MAJOR PITAOk I surely don't want to become part of any dispute, but wasnt PNY marketing a 256meg version of the FX 5600 ( non ultra ) while the Nvidia site was only showing them to be 128meg? I'm just saying that being that most of these card manufactures make thier own PCB's couldn't it be possible ( in theory ) to make a 256meg version?
Yes that's very true MAJOR PITA, however it's interesting that ATI's website lists chipsets cards for different uses. They have a section that lists chipsets specifically for gamers, which has listed the 9600, 9700 and 9800, and a section for home and office which lists the 9200 (among others).
BTW confam, I have been poking around that website where you ordered your PC and found this.
Mid range systems include 32MB S3 integrated graphics. This provides very good performance for general use and acceptable performance for games. The highest performance systems include GeForce 4 or ATI Radeon graphics with 64MB or 128MB DDR memory.
It would have me worried that they consider an integrated 32M S3 chipset provides acceptable performance for games. What do they consider a good peformer?
Oh well, I won't worry about this anymore until you can give us a full report confam.
:cya: :cya: :cya:
Cheers Apocalypse Kid and everyone else. For now I will let sleeping dogs lie and wait until it arrives. Obviously I will be checking if it is indeed a 256MB version! And there is NO WAY ill let the bastards get away with it if they are trying to rip me off! My brother is a journalist for a national newspaper over here in scotland, so ill threaten them with some o' that! But yeah, ill keep you's posted on performance and price and overall value for money.
Keeping my fingers crossed!
so if its true, its around the power of a gefx 5200 ultra. not bad for gaming.
I folks. Thought I'd get back to you all with an update on this card. It's official,there is such as thing as a Radeon 9200 256MB card. But I suspect that the card isn't all that great. Im runnig a Xp2600 with 1GB DDR RAm and Im only getting around 80FPS....dont think thats quite right. To be honest its hard for me to benchmark the card as Im using a new system as well. The good points about the card are it's cheap and it has 256MB, but I would probably recommend staying clear of it.
Anyway See you all on the battlefield.
it being 256mb, doesnt mean its good. it may even be slower. its around the ti4200 128mb speed, even a little slower.
Benchmarks aren't real world anyway man. Those programs are only meant to stress components, not actually show you how well it will work in games.
80fps ain't too bad man. The human eye don't recognize anything over 30fps anywho. TV only plays at 30fps or so. You will noticed faster reactions & smoother game play, but you won't notice higher frame rates.
Benchmarking is just so you can say your stuff is better than someone elses, :D but is it really?
ATI 9800 PRO , by far the best card out right now.
Here is a read for you Nvidia boys ;) http://www.techreport.com/etc/2003q3/valve/index.x?pg=1
MAJOR PITA The human eye don't recognize anything over 30fps anywho. Benchmarking is just so you can say your stuff is better than someone elses, :D but is it really?
I thought it was 60 fps ? And I disagree with your second statement.
Ok seems I was caught up in the [COLOR=royalblue]big misconception[/COLOR] about what the eyes can percieve. But I'm sticking with my benchmark statement. :D Just because so many people are caught up in them, don't make them show how your card will perform with any given game. There are just too many variables present to consider them to be accurate.
Why do you think they recommend running your monitor at over 60hz? For most ppl the eye can't visually percieve the difference but turn your monitor refresh rate down to 60hz for a few minutes and you will be able to tell.
The problem with 3D games isn't the same though, your TV and films run at slower fps cause they have a different method of recording, they use motion blur and other effects to help the illusion of continuous movement, but each frame in a 3D game is a distinct still with no motion blur or fuzzy backgound focus to fool the eye, so it takes more fps to fool the eye into seeing a continuous motion illusion. Having said that, 80 FPS is good enough to do the trick. It's certainly not what I would call tremendous but at least it is very playable. Hey I remeber polaying Q1 at 15fps on my Diamond Monster Voodoo :lol:
Those were the days aye! I'm certanly glad they are long gone and I can get 100+ fps now.
Have fun all
:cya: :cya: :cya: