No announcement yet.

ATI 9500Pro vs. GeForce FX 5700 Ultra?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ATI 9500Pro vs. GeForce FX 5700 Ultra?

    Which is the fastest for video gaming?

  • #2
    9500 pro is quite faster

    Comment


    • #3
      9500 pro is quite faster
      amd man, i was just wondering where you got your info. the 5700 ultra has a mem clock of 900mhz and a core clock of 475mhz(evga geforce fx5700 ultra 128mb). the 9500 pro has a mem clock of 540mhz and a core clock of 275mhz(sapphire radeon 9500 pro 128mb)
      the price diff on these is about 5 bucks(5700 is cheaper). but if your gonna buy a new gfx card get a 5900 non ultra here for 192 usd.

      Comment


      • #4
        Well, not that I look around a bit more, I cant confirm what I said. Either way, I'd still go for the 9500pro, as theirs no PS 2.0 issues with it

        Comment


        • #5
          Actually, they're about the same. And if you can convert a 9500 Pro into a 9700, then it'll spank the FX 5700. nVidia thinks that showing high clock speeds will make everyone buy their cards: for the uninformed, it does. However, they lack in other areas, like having a high horsepower engine and a a s****y trans, and you still have little power at the wheels. Ati cards are very efficient, hence they're always faster in each market level (as of now anyways). : peace2: Mista K6

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by m0s3s
            amd man, i was just wondering where you got your info. the 5700 ultra has a mem clock of 900mhz and a core clock of 475mhz(evga geforce fx5700 ultra 128mb). the 9500 pro has a mem clock of 540mhz and a core clock of 275mhz(sapphire radeon 9500 pro 128mb)
            the price diff on these is about 5 bucks(5700 is cheaper). but if your gonna buy a new gfx card get a 5900 non ultra here for 192 usd.
            The faster clock rate on different cards doesn't mean its faster.
            Just like how the 9800 pro (380/340) vs the 5900 (400/800). There both great cards which ties in some areas and beat each other in other areas. Also the 5900 you suggested might be a budget card. So go for the 9500 and mod it to 9700. :cheers:
            CPU: Opteron 165 @ 311x9 - 2817.8 mhz - 1.47v
            Mobo: Abit KN8-SLI
            RAM: 2x512 Crucial Ballistic Tracers500 @ 202 mhz 2-2-2-5 T1
            GFX: Asus EAX1950pro @ 648/1408
            PSU: Thermaltake 500w
            SC: Audigy 2 zs
            LCD: 22' Samsung 225bw
            Speakers: Klipsch ProMedia 5.1 Ultra
            Mouse: Logitech G5

            Comment


            • #7
              Well since the 9600xt and 5700 ultra beat the 9500pro get the 9600xt it beats the 5700 ultra.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Compgeek
                Well since the 9600xt and 5700 ultra beat the 9500pro get the 9600xt it beats the 5700 ultra.
                Man...where the hell are you getting this stuff..if you flash a 9500 pro to a 9700...it will spank the dam 9600 because there is hardly any difference from the 9600 pro and the 9600 xt....:blah:
                CPU: Opteron 165 @ 311x9 - 2817.8 mhz - 1.47v
                Mobo: Abit KN8-SLI
                RAM: 2x512 Crucial Ballistic Tracers500 @ 202 mhz 2-2-2-5 T1
                GFX: Asus EAX1950pro @ 648/1408
                PSU: Thermaltake 500w
                SC: Audigy 2 zs
                LCD: 22' Samsung 225bw
                Speakers: Klipsch ProMedia 5.1 Ultra
                Mouse: Logitech G5

                Comment


                • #9
                  The 9500 Pro is much faster. It can be clocked up to 9700 Pro speeds with a little luck, and performs nearly as well on the default settings. That's the main reason why it was pulled from the market - performance was too good for the price.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It was pulled from the market because people figured a way to unlock the disabled pipelines and to turn it into a 9700. And also what seranox said. :cheers:
                    CPU: Opteron 165 @ 311x9 - 2817.8 mhz - 1.47v
                    Mobo: Abit KN8-SLI
                    RAM: 2x512 Crucial Ballistic Tracers500 @ 202 mhz 2-2-2-5 T1
                    GFX: Asus EAX1950pro @ 648/1408
                    PSU: Thermaltake 500w
                    SC: Audigy 2 zs
                    LCD: 22' Samsung 225bw
                    Speakers: Klipsch ProMedia 5.1 Ultra
                    Mouse: Logitech G5

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Yeah you have to overclock it to get it faster, thats dumb.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        umm, y is that dumb? :confused: If you can spend less money and get nearly identical performance it seems to me that that would be the smarter choice :cheers:

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Compgeek is just jealous because he has a 9600 Pro. ;)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Compgeek
                            Yeah you have to overclock it to get it faster, thats dumb.
                            When is overclocking dumb...:confused:
                            CPU: Opteron 165 @ 311x9 - 2817.8 mhz - 1.47v
                            Mobo: Abit KN8-SLI
                            RAM: 2x512 Crucial Ballistic Tracers500 @ 202 mhz 2-2-2-5 T1
                            GFX: Asus EAX1950pro @ 648/1408
                            PSU: Thermaltake 500w
                            SC: Audigy 2 zs
                            LCD: 22' Samsung 225bw
                            Speakers: Klipsch ProMedia 5.1 Ultra
                            Mouse: Logitech G5

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Well im not jealous my 9600pro scores at 9700pro scores. The 9600xt can overclock alot higher and still beat it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X