Geforce 4 equivilent?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ~mike~
  • Start date Start date
M

~mike~

Just wondering which Radeon ATI card would be equivilent in power to the old
Nvidia Geforce 4 (ti400). The 128bit 9600 pehaps?

Mike.
 
The 9600PRO beats the 5600 ULTRA in most new games so I don't think it can
be directly compared with that card.

In older titles the Geforce4 is still quite a fast card however in newer
titles it cannot be compared with a Geforce4 at all. For one thing the
Geforce4 doesn't have Directx 9 support or even directx 8.1 in hardware.

Dan
 
Dan said:
The 9600PRO beats the 5600 ULTRA in most new games so I don't think it can
be directly compared with that card.

In older titles the Geforce4 is still quite a fast card however in newer
titles it cannot be compared with a Geforce4 at all. For one thing the
Geforce4 doesn't have Directx 9 support or even directx 8.1 in hardware.
Click to expand...

Have a look at this chart, it'll give you a ballpark equivalent
(raw performance, without regard to DX support):
http://techreport.com/etc/comparo/graphics/

The Ti4x00's range from 7.1GB/s to 10.4GB/s, ATI's
equivalent would be Radeon 7500 through the 9600 Pro.
 
Rick said:
Have a look at this chart, it'll give you a ballpark equivalent
(raw performance, without regard to DX support):
http://techreport.com/etc/comparo/graphics/

The Ti4x00's range from 7.1GB/s to 10.4GB/s, ATI's
equivalent would be Radeon 7500 through the 9600 Pro.
Click to expand...
the card that was made for Direct X 8 by ATI at the same time as
the GeForce 3 and 4 was the Radeon 8500. It may have had slightly better
image quality but the nVidia cards at the time were faster. It was the
first card made by ATI to support programmable shaders. The 7500 did not.
 
~mike~ said:
Just wondering which Radeon ATI card would be equivilent in power to the
old
Nvidia Geforce 4 (ti400). The 128bit 9600 pehaps?

Mike.
Click to expand...

Radeon 8500 64Mb and 128Mb. Not the LE version. Both it and Ti4200 are DX8.1
cards, and have similar pipelines and TMU per pipeline. The standard Ti4200
is actually a bit faster overall in many gamng benches, but the 8500's
visual quality was (is) better. I had both, and wound up selling the Ti4200
and keeping the 8500 128Mb. It was a lot prettier and only about 5-7%
slower. This was back when they were state of the art cards.
 
Why bother? Just buy a Geforce4 if you are looking for something in that
performance range. Back then ATi did not have a competitive card. The 8500
did not have robust drivers or decent FSAA quality.
 
.. Back then ATi did not have a competitive card. The 8500
did not have robust drivers or decent FSAA quality.
Click to expand...

Well, the card was actually quality, but like you say driver stability and
FSAA left much to be desired. The 8500 always ran synthetic benchmarks well.
It was always slower in actual games. It was also very driver sensitive,
which I usually attributed to ATI's generally crappy drivers rather than the
card. Come to think of it, that's still true. The 3.7's were the only Cat's
that didn't give me numerous issues in various things on the 8500.
 
Back
Top