissed. however, i never implied that others WONT be pissed but the statement was only on my behalf and the way i see the issue. others may or may not have the same opinion

i was simply saying if I personally spent the money, i myself would be pissed. thats all, simple as that.

as far as the HL2 issue, i'm not particularly dissapointed. personally, i'm looking more forward to Max Payne II and UT2004. i'm tired of the antics from valve and from ID as well.

 

[BFG10K]

it CAN be loud at it's maximum RPM, but it never gets hot enough to need the fan to run that high

A 9700/9800 never gets that loud since its fan is always quiet no matter what.

#2 I'm afraid you are seriously misinformed... AnandTech isn't just a message board, they do benchmarks and reviews too... see my previous post about that...

And Anandtech isn't the only board that missed the cheating the first around around.

#3 What you call "current issues" I call a bunch of b!tching.

Complaining about cheating is not what I'd call bitching. nVidia is basically selling you a product that doesn't perform in the real world as well as it performs in the benchmarks.

Nobody seems to care that ATI did their own fair share of "cheating" in the past...

Because it's irrelevant. We're looking at today's cards right now and if you buy an off-the-self ATi card it isn't going to cheat, unlike nVidia's current FX lineup.

nobody seems to care that ATI STILL has driver issues despite what the ATI fanboys say about how much better the drivers are.

I agree with you that both vendors have driver issues.

The FX5900 DOES perform better in today's games... and it costs less.

In most cases when you crank up the image quality you'll find the 9800 performs better and looks better as well.

the GPU is overclocked 22%

So you now deem it fair to compare your overclocked 5900 to a stock Radeon 9800? Do you honestly feel that's a valid comparison to make?

 

[Rogodin2]

Valid comparision don't matter in the realms of public forums: just you ask rollo.

"nVidia is basically selling you a product that doesn't perform in the real world as well as it performs in the benchmarks."


Hence my Coffee analogy.

Hell you cant use it for buying a whopper: You buy a whopper and get an AMPM "ratburger" what are you going to do?

It's only $2 but you got a .50C burger, just like if you buy a nvidia card these days.

Tell me the analogy is wrong and that you know THE TRUTH-(just for your info you better put up at least 15 valid premises to support you BURGER TRUTH).

rogo

 

[Nebor]

OCed 5900 will pwn an OCed 9800np. Stock 5900 will pwn a stock 9800np. 5900U and 9800 pro are pretty much dead even.

While I haven't bought a GFX5900 yet, my 9800's fan was unbearably loud, and was replaced within a week w/ a zalman heatpipe. Also, even with the fan, the card quickly became too hot to touch. Youch.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Too bad the FX won't have all the effects on.


Which effects wont it have on?!?!?!?!?!?!?

You're right, Detonator 50.xx is a magical ether out to fix everything, and all those articles on "reduced video quality" are lies.


51.75s had issues.....not having seen the 52.xx we are just guessing.

Well, at least you admitted to your ways. I'm proud of you for that. And such a well written concession, I might add

Is that what you ATI fanbois have to resort to now?

Pathetic....................................

The only pathetic one here is you. There is no argument you can't lose whenever you casually forget issues that have been brought up TIME AND TIME AGAIN. What effects not on? DirectX9 vs mixed-mode DX8 + 9 on the GF FX cards. That's what effects.

But the point is moot now, since HL2 is delayed until April.

And you calling me an ATI "fanboi" (nice spelling btw) has absolutely no merit whatsoever. How about you make one objective post in your life, where you don't blindly defend Nvidia.

You and Rollo are the worst Nvidia fanboys I've seen. Unfortunately, your ranks are being bolstered by the minute with Nvidia catching up in most of the benchmarks. People are flooding the Nvidia ship faster than the AMD camp switches to Intel and vice-versa. I look forward to having to fight this nonsensical "battle" in the future.

Just try to keep an open mind here Genx87. In your opinion what is the status between the FX5900U and 9800 Pro? Is the FX5900 crushing the 9800 or what? In my opinion, they're neck-and-neck, which is why all this arguing makes such little sense. I'd recommend either card to anyone, but if that person is going to hang onto the card for several years, I'd say get the 9800 for HL2. If they upgrade every 3-6 months, then go for either one. I'd love to play around with a FX5900 myself for a bit, but I dont have the cash for that..

 

[nRollo]

You and Rollo are the worst Nvidia fanboys I've seen.

Err yeah. Rollo, the 9800Pro user nVidia fan boy. Rollo the nVidia fanboy who sold the only nVidia card he's owned in the last 12 months because nVidia screwed him and he refused to have their product in his box, and vowed to buy ATI as long as they have a comparable product. Yep, I kiss nVidia's a$$ allright. I'm on here every day talking about how much I love nVidia.

You confuse "taking a rational stance" with being a nVidia fanboy.
I said "Don't buy ATI for HL2" , was that right? Yes
I said "nVidia performance in Dx9 may improve by the time DX9 gets here", was I right? Yes.
I said, "nVidia performance and IQ is comparable in current games", was I right? Yes.

What I see as a "fanboy" is saying you should buy a card for HL2, and HL2 alone, when the game wasn't even out yet? How dumb is that? I've seen many posts here going so far as to recommend POS, crippled 9600 Pros for HL2, because on Gaber Day it was as fast as a 5900U at an ATI event.

Those of you who said this, how do you feel about your "good advice" now? For $50 more, those poor slobs could have got a 9700np or 5900nu which would totally CRUSH the ATI budget wonder. (yes even at the long delayed HL2) I wonder if we'll EVER see HL2 now. The company is losing money hand over fist and has to re-do the game.

