Choose for old rig

[Krazy Owl]

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=77&card2=141

Choose between these 2 cards.

ATI Radeon 9600SE
DirectX 9.0
Open GL 2.0
Memory type 64bits

GeForce4 Ti4200-8X
DirectX 8.0
Open GL 1.5
Memory type 128bits

Based on the website the ATI is newer and more clocked but get less performance. Should I go with ATI for newer DirectX or the Nvidia for better performance?

It will be used in a P4 3gigs socket 775 with 2.5 gigs ddr400 rig.

Thank you!

 

[MyTechAddiction]

Sell

9600 se supports Dx 9 and about 100 of thousands of games.it's pretty hard to find games made in dx8 anymore that you still want to play.IMHO sell both and get something recent like an agp version of AMD's HD4000 series

 

[brandonwh64]

6600GT DDR3 version with dual DVI if you can find it. Those cards were very good!

 

[Krazy Owl]

I dont possess them. I just can get them for 15$ at local store without bothering to order.

 

[MyTechAddiction]

Well ... What do You plan to use them for?

 

[Krazy Owl]

small gaming like Call of duty 1 and older games. plus internet surfing and watch movies.

 

[Durvelle27]

try and see if they have any HD 3xxx or HD 4xxx cards

 

[MyTechAddiction]

I believe the 9600 has a dedicated block for decoding movies ,might also help with flash.Cod 1 needs DX9 to run,so ... this is the best choice.

 

[MyTechAddiction]

looks like Cod 1 needs DirectX 9.0b 9600 doesn't have it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon

 

[ThE_MaD_ShOt]

If these are the only two cards that are under consideration, then the 9600 all the way.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Nvidia rig all the way. I had a Ti 4200 in my very first gaming rig. Great little bang for buck card that held it's own for some time, even matching the 5700 in performance. OK, so the 5700 was a bad design with crippled bandwidth, but still, anyone that knows about the Ti 4200 knows it was one of the best cards in it's price range during that time.

The other reason would be drivers, drivers, drivers. Did I mention DRIVERS? You can't even rely on ATI driver reliability during a given GPUs prime or short term, let alone long term.

That said, depending on use, the Dx9 vs Dx8 IS a very valid argument if it's primarily for gaming.

 

[Am*]

The other reason would be drivers, drivers, drivers. Did I mention DRIVERS? You can't even rely on ATI driver reliability during a given GPUs prime or short term, let alone long term.

Not only is this pure BS, but (for the sake of not derailing this thread) this is a completely invalid argument, as neither of the cards the OP mentioned are supported by either company anymore.

That said, depending on use, the Dx9 vs Dx8 IS a very valid argument if it's primarily for gaming.

Yet again, complete BS, since DirectX9 is fully backwards compatible with DX8.

P.S. If these are the only two cards being considered, the 9600 for sure. Else I'd look for a HD 3850, as it is still in good supply at certain vendors from the looks of it (and socket 775 has a lot of life left). If you had say, a socket 478 P4 or something that ancient, I wouldn't recommend getting anything better, but 775 would run nicely with a 3850.

 

[Frag_Maniac]

Not supported anymore means there better be some flexibility built into the GPU architecture itself and base drivers long term to expect trouble free performance years down the road. This argument comes up all the time and there are ALWAYS ATI/AMD fanboys that assume we're talking current driver updates when we mean driver "support" on older models.

I regretfully migrated to ATI for several years over two cards after that Ti 4200 and the last one I had was relegated to Legacy "support" (IF you can call it that) by ATI. After that I had many problems with my X1950Pro while others on even prior gen Nvidia cards were having no such issues.

Support means giving it when it's necessary, and with Nvidia GPU and driver design, there's much less need for tweaking long term. Conversely when ATI comes out and warns you they are relegating something to Legacy "support", they are basically saying you're about to get screwed. They've dumped support on at least one other latter gen model recently, it's fairly common for them.

So basically a lot of the long term support is in the R&D process up front, at least with Nvidia it is. That a lot of people still insist Nvidia's drivers are better is a clear indication they're doing a better job of it. The only time Omega drivers were made for Nvidia GPUs was the period directly after they adopted SLI. Ever since the inception of Omega drivers and up until the author stopped writing them, they were primarily made for ATI GPUs. The author himself several times stated how buggy and bloated the stock ATI drivers were, and that ATI didn't even write the installers for them worth a damn. I've seen people claim ATI drivers are fine when I was talking about using Omegas with my X1950Pro, then I found out they were using them too. Fine my ass!

Everybody has driver issues now and then, but Nvidia has them less often and fixes them quicker. The Cat 5.7 problem causing all MoH titles to suddenly not work that ATI were clueless about for months, the RAGE launch, I could go on and on about how inept ATI are compared to Nvidia, but only the Nvidia fans seem to get it anyway, so what's the point?

As for Dx, of course there's usually backwards compatibility, but I think most would rather play in Dx 9. Not sure why you'd even argue that though since it's pro ATI in this case.