Video card for my customer's rig?

M

MaxC

Weaksauce
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
Messages
104
I'll be building a PC for somebody pretty soon, with around $800 budget without monitor:

2500+
512mb CH-5 pc3200
Nf7-s 2.0
80gb WD SE
Antec 3700 w/ 350watt

And i'm not sure about the video card, he wants to play HL2 alot, since that is what i'll be playing mostly when it comes out, so he wants to be able to play w/ me. He also likes Call of Duty, so that would bring the 5900 SE in.

9600 XT for $150-175 depending on deals, w/ HL2
Or EVGA 5900SE w/ Call Of duty for $188.

Is there any way to tell if the current Nvidia cards will do well in HL2/anything with PS 2.0?? I've read all the articles and about how terrible the 5600-5900 series cards did in HL2. I know the 9600XT would give solid performance in HL2, but all around isn't as fast as the 5900, nor quite as overclockable.

Pretty frustrating, but if he can extend his budget, i'd get him a 9700Pro or Non Pro and take advantage of ATI's deal where any card you buy will come w/ HL2, but you gotta go through their website to get the deal, not sure how though.

Thanks,
Max
 
not sure about the 5900se but i think the 5900nu is better then the 9600xt (especaill one with 850mhz memory)

If the SE is just a nu with slower ram it may be a good deal.
 
I know for sure the 5900SE is faster than the 9600XT.


Does anybody remember the link to ATI where you could get HL2 with any Radeon purchased after October or something???
 
9600XT is faster than the 5900se after overclocked a tad
The only real lcompetition for the 9600XT right now is the 5900nu, especially if you get one with 2.2ns ram instead of 2.8ns.
SE really mean "Special Edition" and special here means retarded or handicapped (kinda like special education).
 
Originally posted by Socko4Life
9600XT is faster than the 5900se after overclocked a tad
Click to expand...
Wrong. 9600xt is only 128 bit, while a 5900se is 256. 9600xt only has 4 pipelines vs. a 5900se having 8 pipelines. Peak memory bandwith on a 9600xt is 9.6 GB/sec., while a 5900se has a peak memory bandwith of 22.4 GB/sec. A 9600xt will never match the speed or be faster than a 5900se, even if doing a water-cooled overclock. 5900se cards can overclock to 5900nu speeds easily, and some brands to 5900 ultra speeds.

The only real lcompetition for the 9600XT right now is the 5900nu,[/B]
Click to expand...
Wrong again. The real competition for the 9600xt is the FX 5700u.

SE really mean "Special Edition" and special here means retarded or handicapped (kinda like special education).
Click to expand...

Wrong once again. SE means retarded only in the case of an ATI card. SE for nVidia cards are still high performance, very close to that of the non-ultra.

The 5900se or 5900nu are clearly the much better performing video cards.
 
Originally posted by Socko4Life
SE really mean "Special Edition" and special here means retarded or handicapped (kinda like special education).
Click to expand...

Nominated for most politicaly incorrect post of the week!
 
The 5900SE is better then the 9600XT but the ATI cards SEEMS too have better support for HL2 for whatever reasons.... ;)
So in other words get the 9600XT but look around for an OEM, they come without that *niffty* coupon for HL2 but if you can get a good deal on a boxed version pick that instead, either way he's going to have to upgrade the card after games using the HL2 engine come out. But I have to say get a 9700Pro, they kick the crap out the *crappy* 9600XT and they can OC within striking distance of a 9800Pro. Best card on the ATI side if you ask me. If you go with Nvidia get a 5900SE, think of it as the 4200Ti for the FX series. ATI HAS A HL2 DEAL AGAIN?
"SE means retarded only in the case of an ATI card."-ROFL:D
 
Is there any chance that the 5900 series would do better in HL2 than what we saw in the benchies and articles?? I've read that it is hardware only, so it's hopeless.
 
Originally posted by Badger_sly

Wrong once again. SE means retarded only in the case of an ATI card. SE for nVidia cards are still high performance, very close to that of the non-ultra.
Click to expand...

Then explain the Ti4800SE to me then? The Ti4800 is a Ti4600 with AGP 8x. The Ti4800SE is a Ti4400 with AGP 8x. Seems like the SE to me is slower, and confusing.

Its an aweful way to trick customers to buying a slower card that by the name looks to be faster. Same as with ATi's 9800SE. I dont like any name like that. But saying that no nVidia card does it is just wrong.
 
go with the 9600xt, much more future proof. It is a true direct x 9 card as the fx line has hardware issues with dx 9.

You won't regret it.
 
Anyone who says a 5900SE is better than a 9600XT is just a moron and doesn't know shit about hardware. nVidia cards simply can't get done as much in each clock cycle as ATI cards can. So even if an nVidia card is clocked higher than the ATI, the ATI is generally better. Just look at the 9800Pro vs 5900Ultra. The 5900Ultra has much higher clocks but performs worse in everything. Clocks are everything and I know for a fact a 9600XT will run all games very well now, and will run future DX9 games better than ANY nVidia card. Get the 9600XT.
 
Originally posted by EnJoY
Anyone who says a 5900SE is better than a 9600XT is just a moron....
Click to expand...
I could point you towards hundreds of reviews that say otherwise, how does your post help this guy at all? Your post is just basic fanboyism without anything helpful to say.
Now to post something helpful:
Every game made has to be optimized for the hardware it will play on, just think how many gamers will be pissed when HL2 doesn't play on half of the cards in use. The Nvidia cards try to do things at a higher quality then called for in DX9, ATI sticks to the standard specs. Nvida cards take a major hit with certain DX9 calls like Pixel Shader 2.0, ATI cards don't. The safes route would be to get an ATI card, look for:
9600XT, 9500, 9700, 9800 in that order, all PRO versions. The sweet spot would be a 9500/ 9700Pro, if you can find any I guess you could get a 9600XT though.....
 
Originally posted by EnJoY
Anyone who says a 5900SE is better than a 9600XT is just a moron and doesn't know shit about hardware. nVidia cards simply can't get done as much in each clock cycle as ATI cards can. So even if an nVidia card is clocked higher than the ATI, the ATI is generally better. Just look at the 9800Pro vs 5900Ultra. The 5900Ultra has much higher clocks but performs worse in everything. Clocks are everything and I know for a fact a 9600XT will run all games very well now, and will run future DX9 games better than ANY nVidia card. Get the 9600XT.
Click to expand...
Seriously man. Go read a fucking review or two before trying to pretend like you know what you are talking about.

5900SE is the way to go, especially if you want CoD.
 
the fx range stinks in dx9 its fact face it :rolleyes: it's been shown and debated and proven to death.
The one and only reason people are buyin the fx5900nu is because its priced to just about giving it away because of how shithouse the fx cards are.
and to me the 9600XT will be better at dx9 because it will take less of a hit in performance.

so my vote goes to the true dx9 card;)
 
If you and your mate plan to play HL2 like you said then go for the 9600XT for sure.
 
Originally posted by @trapine

and to me the 9600XT will be better at dx9 because it will take less of a hit in performance.

so my vote goes to the true dx9 card;)
Click to expand...

Hehe I'm afraid that FX even with bigger performance hit in dx9 still will be faster than your precious 9600xt :D
And if valve can't optimize their engine to run well on FX series cards then maybe they should start working in Microsoft instead of making games;)
9600XT is good card unfortunatly for it's price there are better buys (like FX5900SE or 9700np if you can find one)
 
when valve released that statement it had not completed the hl2 game same with the doom 3 fiasco.

Going on unfinished games is not a smart idea.
 
Originally posted by @trapine
the fx range stinks in dx9 its fact face it :rolleyes: it's been shown and debated and proven to death.
The one and only reason people are buyin the fx5900nu is because its priced to just about giving it away because of how shithouse the fx cards are.
and to me the 9600XT will be better at dx9 because it will take less of a hit in performance.

so my vote goes to the true dx9 card;)
Click to expand...
Like the other guy said, even IF the 5900NU takes a 50% performance hit in DX9, it will still be faster, and in every single other game it will be trashing the 9600XT. I don't see where the decision here is really. Well unless you are a fanboy.
 
"9600xt only has 4 pipelines vs. a 5900se having 8 pipelines"

Sorry but this is wrong... there are many theorical fill rate tests that pointed that the NV35 acts like 4x2.

Anyway ATI PS2.0 operations are always faster and more compatible... there are some missing features like MRT and floating textures suport in the FX line.
 
Originally posted by fallguy
Then explain the Ti4800SE to me then? The Ti4800 is a Ti4600 with AGP 8x. The Ti4800SE is a Ti4400 with AGP 8x. Seems like the SE to me is slower, and confusing.

Its an aweful way to trick customers to buying a slower card that by the name looks to be faster. Same as with ATi's 9800SE. I dont like any name like that. But saying that no nVidia card does it is just wrong.
Click to expand...
You're telling me that a ti4400 and a ti4600 don't have performance that is pretty close? Um, ok. The parent never said it wasn't slower, just that it wasn't dramatically slower. You look at 9800->9800SE and you see roughly a 50% drop in performance. A 4800->4800SE is more like 5-10%.
 
Originally posted by obs
You're telling me that a ti4400 and a ti4600 don't have performance that is pretty close? Um, ok. The parent never said it wasn't slower, just that it wasn't dramatically slower. You look at 9800->9800SE and you see roughly a 50% drop in performance. A 4800->4800SE is more like 5-10%.
Click to expand...

It doesnt matter, the SE is slower than the non-SE.

Originally posted by Badger_sly
Wrong once again. SE means retarded only in the case of an ATI card. SE for nVidia cards are still high performance, very close to that of the non-ultra.
Click to expand...

He said its only the case for ATi cards, when its not.
 
Originally posted by fallguy
It doesnt matter, the SE is slower than the non-SE.

He said its only the case for ATi cards, when its not.
Click to expand...
Reread his post:
Wrong once again. SE means retarded only in the case of an ATI card. SE for nVidia cards are still high performance, very close to that of the non-ultra.
Click to expand...
Notice the very close part? He just says that for NVIDIA, SE is a slightly slower version. For ATI, it means crippled. You can now proceed to try to change the subject.
 
Originally posted by obs
Reread his post:

Notice the very close part? He just says that for NVIDIA, SE is a slightly slower version. For ATI, it means crippled.
Click to expand...

Except there I wasnt talking about the none-Ultra. Hes talking about the 5900 series. I brought up the Ti4800 series to show that nVidia too does the SE thing.

Its also no were near 50% faster in most games. But yes the SE on ATi cards is slower than the non-SE cards vs. nVidia's. Seems like nVidia started the whole SE thing recently. But when you consider the 9800SE is half the price of the 9800 Pro.. its not such a bad card. Especially if you can soft mod it.

I dont find relatively close to the same performance for 50% of the price, "retarded".
 
Originally posted by fallguy
Except there I wasnt talking about the none-Ultra. Hes talking about the 5900 series. I brought up the Ti4800 series to show that nVidia too does the SE thing.

Its also no were near 50% faster in most games. But yes the SE on ATi cards is slower than the non-SE cards vs. nVidia's. Seems like nVidia started the whole SE thing recently. But when you consider the 9800SE is half the price of the 9800 Pro.. its not such a bad card. Especially if you can soft mod it.

I dont find relatively close to the same performance for 50% of the price, "retarded".
Click to expand...
Well now that you changed the subject, you got less than 50% chance on that mod. Not too mention every single other place in this discussion we are talking about stock cards, and then to ATI's defense you trying to justify their naming because you can possibly mod it to a 9800. Get some better arguments man.
 
Originally posted by obs
Well now that you changed the subject, you got less than 50% chance on that mod. Not too mention every single other place in this discussion we are talking about stock cards, and then to ATI's defense you trying to justify their naming because you can possibly mod it to a 9800. Get some better arguments man.
Click to expand...

Uh, Im not defending ATi, nor changing the subject. Someone commented on getting a 2.2ns over a 2.8ns card, which idicated overclocking. Which is common to do with the card. I dont like their SE naming at all, which Ive said. It seems nVidia started the SE naming with a slower card.

Look at what I said again, "But when you consider the 9800SE is half the price of the 9800 Pro.. its not such a bad card. Especially if you can soft mod it."

How am I "trying to justify" the naming of it because you have a chance of soft modding it? I said its not a bad deal at all, "especially" if you can soft mod it. For $145'ish the 9800SE is not a bad card at all.

Ive said what I wanted to say. The SE naming is crappy for everyone. Most people think of it as a "better" thing, as thats what it has been used with most of the time, aka Win98SE.
 
not to mention that Nvidia can't afford to cripple there cards that much more than what they are now.
 
Originally posted by creedAMD
not to mention that Nvidia can't afford to cripple there cards that much more than what they are now.
Click to expand...


doh!....:)
 
obs,

Don't waste your time with fallguy, he's a regular ATI fanboy that only argues for the sake of creating an aguement, even when he knows he's wrong. As he is in this thread. He's entertainment, at best, LOL.:p
 
Yeah, Im an ATi fan boy :rolleyes: (gj on not following the forum rules and calling names btw) I have an AMD rig, with a nVidia card. And a Intel rig, with a ATi card. HyperX mem in one, and soon to be XMS in the other. Two different chipset companies, and two different types of HD's. I doubt you can say the same.

Im such a fanboy!

You didnt know about the Ti4800SE naming, or overlooked it. I pointed it out. Simple as that.
 
Michaelius

Hehe I'm afraid that FX even with bigger performance hit in dx9 still will be faster than your precious 9600xt
And if valve can't optimize their engine to run well on FX series cards then maybe they should start working in Microsoft instead of making games
9600XT is good card unfortunatly for it's price there are better buys (like FX5900SE or 9700np if you can find one)
Click to expand...

wrong again Michaelius in that yes it may be faster but that will mean squat when it cant do VS and PS2 even half as good as a 9600XT:p

Valve should'nt
have to rearrange all there code just for the fx card nvidia should get off there lazy asses and start making proper dx9 cards or just stick to calling them dx8.1 turbo cards :rolleyes:

And yes i will agree that the 9700np and pro are a bargin card.But in my eyes the 5900nu unless it can do proper dx9 isnt a bargin card no matter what price they are.
In my eyes and a lot of other people they are just a lazy poor excuse for a dx9 card.
And in australia the 9600Xt is a bargin card compared to 500$ for a 5900nu ;)
And i will stick by my statement that the one and only reason people are buying the 5900nu is that A: its priced to just about giving it away because no one would buy them otherwize and it plays dx8.1 ok ! but give it to the middle of the year and then lets see which card out of the 5900nu and the 9600xt fairs in proper dx9 games.
But thats my opinion and others are welcome to theres its a free world after all :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top