Unfortunately, your ranks are being bolstered by the minute with Nvidia catching up in most of the benchmarks.

Oh yeah, this is unfortunate. If nVidia went out of business we'd all benefit by ATIs monopoly. ATI would have more pressure to put out better, cheaper cards if they were the only company in the business.

The only reason this makes you sad is you and many others have been having so much fun putting other gamers down and feeling like you were somehow smarter than they are, all because you bought a lousy video card that could do one of two things a little better.
If you want to feel smart, go get some college degrees, then get a job that challenges your mind. The satisfaction will last a lot longer and actually mean something. (not to mention contribute to society)

 

[Genx87]

The only pathetic one here is you. There is no argument you can't lose whenever you casually forget issues that have been brought up TIME AND TIME AGAIN. What effects not on? DirectX9 vs mixed-mode DX8 + 9 on the GF FX cards. That's what effects.

I am pathetic? I dont remember making up a fake quote about you being a fanboy. That is why you are totally pathetic.

Hmm DX mixed mode vs DX9 full precision. Ok now tell me which effects the FX wont have? You are just telling me the precision these effects will be done in which tells me jack squat. That is why I asked you which effects the FX card "cant" do.


But the point is moot now, since HL2 is delayed until April.

Kind of ironic dont you think?

And you calling me an ATI "fanboi" (nice spelling btw) has absolutely no merit whatsoever. How about you make one objective post in your life, where you don't blindly defend Nvidia.

When you make up quotes about somebody being a fan boy, that is the surest sign you are a totally pathetic fanboi. The spelling is to add a gay little twist to it.

You and Rollo are the worst Nvidia fanboys I've seen. Unfortunately, your ranks are being bolstered by the minute with Nvidia catching up in most of the benchmarks. People are flooding the Nvidia ship faster than the AMD camp switches to Intel and vice-versa. I look forward to having to fight this nonsensical "battle" in the future.

Waa Waaa. I am going to take my toys home with me. Waaa waaa.

Just try to keep an open mind here Genx87. In your opinion what is the status between the FX5900U and 9800 Pro? Is the FX5900 crushing the 9800 or what?

Unlike some of the fanbois here. I dont think either card is terribly crushing the other. In some instances the 5900 Ultra wins, in others the 9800 Pro. As for DX 9 titles we really havent had a chance to look at how they will perform on game day. I think the FX arch is a little bit on the delicate side IMO and hope the NV40 is a more straight forward design like the R3.xx. It will save Nvidia a lot of headaches.

In my opinion, they're neck-and-neck, which is why all this arguing makes such little sense. I'd recommend either card to anyone, but if that person is going to hang onto the card for several years, I'd say get the 9800 for HL2. If they upgrade every 3-6 months, then go for either one. I'd love to play around with a FX5900 myself for a bit, but I dont have the cash for that..


You sure dont make that opinion very well known. I suggest in the future not making up quotes and trying to label people. it only degrades your image and makes your arguments pointless.

 

[sellmen]

Originally posted by: Genx87
The 5900 is barely playable on the same modes.

Didnt you just say 40 FPS was just fine?!?!?!?!?!? And where did you get the 40 FPS with AA\AF turned on? I didnt see any AF\AA scores. Or are you just making it up? Oh anyways back to the topic. You said 40 FPS is just fine. Last I checked even before the Det 50s the 5900 Ultra was getting around 45-50 FPS. So by your own defintition the 5900 ultra is just fine for HL2.

If the numbers Anand posted are correct and the FX with the Det 50.xx turns in a performance equal to the 9800 Pro. Then I guess this whole argument is moot.

Read carefully...."The 5900 is barely playable on the same modes.

The AA/AF benchmarks are from toms:

Toms HL2 benchmarks

Here are some numbers on different levels with 4XAA, using the full DX9 path.

Radeon 9800: 40.2 FPS
Geforce 5900 Ultra: 29 FPS

Radeon 9800: 62.1 FPS
Geforce 5900 Ultra: 26.6 FPS

Radeon 9800: 41.4 FPS
Geforce 5900 Ultra: 19.5 FPS

And here are some numbers w/ 8X AF

Radeon 9800: 63.6 FPS
Geforce 5900 Ultra: 27.3 FPS

Radeon 9800: 63.4 FPS
Geforce 5900 Ultra: 25.4 FPS

Radeon 9800: 41.4 FPS
Geforce 5900 Ultra: 19.1 FPS

Radeon 9800 owners will be able to run the game @ 40+ FPS with something like 2XAA, 8XAF with full directx9 features.

 

[nRollo]

Radeon 9800 owners will be able to run the game @ 40+ FPS with something like 2XAA, 8XAF with full directx9 features.

Sellmen, your post is meaningless and a waste of time
1. No one really cares how last month's nVidia drivers work, when Anand has told us the upcoming drivers greatly increase performance without degrading IQ. So while it's nice you think nVidia owners will be using last month's drivers on a game going to be released in 6 months, it's pointless for most of us. Wake up, Sellmen! Read the site you're on!

2. You don't really tell us what the difference in nVidias mixed mode and ATIs DX9 rendering are. I'm guessing you have no idea and are just stirring your troll pot trying to flame nVidia in regard to issues you know nothing about at all. So why don't you prove me wrong and tell me what the IQ differences are in HL2 between nVidia's Det 52s and ATI? Better yet, what the difference will be when the game is released half a year from now?
Didn't think so- next.