my geforce4 sucks?

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: NYHoustonman
Hey, it's not a bad card at all, Just don't use AA and AF where you can't.

yea. i know that now. wish i had known that b4 so i wouldve invested in a 9500 or something

how does the 9500 (pro/non pro) compare to other cards...atis or nvidias?

 

[Regs]

Even though I like AA on w/ a 9800 @ 1024 x 768, it seems very... cheap. Play a game of UT2003k, stand a few feet from a straight edge, then pan left and right. If you pan fast enough you can see the jaggies re appear, then the edges sort of rebuild themselves and then the jaggies disappear. I'm hoping that will get fixed in later software and hardware.

 

[funko]

the 9500's are in the ballpark of gf4's in raw performance when everything is stock if i remember correctly(this is off teh top of my head, yo ucan checkreviews later)
but when aa and as are turned on.... they dont take much of a hit, they also have pretty good dx9 hardware compared to the nvidia fx line.. so basically for the extra $35 or so you spend for a 9500 over a 4400 you get the ability to use aa, and as, one notch better image quality, and a card that has dx9 stuff for the games coming out this fall and winter (and you'll most likely add a couple thousand points to your 3dmark2003 score...if you care)...

the 9500 pros are actually a decent step up because they use 8x1 texture piplines in stead of just 4 with the nonpro...so you get a nice boost of performance for the money...

i think the 9500pro's are around teh same balpark as the 5600ultras... correct me if i'm wrong...

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: Regs
Even though I like AA on w/ a 9800 @ 1024 x 768, it seems very... cheap. Play a game of UT2003k, stand a few feet from a straight edge, then pan left and right. If you pan fast enough you can see the jaggies re appear, then the edges sort of rebuild themselves and then the jaggies disappear. I'm hoping that will get fixed in later software and hardware.

turn vertical sync on.

 

[Aharami]

i dont trust 3dmark anymore. too much optimization issues

 

[Curley]

Why do you think a 1.4 athlon is weak? I think you have plently of processing power. If you were running a 1ghz or below, then I would consider the processor to be the problem. I would buy an FX card even if it was the 5200 before a ti42/4400 because the technology in the chip is the same as the 5900 and they are all DirectX9 compliant.

 

[modedepe]

Originally posted by: Curley
I would buy an FX card even if it was the 5200 before a ti42/4400 because the technology in the chip is the same as the 5900 and they are all DirectX9 compliant.

You are exactly the type of person nvidia is trying to sell the fx5200 to.

And actually the fx5200 shares little of the same technology--built on a larger process, no z compression, really the only thing the fx5200 shares with the fx5900 is dx9.

 

[Curley]

I think the low end FX cards are way better that the GF4MX line. For $60.00 or under with 128MB DDR, I think the AA is much better and it is a good card for the price. The FX is the basic vid card for the systems I sell. Sell is the key. A non enthusiast will only care if you have the latest card and the FX 5200/low end 5600s are good cards that really don't lag as much as thier predecessors with AA/AF turned on.

What you are saying is completely accurate. :beer: