x1950 or 8600GTS

[mlhm5]

SAPPHIRE 100176L Radeon X1950PRO 256MB - $127 - No MIR
Computer Geeks

Foxconn 8600GTS-256 GeForce 8600GTS 256MB - $144.99 - $30MIR
the egg

thanks

 

[heyheybooboo]

Radeon X1950PRO all the way UNLESS you want DX10 and hardware decoding of vc1/h264 - then it's

GeForce 8600GTS all the way!

(both should be hdcp compliant - the Radeon may be about 10% faster in some games)


Edit: Ooops! I don't think the gts does hardware decoding of vc1/h264 . . .

 

[Denithor]

If gaming, x1950pro is much much stronger than 8600gts (see this review for comparison).

I would get the Sapphire from newegg because they offer their standard 1-year return policy on the card. $130 shipped

If your budget is a bit higher, get the new 8800gt just launched today that will totally wipe both of these cards out. And even if you don't get one of the new cards, just wait a week or two for the prices on the older cards to fall off significantly as everyone shakes out prices to account for relative performance (exactly like we have seen over the last year since the C2D processors launched--remember when an X2 3800+ cost >$300?).

 

[mlhm5]

thanks for the suggestions. Going with the x1950pro.

 

[happy medium]

8800gt. all the way for 50 dollars more

 

[zero2dash]

2600XT

Similar performance to 1950 Pro, average of $15-$25 cheaper plus it is DX10 compliant.

Both outperform the 8600GTS.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: zero2dash
2600XT

Similar performance to 1950 Pro, average of $15-$25 cheaper plus it is DX10 compliant.

Both outperform the 8600GTS.

Yeah right.

 

[s44]

Neither -- wait for the 8800GT 256

 

[happy medium]

Originally posted by: s44
Neither -- wait for the 8800GT 256

:thumbsup:

 

[zero2dash]

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: zero2dash
2600XT

Similar performance to 1950 Pro, average of $15-$25 cheaper plus it is DX10 compliant.

Both outperform the 8600GTS.

Yeah right.

Right.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3128&p=3
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3122&p=3

I'll repeat again.

2600XT outperformed the 8600GTS and was similar to 1950 Pro.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: zero2dash

Originally posted by: Azn

Originally posted by: zero2dash
2600XT

Similar performance to 1950 Pro, average of $15-$25 cheaper plus it is DX10 compliant.

Both outperform the 8600GTS.

Yeah right.

Right.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3128&p=3
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3122&p=3

I'll repeat again.

2600XT outperformed the 8600GTS and was similar to 1950 Pro.

One benchmark and it makes the card faster?

Do I really have to link you to other 200 games?

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: s44
Neither -- wait for the 8800GT 256

ah yes, this is the sound choice

 

[zero2dash]

Originally posted by: Azn

One benchmark and it makes the card faster?

Do I really have to link you to other 200 games?

This is what I'm looking for...recent games with recent drivers comparing the cards. There's a million other benchmarks from months ago that are using old Catalyst drivers that basically say the 2600XT sucks. Tom's Hardware (severely outdated) VGA charts say the 2600XT sucks. I'm just saying - "no it doesn't". I'm not expecting 4xFSAA at 2056x18whateveritis 60fps gameplay but if it's close to a 1950Pro or 8600GTS at its price point then I believe it's a solid card for the money which is why I will most likely buy one. There's a chance when all's said and done I say "well I'll pay an extra $70 for an 8800GT" but the plan right now is to go with the cheap decent option (2600XT).

It's not an 8800GTX but then again it's also only $130.

 

[Cheex]

Originally posted by: happy medium

Originally posted by: s44
Neither -- wait for the 8800GT 256

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: zero2dash

Originally posted by: Azn

One benchmark and it makes the card faster?

Do I really have to link you to other 200 games?

This is what I'm looking for...recent games with recent drivers comparing the cards. There's a million other benchmarks from months ago that are using old Catalyst drivers that basically say the 2600XT sucks. Tom's Hardware (severely outdated) VGA charts say the 2600XT sucks. I'm just saying - "no it doesn't". I'm not expecting 4xFSAA at 2056x18whateveritis 60fps gameplay but if it's close to a 1950Pro or 8600GTS at its price point then I believe it's a solid card for the money which is why I will most likely buy one. There's a chance when all's said and done I say "well I'll pay an extra $70 for an 8800GT" but the plan right now is to go with the cheap decent option (2600XT).

It's not an 8800GTX but then again it's also only $130.

Improved but it still falls little short of the gts in many situations. Yeah 2600xt is getting whole lot better for the price but it gets is ass handed by a 8600gts new games like COD4 or Quake Wars. 1950pro is still the faster card. 8600gts is still gets really close to 1950pro while having better image quality and better HDCP functions. 2600xt is now better than 8600gt with good HDCP functions.

http://www.amdzone.com/modules...ticle&artid=326&page=1

 

[zero2dash]

Yeesh, 8600GT beat the 2600XT in CoD4...yikes. Thanks for posting that link.

Yeah...I think I'll probably pay the extra $70 towards new year and get the 8800GT instead. Wowzers *still reeling from 2600XT CoD4 marks*

 

[dingetje]

good choice...because buying the 1950pro would be a very silly buy now...it's old technology....you would be in the same sort of boat that many people were with the x800 that had nice fps but didnt have SM3.0 which got them in trouble a bit later when the SM3.0 games came out.
buying a non dx10 card seems not to be the smart move right now.

 

[Avalon]

Originally posted by: dingetje
good choice...because buying the 1950pro would be a very silly buy now...it's old technology....you would be in the same sort of boat that many people were with the x800 that had nice fps but didnt have SM3.0 which got them in trouble a bit later when the SM3.0 games came out.
buying a non dx10 card seems not to be the smart move right now.

I felt fine paying $120 for an X1950Pro two months ago. I'm definitely not missing anything, since Crysis runs great up to 1280x1024 medium settings, and if I felt so inclined I could enable most of the very high settings through config files...but I'm just going to grab a new card.

Then again, I guess most people don't go through 4 video cards a year like me...