Gainwood
http://komplett.co.uk/k/ki.asp?action=info&sku=117173&p=&t=278&l=2&AvdID=1&CatID=24&GrpID=1&cks=PRL
Hercules 3D Prophet 9600 256MB DDR
http://europe.hercules.com/showpage.php?p=77&b=0&f=1&PHPSESSID=dbc6fc3b371a9e8181d262a8db715750
Hercules 3D Prophet 9600 Pro 128MB DDR
http://europe.hercules.com/showpage.php?p=74&b=0&f=1&PHPSESSID=dbc6fc3b371a9e8181d262a8db715750[/b]
tbh forums generally arent too useful when researching either a cpu or graphics card purchase - lots of fanboys tend to get in the way, and how many people do you think have owned two of those cards?
try something like:
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/digest3d/index.html (says august but has had additions).
also try places like www.hardocp.com etc., lots of decent hardware sites have 9600pro vs. 9600 vs. 5600 comparisons.
It would appear the 9600pro is a better choice if you intend on running it with the coming directX 9 games. May be better still to wait for the 9600XT - is expected to replace the 9600pro’s price point (i.e. the 9600pro’s original price point, not that they’ve come down very much) while offering more performance. Depends how long you can wait, though theyre supposably on sale around end of the month. Comparative benchmarks should appear just before the cards appear in stock.
Check http://www.techimo.com
Best technical support community I’ve ever come across.
None of the above.
First off, the 9600 is just slightly better than the 9500. Se the review here:
Though they did test with the 128 Meg DDR version, so the 256 should be expected to be a bit better. This also directly compares it to the FX 5600 Ultra, which the 9600 out performs, though not by much.
Then here:
We have the FX 5600 Ultra put up against my personal favorite the GForce4 Ti4800, which blows the 5600 Ultra out of the water. Now, considering that the 5600 was only a bit lower performance than the 9600 Pro, I would expect that the Ti4800 would beat out the 9600 Pro. Which is, of course, not very suprising, if you consider the types of cards. The 9600, and FX 5600 are budget gamer cards. They are meant to meat a price point with OK perfomance. The Ti4800, on the other hand, was the top end Gforce 4 card. And I can tell you from personal experience that the Ti4600, which is just a slight step down, runs beautifully.
Further, ther price on the Ti4800 is about the same as the 9600 Pro 256 and the FX 5600 Ultra.
Go here:
Click on Video Cards and compare the prices, all three cards are within a few dollars of each other (about US$130 shipped).
The only drawback is that you won’t get all of the wiz-bang features of Direct X 9. You can still run it, but there is some extended functionality that this card won’t support. In the end, there aren’t any current games, or any comming up that will absolutly require those feature. And by the time there are, the FX 5900 Ultra will probably be way down in price.
My vote goes to the Ti4800. Its in the same price range and its a flat out better card.
Was just poking around a bit more (sorry bored at work), and found this:
It puts just about every recent card in the same review. Very nice if you are looking at what to buy. That and Pricewatch, mentioned last post, should be a good way for comparing cards and picking a good one.
tomshardware is widely “disliked” and discredited among the hardware enthusiast community btw.
Alright, I’ll bite, what makes you claim this. Please, if you have any links post them for me, I have yet to see anything put up there be utterly skewed. After a cusory search, the only thing I can come up with is there are some issues about the way he ran a test of AMD vs. Intel chips (removing the heat sink and fan), and the results (The AMD burned up, the Intel chip didn’t; though this later turned out to be partly the fault of the motherboard, and Tom’s hardware posted an article to that effect). Also, there is mention of him crediting himself with article that were written by other people, which I admit is dubious at best, but that hardly means that the tests/results are faked. Lastly, most of the comments I found about the problems with Tom’s Hardware seem to be located in the Ace’s hardware forum, not exactly something I would call widespread.
As for the community as a whole, I tend to keep tabs on a number of sites, and this is the first I have heard of it, obviously we move in different circles.
toms hardware, haha. Reasons are plentiful, laughter to great to write them down though.
Which is wonderfully helpful. Oh wait, no its not, if you can’t back up such a statement its not worth the hard drive space it takes to store the post.
I would also like to know the reason. Since I don’t trust a single source (be it THG or Anand or anyone else) I always check several, and not once have I found a THG test where the benchmark numbers (or conclusion) diverge radically from the rest of the HW sites.
SO is http://www.hardocp.com/
the only 2 sites needed are
www.nvnews.net for Nvidia
www.rage3d.com for ATI
both have reviews and information
SH
=ABS= SparhawK, I havent seen any such view towards HardOCP, though Kyle’s evident increasing annoyance and frustration with nvidia driver tactics has breached professionalism imho.
Sylver Dragon, read a roundup on THG then read similar on practically any reputable site. It’d not easy to miss, especially if you take your time reading the given reasons why particular benchmark sets were used and associated known bias. Faking benchmark results is merely the work of the lazy, while conveying a predetermined or biased view requires work but is almost as easy and yet far more convincing.
Use whatever and whereever you like to assist your purchase decisions, its your money. Not sure what “circles” you move in if youve managed to aviod distaste and distrust towards THG.
rage3d and nvnews are useful sites for news on either brand’s cards, but hardly where I’d start when deciding between them.
I’m a big Nvidia fan but it seems the ATi 9600 Pro has the edge for upcomers like HL2 and Doom 3. I think I’ll get one soon as well as they are getting nice and cheap.
ACTUALLY with regard Doom 3, it would be VERY nice to ask SD what they prefer to run their Doom 3 code on, or maybe a graphics card isn’t ALL that relevant to their avenue of work in the project. But still if they are able to (legal issues etc.) a personal opinion wouldn’t be unappreciated 
.
Yup Nvidia cards have thrown a wobbly with HL2 and DOOM3,
come to think of it most of the other DX9 games as well;
http://www.ocprices.com/index.php?action=reviews&rev_id=185&page=7
http://www.elitebastards.com/page.php?pageid=2086&head=1&comments=1
http://english.bonusweb.cz/interviews/carmackgfx.html
http://www.beyond3d.com/misc/hl2/index.php?p=3
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1863&p=2
http://www.gamersdepot.com/hardware/video_cards/ati_vs_nvidia/dx9_desktop/HL2_benchmarks/001.htm
http://www.tomshardware.com/technews/20030910_230527.html
The next card that nvidia is bringing out is the NV38/39, its the same pants card as last time, with an absolutely huge (bigger than nv30) heatsink
Wait for the NV40, should be a good card.
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=6655144d4f823b3d270605cccfcd2097&threadid=18573
Tom’s is widely respected, read, and one of the best sources for unbiased PC tech info. In the years I have been visiting that site and many others, I have never heard of anyone in the “community” or otherwise “discrediting” that site.
