Toms hardware GFX round-up

For those who haven't seen it, there's a nice round up of the current GFX
cards at http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic...229/index.html
Compares the full range of ATI and nVidia cards, plus others such as XGI and
Matrox

S

Although the resolution used in the tests (1024x768) isnt perhaps getting
the best out of the high end cards in the tests, its interesting to notice
that if you stick to this sort of resolution, you dont really need to
upgrade for the christmas releases if you have a 9600 or better, assuming
you want directX 9 support.

At the top end there doesnt really seem much in it, but I guess it will
become an issue for the big resolution guys, and the placebo-effect geeks
(!)

Also interesting is the differences at the mid/bottom end of the ATI pile -
the 9500 and 9600. The 9500 still holds up well (and I can report it is
most definatly the better card if you have an unlocked one with an artic
cooler and some serious o'cing - as I do on one of my machines).

The 9600SE seems particularly crap, and a total waste of time

Finally, although ATI seem to be trouncing NVidia on performance, theres
some compatibility issues with ATI and the odd newer MOBO, as well as the
fact that nVidia seem to be doing better when value for money is factored in
(the FBucks chart)... which may be a problem for ATI given that the majority
of GFX cards are still being sold as part of a pre-built machine, and nVidia
seem to have the edge here.


food for though (and prolly a fair bit of flaming I'll wager

S



"Sham B" wrote in message
t.net...
For those who haven't seen it, there's a nice round up of the current GFX
cards at http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic...229/index.html
Compares the full range of ATI and nVidia cards, plus others such as XGI
and
Matrox

S

Sham B wrote:
For those who haven't seen it, there's a nice round up of the current
GFX cards at http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic...229/index.html
Compares the full range of ATI and nVidia cards, plus others such as
XGI and Matrox

S

What a pathetic, bought-out site Toms has become. Sad really.

Not clicking.

I don't bother much with the site anymore either, and when I do I never use
it as a reliable reference. Many posts I see about that site are trolls.

Mike

"Sham B" wrote in message
. net...
Although the resolution used in the tests (1024x768) isnt perhaps getting
the best out of the high end cards in the tests, its interesting to notice
that if you stick to this sort of resolution, you dont really need to
upgrade for the christmas releases if you have a 9600 or better, assuming
you want directX 9 support.

At the top end there doesnt really seem much in it, but I guess it will
become an issue for the big resolution guys, and the placebo-effect geeks
(!)

Also interesting is the differences at the mid/bottom end of the ATI
pile -
the 9500 and 9600. The 9500 still holds up well (and I can report it is
most definatly the better card if you have an unlocked one with an artic
cooler and some serious o'cing - as I do on one of my machines).

The 9600SE seems particularly crap, and a total waste of time

Finally, although ATI seem to be trouncing NVidia on performance, theres
some compatibility issues with ATI and the odd newer MOBO, as well as the
fact that nVidia seem to be doing better when value for money is factored
in
(the FBucks chart)... which may be a problem for ATI given that the
majority
of GFX cards are still being sold as part of a pre-built machine, and
nVidia
seem to have the edge here.


food for though (and prolly a fair bit of flaming I'll wager

S



"Sham B" wrote in message
t.net...
For those who haven't seen it, there's a nice round up of the current
GFX
cards at http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic...229/index.html
Compares the full range of ATI and nVidia cards, plus others such as XGI
and
Matrox

S

"neopolaris" . wrote in message ...


Sham B wrote:
For those who haven't seen it, there's a nice round up of the current
GFX cards at http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic...229/index.html
Compares the full range of ATI and nVidia cards, plus others such as
XGI and Matrox

S

What a pathetic, bought-out site Toms has become. Sad really.

Not clicking.





It's nice to have the cards in one place!

I want an XGI V8 Duo! They rule. (S******)

On Thu, 1 Jan 2004 18:33:55 -0000, "Dam6"
wrote:


"neopolaris" . wrote in message ...


Sham B wrote:
For those who haven't seen it, there's a nice round up of the current
GFX cards at http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic...229/index.html
Compares the full range of ATI and nVidia cards, plus others such as
XGI and Matrox

S

What a pathetic, bought-out site Toms has become. Sad really.

Not clicking.





It's nice to have the cards in one place!

I want an XGI V8 Duo! They rule. (S******)

Really?! From the ADS and stats they display in big numbers, it
should be up there with GF4-5 cards, but for $100!! What a bargin!

Now if ATI and Nvidia could sell DX9 card for $100 or so...


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:46:48 -0000, "Sham B"
wrote:

For those who haven't seen it, there's a nice round up of the current GFX
cards at http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic...229/index.html
Compares the full range of ATI and nVidia cards, plus others such as XGI and
Matrox

What... they forgot the XT series of cards... 5900xt / 5600xt(64bit)
and 5200xt.


--
Remember when real men used Real computers!?
When 512K of video RAM was a lot!

Death to Palladium & WPA!!