| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted:
Fri Jun 06, 2003 1:11 pm |
Tycho,
I have used a 9500Pro which is close to the 9600 pro on UT2k3 not that bad. Currently I have the R9700 and that I would not trade. I have wanted to try a FX card but at the momement there is no reason to. So long as your GF4 works and your happy with it, good for you 
Jb
ChaosUT (and someday I will register here) |
|
|
|
|
|
Peoii
Ultimate Fanboy
Joined: 19 May 2003
Posts: 572
Location: Post Falls, ID, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
|
| Posted:
Sat Jun 07, 2003 1:52 am |
My point is that I don't believe future benchmarks are all that important.
If you get a game, and you can't play it, you look for a video card THEN.
Reason? If you plan for the future, something will come out between now and then, and stomp your "future card" into the ground. It's happened in the past, it's happening right now, it'll happen in the future.
Guess my overall point is that you should by a card based on what your playing right now, and when it has outlived it's usefulness (IE: you can't play your new games), then it's time to upgrade.
Different strokes for different folks though, this is just the opinion of a budget gamer  |
_________________
[Peoii's Place]
SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue > 0
0 Rows Returned. |
|
|
|
|
Tycho
Wanna-Be Webmaster
Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1041
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan
|
| Posted:
Sat Jun 07, 2003 12:18 pm |
I am happy with it but I defintely want faster. The one good thing about all this is that you were wise to invest in a 9700. There are only 3 great (non-price) cards out there: The FX5900, Radeon 9800 and 9700. |
_________________
In the Immortal words of Socrates who said, "I drank what?" |
|
|
|
|
EnisDonKing
Spamming Fanboy
Joined: 18 May 2003
Posts: 180
Location: Bosnia
|
| Posted:
Sun Jun 08, 2003 7:54 pm |
| Anonymous wrote: |
Tycho,
I have used a 9500Pro which is close to the 9600 pro on UT2k3 not that bad. Currently I have the R9700 and that I would not trade. I have wanted to try a FX card but at the momement there is no reason to. So long as your GF4 works and your happy with it, good for you
Jb
ChaosUT (and someday I will register here) |
As far as I know, 9500 Pro is faster then 9600 Pro. (at least in benchmarks) |
_________________
Be Real, Play Unreal! |
|
|
|
|
EnisDonKing
Spamming Fanboy
Joined: 18 May 2003
Posts: 180
Location: Bosnia
|
| Posted:
Sun Jun 08, 2003 7:56 pm |
| Tycho wrote: |
| I am happy with it but I defintely want faster. The one good thing about all this is that you were wise to invest in a 9700. There are only 3 great (non-price) cards out there: The FX5900, Radeon 9800 and 9700. |
9700 pro is really great card.. for about a month it should become very cheap.. smtg like 9500 pro is atm.. deffo, looking for an uprage asap:] |
_________________
Be Real, Play Unreal! |
|
|
|
|
barbos
Ultimate Fanboy
Joined: 18 May 2003
Posts: 508
|
| Posted:
Thu Jun 19, 2003 9:17 pm |
How are you so sure it will stop with 3dmark?
Nothing is to stop nVidia (or any other company) from pulling the same stunt with a game like UT2003... It may get more FPS but whats the point.
Can you truely judge something by it's FPS anymore?
What about image quality??? Why is it people want the fastest card, but not one that has the best quality? |
|
|
|
|
|
EnisDonKing
Spamming Fanboy
Joined: 18 May 2003
Posts: 180
Location: Bosnia
|
| Posted:
Thu Jun 19, 2003 9:31 pm |
talking about image quality, it is the fact that ATI always had that advantage over nVidia.. |
_________________
Be Real, Play Unreal! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
