[mythtv-users] TODAY, which is better: Radeon 9100IGP, or GeForce
tmartin at physics.ucsd.edu
Wed Aug 11 03:06:18 EDT 2004
Well I get the impression from this list that aside from the output
options (DVI, Composite etc) there is really no TVOut difference between
a Geforce4 MX and a 5950 Ultra. The 2D does not change nearly as much as
the 3D. I will defer to the more seasoned myth people on that.
Now if you need 3D gaming power ATI and Nvidia are pretty much neck in
neck at any given price point. Mostly you pick the card for the games
you want to play since each chips seems to have sweet spots for certain
games. For ati a 9600pro or 9600xt is as low as you dare go. The other
ATI cards are pretty much crippled with low clocks, slow ram or crippled
pipelines. Take the SE cards for example. Waste of money. Even the
9600pro is limited compared to its older, lower clock but uncrippled
9500pro cousin which with a firmware change could be overclocked almost
to 9700pro levels.
If you are looking for gaming bang for buck the 9800pro is a good choice
still in ATI. If you really want gaming speed with still a good
price/performance ratio then go for the Nvidia 6800GT. It has the best
price/performance of all the higher end cards.
The question you have to ask is how much horsepower do you think you
need? What games are you going to play?
The 9600xt is handily beaten by the 5700Ultra at doom3 (anandtech's
review) and both are around the $160 range on newegg. Likely the 9600xt
will do well against the 5700ultra in directx games. However a 9100 vs
the 5700ultra is not really a fair fight if you are talking 3D.
If you really want to play modern games at all with decent frame rates
purchasing any card below the 5700ultra or 9600xt in performance is
throwing away good money. If you are talking myth though, x support+low
cost seems to give nvidia the advantage. This also probably means that
3D speed+X support+cost equation will go to nvidia.
Dean Blackburn wrote:
> howdy, I have some machines getting ready to be built, and we have one
> last decision to make: Go ATI or Nvidia with video out. On the windows
> side, things lean a bit towards the ATI, and certainly from a cost*
> perspective, it's a huge win, but I've seen so many posts about ATI
> card difficulties.
> Is this really a big deal? One problem with a project like this, is
> that the main developers and maintainers almost always try to steer
> clear of endorsing specific hardware/distros/etc, in part because if
> they appear to support something specific, they'll get hatemail from
> everyone else, and support queries from those that buy what they
> suggest. Understandable, but at times inconvenient...
> Anyway, I'm just wondering if anyone's had, say, "great success" with
> the Radeon 9100IGP, or if I should just hunker down and go with a
> 5700. I should also mention that these machines will* be dual boot,
> and will occasionally need the myth-wasted graphics horsepower for
> various windows (and linux??) apps, games, etc.
> Any help is appreciated!
>mythtv-users mailing list
>mythtv-users at mythtv.org
More information about the mythtv-users