FX 5600 XT vs Radeon 9600 both 256MB

X

XLNC16

Geek Trainee
I have to decide between these two graphics cards. The Nvidia costs slightly more than the Radeon 9600. This is the standard version of the Radeon 9600, not SE or Pro just the one which better than the SE version, manufactured by saphire.

I've reading here and found that Nvidia don't support DX9 which is a disadvantage, but will it make a big difference to my gaming, will it be noticable?

I'm on a budget of £90 so does anybody know of any bargains, could I get the Pro version for a similar price. This is about US $167, does anybody in the US know if I can get a Radeon 9600 less than that amount.
 
XLNC16 said:
I've reading here and found that Nvidia don't support DX9 which is a disadvantage, but will it make a big difference to my gaming, will it be noticable?
Click to expand...
For DirectX9 games, it will make a HUGE difference. For most current games, the NVidia still won't provide a noticable performance difference over the 9600. It it was me, I'd go with the ATI in an instant. Nvidia may be the best in the past, and maybe in the future. But ATI is king now. :)
 
I'd like to clarify things a little.

Nvidia's current line of cards does support DX9. However, it supports it badly.

By that I mean that it renders DX9 effects but in the wrong way. Performance also drops a lot DX9 wise (for most games).

That is why I do not think it is a good choice to get an FX card right now, unless it's a huge steal.

Also, if you can find a 128mb version for significantly less, go for it since the extra memory won't do a big difference. The plain 9600 will not benefit from it even in games which use that much memory because it is simply not powerful enough.

Another thing, the next gen of cards will arrive very shortly so you might want to wait before you buy one because ATI claims that their flagship card (R420/R423) will be twixe as fast as the current flagship, making the 9600XT and 9800 np midrange cards.

I was skeptical(sp?) at first but when I first played Far Cry and realized that my 9800 Pro couldn't run the game at its highest settings @1024x768, I realized it was true !

I say wait a little and then grab a 9600XT or better for less than it is now.

In any case, I'm pretty sure that for 90£ , you can get way better than a plain 9600, if you look around.
 
I knew everybody was going to say the ATI but I just asked because the Nvidia card was about £10 more expensive and thought that it was better.

I've seen an ATI Radeon 9600XT 256MB DDR for £108 which is very good value as their usually £135 the least. Here's the link

http://www.dabs.com/uk/channels/components/graphicscards/productView.htm?quicklinx=30RR

I think harack52 has a good point about waiting for the prices to go low but I'm not a very patient person but I will wait as in the end I will have great graphics card for less plus Half Life 2 rather than getting one now which will be more expensive and also no Half Life 2.

Another question is does the speed of the CPU make a difference between gaming. Is the AMD XP 2600+ significantly better than the 2400+ or is there no real difference in gaming.
 
One thing about HL2.
Once it comes out, it'sl ikely that better cards will be available, so do not base your purchase simply on that.

As for the cpu, the 2600+ would make a significant difference mainly because it has a FSB of 333mhz instead of 266, it is also clocked 133mhz higher.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top