Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: vid card comparison

  1. #1
    Banned Jimmy Little's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    2,517
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    vid card comparison

    hi, someone just gave me an ati radeon 9200 64mb, I currently have a geforce 3 64mb clone, what i ned to know is which is the better performing card of the two, i've not physically tested a comparison as i thought i could check here 1st, the geforce is a couple of years old, is it worth swapping them and benchmarking or is the radeon bound to be better seeing as its much newer?

    tia

  2. #2
    Sexiest Hexus user? quite possibly Russ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    North Norfolk
    Posts
    5,200
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked
    69 times in 44 posts
    • Russ's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Apple Logic Board
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 2.8GHZ 8MB Cache
      • Memory:
      • 2x2GB
      • Storage:
      • 1TB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • ATI 5750
      • Case:
      • iMac
      • Operating System:
      • Mac OS X Snow Leopard
      • Monitor(s):
      • 27" iMac
      • Internet:
      • 2mb(on a good day)
    it IS better, but bench it anyway
    Gamertag - Russonf (xbox and ps3)

  3. #3
    Senior Member SilentDeath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    4,745
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked
    16 times in 11 posts
    teh raddy should give muh beter image quality iirc, but perform about the same, the 9200 should also overclock quite a bit aswell, cos it is just newer version of the 8500 which was clocked higher.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    House without a red door in Birmingham
    Posts
    1,595
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Depends on what GF3 it is. TI200 were pretty close compared to the std and TI500 versions ... but then they o/c'ed to similar speeds anyway. Rad9200 is a decapitated Rad8500LE (it's not just clock speed) and way slower (than 8500LE) as a result. Rad9200 is on par with a GF3TI200 in 3D speed with the Rad having the edge in AF and the GF3 having the edge in AA (2xAA). However the Rad is a much better card ... produces less heat and uses less power as well as sporting hugely better '2D' image quality, DVD playback, TVout and dual display (when possessing dual RAMDACs). GF3 simply had too many downfalls in the non 3D environment, something which was seriously addressed by the GF4TI range (as well as being faster in 3D of course). IMHO Rad9200, don't even bother benchmarking but if you do be sure to check out things like image quality, TVout and DVD playback.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •