ti4600 or 9500 Pro

[Whisper]

Ok everyone, I'm sure this has been brought up before, but I figured hey...might as well bring it up again

I have the opportunity to receive one of the above mentioned cards (ti4600 or 9500 pro) for my birthday, as they are both roughly the same cost. The 9500pro would of course be Built by ATI rather than simply Powered by ATI, and the ti4600 is a "house brand," which I believe equates to visiontek in this case. They are nearly the exact same price (199 and 195 respectively), so which do you think I should end up with?

A friend of mine is badgering me to go with the 9500 as it's newer, and he feels the 4600 is an "old" card nowadays...at least compared to the radeon, which in a way it is. However, the 4600 just seems to have more raw power in many instances, and of course there's always the ever-present fear of driver/incompatibility issues with the radeon.

Main uses of the card: Gaming, gaming, internet browsing, and gaming. I also use my computer for web design (graphics and coding), but it's a past time and not a profession, so nothing overly serious. I do watch DVD's occassionally, but not enough for DVD quality to be a huge issues unless the discrepency in quality is unbearable.

So yeah, if you need anymore info just let me know, but those are the bare facts. The current system is begging for the card (Athlon XP 1800+ currently being limited by a GF2 GTS), and so this is a much desired upgrade. Also, please post at least a brief reason for your opinion beyond the helpful, "nVidia/ATI sucks goat toes."

That's about it, thanks in advance for the input.

 

[Lonyo]

The 9500 PRO is a faster card than the Yi 4600, especially if you use AA and AF. Plus the 9500 is DX9 compliant.
Many people say that ATi cards also have better 2D quality.

 

[pillage2001]

No reason why you should get a Ti4600. Go with the 9500Pro.

 

[nick1985]

i disagree. i would get a 4600. look here

lool

that is if you do gaming, which this test is based on

 

[nick1985]

that is supposed to say "look" not lool. oh well, im retarded

 

[nick1985]

son of a ......

FINALLY!

 

[Deeko]

There is an edit button.

Get the 9500 pro. Faster in what matters, IE games, not that 3DMark bullsh!t someone just posted. Also, who doesn't use FSAA these days??? With FSAA/ansio, it is no contest.

 

[pillage2001]

If running 3dmark is what you do all day, by all means get the ti4600 but look at THESE scores before going for a ti4600. I love my games with 16x AF but 4x FSAA and 8x AF. The ti4600 is NOWHERE NEAR.

 

[nick1985]

go to that website where both of our links are. look at the 3 or 4 game sections where the run tests on the cards. the 4600 wins ever time in the gaming section and the benchmark.


4x FSAA
8x Anisotropic
4x FSAA + 8x Aniso

the 9500 wins all of those tests.


they are pretty equal IMO. the 4600 wins half the tests, the 9500 the other half.

 

[pillage2001]

Originally posted by: nick1985
go to that website where both of our links are. look at the 3 or 4 game sections where the run tests on the cards. the 4600 wins ever time in the gaming section and the benchmark.


4x FSAA
8x Anisotropic
4x FSAA + 8x Aniso

the 9500 wins all of those tests.


they are pretty equal IMO. the 4600 wins half the tests, the 9500 the other half.

If you're buying a high end card, you would want to make sure you get the best out of it. I'm not gonna play my games without any AA or AF on. That's the whole point of getting the 9500Pro. WHo runs their games with either AF or AA off anyway??

 

[Literatii]

Personally I'd take a rain check and wait for the NV30. At that point the Radeon 9700 will come down in price; and then you can own a really stellar gaming card if you can't afford the GeforceFX.

IMO, a "super" ti4200 is going to give you more bang-for-buck than a ti4600. My OCed Albatron is already clocked to ti4400 levels for minimal cost.

 

[Whisper]

Thanks for the input, everyone. I had already put in the order for the Geforce, but I'll be cancelling that and going for the 9500pro now. I figure if the drivers give me any issues, I can always return. But hey, it's just gonna keep getting better I figure, so bring on the DX9 and AA

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: nick1985
go to that website where both of our links are. look at the 3 or 4 game sections where the run tests on the cards. the 4600 wins ever time in the gaming section and the benchmark.


4x FSAA
8x Anisotropic
4x FSAA + 8x Aniso

the 9500 wins all of those tests.


they are pretty equal IMO. the 4600 wins half the tests, the 9500 the other half.

9500 wins what matters. That is the important part.

 

[Literatii]

If you're a gamer, you probably won't have too many problems with ATI. I had quite a few when the Radeon 8500 came out, but it seems better now.

As an OpenGL developer I won't go back to ATI unless they start paying serious attention to their OpenGL drivers. They just plain suck, and I have to code around them all the time.

 

[EdipisReks]

you might want to wait just a couple days before you buy anything. x-bit labs may very well have found out how to turn a non pro 128 MB 9500 into a 9700 with just a couple touchs of a soldering iron. if this turns out to be true, then i would get that .

 

[Whisper]

Yeah, I have heard about developers' issues with ATI's OpenGL drivers. One example being the shiny water effect in NWN, which didn't work on any Radeon for 3-4 months or so after the game's release. Took some recoding by the Bioware peoples to get around a few lines of OpenGL commands that weren't supported by the ATI drivers, or something similar. So should I attempt to stick to Direct3d whenever possible with the 9500pro, or would it truly matter?

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Price

9500 Pro < Ti 4600 = the 9500 Pro costs less

Performance

9500 Pro >= Ti 4600 = yes, the 9500 Pro is faster than or equal to the Ti 4600 in many situations

Drivers

9500 Pro <= Ti 4600 = ATI sure as hell has fixed their driver problems. Its thanks to drivers that the 9500 Pro actually stands a chance against the 4600, use to be that the 9500 merely a contender for the 4200 until ATI fixed things.

Winner

9500 Pro

You get performance that is at least on par with the 4600, the ability to crank up FSAA and/or AF (especially in older games making them look newer/better), and it costs less. Driver problems are hardly an issue with ATI anymore. I don't see how a 4600 is an option at all... now a 4200 if you are willing to risk an overclock... but even then the 9500 can be overclocked as well...

 

[Actaeon]

Originally posted by: Lonyo
The 9500 PRO is a faster card than the Yi 4600, especially if you use AA and AF. Plus the 9500 is DX9 compliant.
Many people say that ATi cards also have better 2D quality.

Exactly what i was going to say...

 

[bgeh]

i'd go with ati's radeon 9500pro for the dx 9
and you can also mod it into a radeon 9700

 

[Kazuo]

No. No, you can't. You can mod the 9500 into a 9700, but the 9500 Pro is screwed regardless.
It was laziness on Sapphire's part that the 9500 can become a 9700, which is good. But that may also change in the near future.
If you want to do the mod, get a standard 128MB Radeon 9500 Sapphire for $163 from Newegg. Then, once the mod is complete and you get some RAM sinks, then the show will be on the road and you can get 9700 Pro speeds (mainly by OCing the VPU).

 

[BFG10K]

The Radeon 9500 Pro is the better choice, especially if you like high resolution + anisotropic filtering settings and/or if you want a DirectX 9 featureset.

 

[EdipisReks]

nm.

 

[frustrated2]

I to have been in this same predictament.

I was almost ready to order a 9700 non pro and then read that it might be possible to turn a 9500 into a 9700 so I have been waiting. I now have the opportunity to get a geforce 4 4200 for a really nice price ($100 less than the 9700).

I have read about quite a few problems with the ati cards driver wise etc. I know that nvidia has been the best for along time and now ati has squeezed them hard and for sure taken over in performance. I am not sure ati has solved all of its issues so I may just get the ti 4200 and wait and see (let them get everything perfect before I jump in).

I really need a whole system upgrade to use a 9700 properly

What do you guys think??

 

[nRollo]

Deeko:
"Also, who doesn't use FSAA these days??? With FSAA/ansio, it is no contest. "
Contest
Err, the 4600 wins one by about 10%, the 9500 wins one by about 10%.

4600 wins all 3

4600 stomps

Flight SIMs too

This choice isn't as easy as you make it out to be, the 4600 is a faster card.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Deeko:
"Also, who doesn't use FSAA these days??? With FSAA/ansio, it is no contest. "
Contest
Err, the 4600 wins one by about 10%, the 9500 wins one by about 10%.

4600 wins all 3

4600 stomps

Flight SIMs too

This choice isn't as easy as you make it out to be, the 4600 is a faster card.

WTF are you talking about, the 9500 Pro beats the 4600 in EVERY ONE of those benches. You probably just looked at the "Radeon 9500 Pro" Benches other than the "Radeon 9500 Pro (Final)" benches. GF. Oh and in some cases the 9500 Pro is faster than the 9700/Pro, especially in 1024x768, even 1280x1024... And that's WITHOUT FSAA and/or AF...

The whole purpose of that article and benches was to show how ATI improved the 9500 Pro to compete with the 4600 rather than the 4200 as it had been doing. The article shows just that...

Seriously, there is little reason to go nVidia considering at this very moment when the 9700 is unopposed so far in its price range, the 9500 Pro beats the 4600 easily price/performance (its cheaper and faster). Getting into the sub $100 level you have the 8500(9100)/9000. Really the only thing nVidia seems to have right now that might be worthy of money in comparison to ATI products is the 4200. If you want more than a 8500/9000 but you can't scrape up enough for a 9500 Pro, then the 4200 is probably the best bet. Even then ATI offers the 9500 non pro...