Radeon Saphire Vs. GeForce FX

Ashton · Post by **Ashton** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 11:27 pm

Alright, so I'm putting together this new computer that is going to be really freaking nice. Assuming I have the money, I want to know which card you think is going to be better in the long run in terms of stability, performance, and support (continuing driver updates,)
So which is it?

The NVidia GeForce FX 5800 Ultra or the ATi Radeon Saphire 9800 Pro?
You make the call.

On an unrelated note, I was wondering if any of you had a favorite shopping spot on the 'net for cases (esp. cool looking ones. ~_^)
Thanks

EarthCurrent · Post by **EarthCurrent** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 11:35 pm

If you're putting this together for gaming, go with the Nvidia. Seems most game companies still focus on programming special graphical features in their games around NVidia cards more than ATI. In the long run, though, either card will last you a number of good solid years.

SnhKnives · Post by **SnhKnives** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 11:59 pm

well, if your going with a Nvidia chip, go with the FX 5900, not the 5800. It all depends on what you plan on doing. Radeon chips have more versitile uses for other things such as video editing and photo editing, etc.... but the nvidia cards have better drivers for their hardware and are more tuned for gaming. it all depends on what you plan on doing.

Ashton · Post by **Ashton** » Thu Jun 19, 2003 12:04 am

SnhKnives wrote:well, if your going with a Nvidia chip, go with the FX 5900, not the 5800. It all depends on what you plan on doing. Radeon chips have more versitile uses for other things such as video editing and photo editing, etc.... but the nvidia cards have better drivers for their hardware and are more tuned for gaming. it all depends on what you plan on doing.

Yeah, sorry, the 5900, I wasn't paying attention.

What am I doing with it? That's a silly question, I'll be editing with it. I will use it for games, but much more for editing.

Truest-Chaos · Post by **Truest-Chaos** » Thu Jun 19, 2003 1:20 am

I just got a new, sweet-ass pc as a graduation present, and it has the GeForce chip, and it seems to rock the hizzouse.

klinky · Post by **klinky** » Thu Jun 19, 2003 1:37 am

Uhh...

Guys your video card isn't going to do jack for video editing. All that happens is bitmaps get blitted to the screen. nVidia, Geforce or old freakin 4MB s3Virge chip is not going to make Premiere render any faster.

Some programs out there, like say Discreet's combustion use OpenGL for things like particle effects and compositing. But it doesn't actually play much part in rendering the final product.

":O So they're both going to perform about equal as far as editing AMVs is concerned.

ATI does have the All-In-Wonder line which will cost you a arm and a leg.
Nvidia has Video In/Out cards too. So they can be neck and neck.

I like ATI right now though. They have the best value and chipset. Their drivers are vastly improved from years past as well.

Ashton · Post by **Ashton** » Thu Jun 19, 2003 1:47 am

klinky wrote:Uhh...

Guys your video card isn't going to do jack for video editing. All that happens is bitmaps get blitted to the screen. nVidia, Geforce or old freakin 4MB s3Virge chip is not going to make Premiere render any faster.

Some programs out there, like say Discreet's combustion use OpenGL for things like particle effects and compositing. But it doesn't actually play much part in rendering the final product.

":O So they're both going to perform about equal as far as editing AMVs is concerned.

ATI does have the All-In-Wonder line which will cost you a arm and a leg.
Nvidia has Video In/Out cards too. So they can be neck and neck.

I like ATI right now though. They have the best value and chipset. Their drivers are vastly improved from years past as well.

Yeah, I see what you are saying. Just so long as the card has a couple of megs of RAM it's not going to make a difference.
Well then, in terms of other features, mostly input/output capabilities and, of course, gaming preformance.

Sub0 · Post by **Sub0** » Thu Jun 19, 2003 11:18 am

klinky wrote:Uhh...

Guys your video card isn't going to do jack for video editing. All that happens is bitmaps get blitted to the screen. nVidia, Geforce or old freakin 4MB s3Virge chip is not going to make Premiere render any faster.

Some programs out there, like say Discreet's combustion use OpenGL for things like particle effects and compositing. But it doesn't actually play much part in rendering the final product.

":O So they're both going to perform about equal as far as editing AMVs is concerned.

ATI does have the All-In-Wonder line which will cost you a arm and a leg.
Nvidia has Video In/Out cards too. So they can be neck and neck.

I like ATI right now though. They have the best value and chipset. Their drivers are vastly improved from years past as well.

probly an idea from old days where not every card had the dvd decoder built in. Or maybe it's due to the filter therefor giving you a better picture. Got me, but your video card does minorly affect your video DEcoding (bout as much as a monitor) but not ENcoding.

less your talking about that extra stuff they integrate in on AllinWonder and Personal Cinema products.

I would suggest the ATI but you mention a Sapphire... the Sapphire 9500- are HORRIBLE I hear but the 9700 was good, Idunno bout that one but I'd read a review first.

what is up with all this help in OT?!!

klinky · Post by **klinky** » Thu Jun 19, 2003 1:30 pm

Most all decoding takes place on the CPU. There are some video cards with DVD playback or DVD-assistance chipsets. However most anything going through VfW is going to be CPU bound.

In the old days video cards were important. Not exactly in the video editing area, but just basic 2D on PCs. 386/486days, before a quantity people I realized that NLE would be doable on PCs in the future. Not all 2D cards were equal back then and heck they still aren't. The point is that they are ALL fast enough to do any real 2D operation. heck the The 4MB s3 virge is fast enough. Anything video card you've picked up in the last 5 - 6yrs is fast enough. If it can support hardware overlay then you're in good hands :p.

The only part that is key that the video card holds is displaying the image. The cpu takes the compressed data and converts it into a raw bitmap, then shoves it into video memory for display. All your video card is doing is accepting it and converting it to a analog signal for your monitor(or not converting it in the case of DVI LCDs).

~klinky

gadoo · Post by **gadoo** » Thu Jun 19, 2003 9:34 pm

so what about for cases of 3d. like your making 3d models and 3d movies. which one would be better?