I am currently building a new computer. I currently have a first generation Radeon in my system (Radeon 64MBddr VIVO). The old parts on my current system will be used in a new system, but im having a hard time deciding if I want to keep my existing video card and put a low-end video card ($30-$40) in my second system, or buy a new video card (ive been looking at the TI4200 64mb ddr $150) for my new system. I originally wanted to buy a new Radeon 8500 128mb card, but Ive read that the TI4200 cards are alot better. Ive also read that the TI4200 cards have some problems in some games, and that the Radeon has a better, clearer image than the TI4200 cards. Can someone who has experience with both of these cards give me their opinion. Thanks.

BTW, I know that some people may tell me to wait for the new cards to come out, but I may not have the money to get it then.

 

Nah, don't wait for the new cards to come out. The Parhelia is disapointing so far in the majority of the pre-release benchmarks. I've read in many places blatently telling people to go out and buy the ti4200 because it's such a great deal... And it is.

As for the picture quality between the Radeon 8500 and the GF4 ti4200, I doubt that you'd be able to tell a difference unless you had them right next to each other with a very high-resolution monitor (like a 21" trinitron or something).

The Radeon 8500 and Ti4200 are very comparable performance wise, but you can easily overclock the 4200s to almost Ti4600 speeds.

If I were you, hands down I'd get the Ti4200. You can get them hella-cheap, and to be better off, you might want to consider the 128M version, but only if you run games in high resolutions (like 1280X1024 or higher) and high color depth. Hope this helps!

 

Go here:
http://www17.tomshardware.com/graphi...409/index.html
Hope that helps

BTW, I'd get the Ti4200 as well....the 8500 has some cool features, but it's not fast enough these days.

 

BTW from a few articles I've read, the 128 vs 64 MB RAM doesn't make a huge difference, especially if the 128 MB RAM is running slower than the 64 MB. Also, most games today cannot take advantage of 128 MB RAM...and by the time they can, there will be newer faster cards anyway.

 

man all these people getting new computers with superfast video cards and CPUs, all while yours truly is running a AMD k6-2 400Mhz with an Intel I740 video card 256mb PC100 SDRAM though, so it's not THAT slow

And I just realized I've had this machine since 99, 3 years is a LIFETIME in the PC world!

don't fix it until you break it!!!

 

Like i said, 128M is primarily for running very high resolutions and color depth. At those setting the memory DOES make a difference.

 

You think that is bad? I am running a Pentium 233 w/128 MB SDRAM back from early 1998. I have a voodoo2 card for games, but never use it. I have gotten more into the development side and play with Macromedia, Adobe, and Visual Studio products instead of playing games. The ATI TV card is my primary card, the voodoo2 is just for 3D Games (OPEN GL and such)

Anyone want to buy a voodoo2? :-)

 

I just got a Radeon8500LE 128mb for my bro's comp. I made a stupid mistake and got an OEM version which is "powered by ATI" meaning it uses the ATI components except for ram, I think. Stupid decision, because I thought it had the same core and memory speed as the retail version which is "built by ATI" but the mem speed is scaled back 50mhz to only 200. It uses Samsung ram which is good but it's only 5.0ns, providing not much OC potential. I got for the same price (250CAN) a month later a retail version built by ATI Radeon 8500LE 128mb. And let me tell you it is a steal. For 100CAN less than the Radeon8500 128mb non-LE, you get the same card without a DVI output connection for running a second monitor and a core and memory speed of 25mhz less.

No problem because its now running at 8500 non-LE speeds, with a slight overclock. I even went as high as 300/300 on stock cooling with no artifacts and graphic glitches. It's due to the fact the card comes with 3.6ns Infineon ram.

Yes, I admit that the GeForce4 Ti4200 has high OCing potential. Some say when OCed to its limits it can approach the performance of the Ti4600. I still find it too expensive IMO, and I also like the better image quality of the Radoen since similarly you won't notice a fps difference at all but super high resolutions only 21 inch monitors support. And besides I don't play games everytime I turn on the computer.

 

Go with the NVidia chips. You will be glad you did. Especially with prices so good right now:

www.pricewatch.com

 

Go here for a good review on the TI4200 and they discuss the 64 vs 128 MB question.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1643&p=1

 

Thanks for all the replys Keep em coming, I havent ordered anything yet

 

I saw a Chaintech Ti4200 128M on www.allstarshop.com for about $169 or something, sounds like a great deal. Even includes the analog (regular monitor), Tv-out via S-video, and DVI (for LCD screens) outputs.

 

Well, I decided to get the Radeon 8500 128mb video card. I got it for $154 including s/h @ www.buy.com . It comes with a free NOSTROMO SPEEDPAD N50. Like I said in my first post, I currently have a Radeon 64. I have been happy with this card, despite many people saying that ATI drivers suck. The only driver problems I had was with the tv-out and winxp. I had to fiddle with them to get the tv-out to look decent.

In case anyone is looking for a deal on the Ti4200, Best Buy currently has a Visiontek Ti4200 128mb for $179.99 with a free $10 gift card. Thats the cheapest I found the Visiontek for. The Chaintech that was mentioned in the previous post doesnt have high-quality components, which will make it harder to OC.

Also, the 8500 and Ti4200 is very close in terms of performance.





http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardwar...le.php/1370641