Nice information!

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Xtracktor Geforce gets owned by HL2,

Geforce6800's easily stand up to Radeon X800's, and they're cheaper. The one I mentioned is capable of running HL2 with HIGH quality settings, AA/AF and really good frame rates and it only costs $250

Find me a current generation card that performs THAT well for that price tag.

Click Here and check out how the new Geforces don't get owned in the slightest...but hold their own in each category from regular, to the GT & Pro, and the Ultra & XT's).

Last edited by infinity HiGH on Dec-03-2004 at 03:57

quote:

Originally posted by infinity HiGH Geforce6800's easily stand up to Radeon X800's, and they're cheaper. The one I mentioned is capable of running HL2 with HIGH quality settings, AA/AF and really good frame rates and it only costs $250 Find me a current generation card that performs THAT well for that price tag. Click Here and check out how the new Geforces don't get owned in the slightest...but hold their own in each category from regular, to the GT & Pro, and the Ultra & XT's).

I didnt mean "owned" as completely useless, but as you posted on this page page you can clearly see that x800 XT has the advantage over the 6800 Ultra, yes the Geforce holds its ground, just like the Radeon holds its ground in Doom 3. I have to admit I failed to state that I ment the Geforce 6800 Ultra specifically compared to the X800 XT.

Also, take a good luck at the benchmarks that you posted, the 6600 GT performs equal and if not better than a 6800, and its price is really good for its performance around 180 on newegg, but the only catch is that its PCI-X.

Last edited by Xtracktor on Dec-03-2004 at 09:27

DJ Xtracktor has a very good point.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Xtracktor Radeon 9800 pro is 150 - 200 dollars (worth the addition in cash)... But I agree, the 9600 XT will fit all his needs for the price. Oh yea, the 6600 GT is one really nice card extremely good performance.

not the worth while one, a 9800 pro 256 is 240 on pricewatch. the 9800 pro 128 which is slower is around 180-200

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Xtracktor I didnt mean "owned" as completely useless, but as you posted on this page page you can clearly see that x800 XT has the advantage over the 6800 Ultra, yes the Geforce holds its ground, just like the Radeon holds its ground in Doom 3. I have to admit I failed to state that I ment the Geforce 6800 Ultra specifically compared to the X800 XT. And I have to admit, that I haven't seen how the Radeon's fared versus Geforce's in Doom 3, but I will have a look... Also, take a good luck at the benchmarks that you posted, the 6600 GT performs equal and if not better than a 6800, and its price is really good for its performance around 180 on newegg, but the only catch is that its PCI-X.

Oh, I'm not denying that the Geforce lost in the Half-Life 2 benchmarks. It was a given ever since ATI became the "sponsor" of HL2 (but that's a whole different story ).

What I was saying was that Geforce's hold their own extremely well and very far from being "owned" in any meaning. There's no denying that if you really need to run Half-Life 2 at it's absolute best, then go with X800, but the Geforce will give almost the exact same performance, minus those few meaningless frames.

Regarding the 6600 series: I have to say that if you're a more "casual" gamer looking for a new video card, and/or you're on a tight budget, then the 6600 is the absolute best card you can get.

And it IS available in AGP

quote:

The BFG GeForce 6600 GT OC has an eight pipe superscalar design, and features the only GPU in its class that supports Microsoft® DirectX® 9.0 Shader Model 3.0. The BFG GeForce 6600 GT OC will support NVIDIA's SLI(TM) multi-GPU technology in a PCI Express-based system. BFG Tech will also offer an AGP version of this card. This board will offer 128MB of the world's fastest graphic memory, GDDR3.

edit also, did you see the Radeon X850 demo's? DAMN!

Last edited by infinity HiGH on Dec-04-2004 at 07:19

quote:

Originally posted by Tranceporter99 not the worth while one, a 9800 pro 256 is 240 on pricewatch. the 9800 pro 128 which is slower is around 180-200

Unless you are a anti-aliasing addict (differnce of less than 5 fps), and/or an extremely impatient person with loading times (less than 5 seconds difference) you will need the 256 instead of 128, also not sure if you saw my links in my other post, but I have a 9800 pro link from newegg for 165. Here are the benchmarks between the 128 vs 256 LINK

This is a quote from that site:

"To reiterate, those high resolutions are the only cases where you can expect a difference between 128-MB and 256-MB cards. Under "normal" conditions, there's absolutely no difference"

Last edited by Xtracktor on Dec-05-2004 at 10:19

quote:

Originally posted by infinity HiGH What I was saying was that Geforce's hold their own extremely well and very far from being "owned" in any meaning. There's no denying that if you really need to run Half-Life 2 at it's absolute best, then go with X800, but the Geforce will give almost the exact same performance, minus those few meaningless frames.

Yes I totally agree, excuse my slang, owned is commonly used here for anything that comes out on top in the end no matter what (even those meaningless frames ). If if it were up to me, go with the least expensive one .