PDA

View Full Version : Geforce4 4600ti vs FX5600, 5800 or 5900


Graham Hoyle
July 19th 03, 05:04 PM
Hi, All

I have a AthlonXP 3200+ on an Asus A7N8X Rev2 400fsb
with 512mb of Corsair (466mhz) ddr RAM. .
ASUS AGP-V8460 Ultra Graphics

Although this obviously runs quite well, there is still the occasional
stutter and low frame rate when all the stops are out in some of the
more demanding games. So I wondered wether anyone knew what
difference I could expect by going from a 4X AGP 4600ti Ultra to an 8X
AGP FX5600, FX5800 FX5900 or Radeon

Lee
July 19th 03, 05:33 PM
I gather the top FX range has a core clock of 500mhz and memory clock of
800mhz. I have a ti4600 and it has 300mhz core and 650mhz memory clock,
so my guess is the top FX range would be a big difference in demanding
games.

On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 16:04:17 GMT, "Graham Hoyle"
> had the will to write:

>Hi, All
>
>I have a AthlonXP 3200+ on an Asus A7N8X Rev2 400fsb
>with 512mb of Corsair (466mhz) ddr RAM. .
>ASUS AGP-V8460 Ultra Graphics
>
>Although this obviously runs quite well, there is still the occasional
>stutter and low frame rate when all the stops are out in some of the
>more demanding games. So I wondered wether anyone knew what
>difference I could expect by going from a 4X AGP 4600ti Ultra to an 8X
>AGP FX5600, FX5800 FX5900 or Radeon

----
Lee

McGrandpa
July 19th 03, 06:18 PM
Toms Hardware has a fairly new comparison of the newest ATI and Nvidia
offerings,
such as R9800Pro and FX 5900 Ultra. The FX 5900 Ultra wins. BUT,
both cards
are very very good :)
McG.

"Graham Hoyle" > wrote in message
. ..
> Hi, All
>
> I have a AthlonXP 3200+ on an Asus A7N8X Rev2 400fsb
> with 512mb of Corsair (466mhz) ddr RAM. .
> ASUS AGP-V8460 Ultra Graphics
>
> Although this obviously runs quite well, there is still the
occasional
> stutter and low frame rate when all the stops are out in some of the
> more demanding games. So I wondered wether anyone knew what
> difference I could expect by going from a 4X AGP 4600ti Ultra to an
8X
> AGP FX5600, FX5800 FX5900 or Radeon
>

B
July 19th 03, 10:36 PM
You can look at Tom's Hardware website for analysis. One important thing
about the FX cards as well as the newer ATI cards is that both are Direct X
9.0 hardware compatible which means that these cards for example will run
the PIXEL 2.0 Shader tests in 3dMark 2003 whereas your Ti 4600 or any other
Ti video card will not. However that doesn't mean too much right now as not
many games employ these features. DOOM III will be incorporate several of
the features according to news leaks I've read. DOOM III will still run on
the lower TI cards but you won't see the newer features, that's all. If you
want to save money go with the FX 5900 128 meg card. Although slightly
slower than the ultra, it's performance is very similar at lower cost.

regards

B
"Graham Hoyle" > wrote in message
. ..
> Hi, All
>
> I have a AthlonXP 3200+ on an Asus A7N8X Rev2 400fsb
> with 512mb of Corsair (466mhz) ddr RAM. .
> ASUS AGP-V8460 Ultra Graphics
>
> Although this obviously runs quite well, there is still the occasional
> stutter and low frame rate when all the stops are out in some of the
> more demanding games. So I wondered wether anyone knew what
> difference I could expect by going from a 4X AGP 4600ti Ultra to an 8X
> AGP FX5600, FX5800 FX5900 or Radeon
>

B
July 20th 03, 04:04 PM
The MSI card is a good choice as it comes with a lot of software and uses a
different cooling technique which is quieter than the generic design.

regards

B
"Graham Hoyle" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks for the replies, I`ve looked at Tom`s, soaked up
> loads of numbers and come away suitably confused.
>
> I`ve ordered a MSI FX5900 with 128MB Ram from
> DABS. I`ll let you know how it goes.
>
> Thanks
>