Home

News

Forums

Hardware

CPUs

Mainboards

Video

Guides

CPU Prices

Memory Prices

Shop



Sharky Extreme :


Latest News


- New Toshiba Laptop Offers Hard Disks for Business and Pleasure
- Iomega Supersizes Small-Network Storage
- Intel Embraces Draft 802.11 Wireless for Centrino
- Seagate and Fujitsu Boost Hard Drive Technology
- Dell Goes Outdoors With Ruggedized Notebook
News Archives

Features

- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with ATI's Terry Makedon
- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with Seagate's Joni Clark
- Half-Life 2 Review
- DOOM 3 Review
- Unreal Tournament 2004 Review

Buyer's Guides

- December Value Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- November Extreme Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- September High-end Gaming PC Buyer's Guide

HARDWARE

  • CPUs

    - Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Processor Review
    - Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 Processor Review

  • Motherboards

    - Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 Motherboard Review

  • Video Cards

    - ASUS EAX1650XT 256MB Review
    - Albatron GeForce 7600 GS 256MB Review
    - Albatron GeForce 7900 GTX 512MB Review
    - PNY Verto GeForce 7950 GT 512MB Review
    - ATI Radeon X1900 XT 512MB Review





  • SharkyForums.Com - Print: Settle it, Radeon vrs MX

    Settle it, Radeon vrs MX
    By Balefire October 23, 2000, 02:25 PM

    I'm getting ready to get a new system. I've watched the battle rage since the beginning. It's time to settle if once and for all. If possible I'd even like to see some benches comparing the two because there seems to be enough people arguing over it (please Shark). And all assuming if ATI would hire someone that could write drivers how would the Radeon compare with the upper end cards? And does anyone know if the 32mb radeon has a vivo option, I've only seen the 64 with it?

    By Humus October 23, 2000, 02:41 PM

    ATi can write drivers, the current drivers are not worse in any way than nvidia drivers.
    And Radeon IS a upper end card and performs better than GTS in many games in hi-res 32bit.
    You can see some benches here: http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1334

    There's no vivo for 32bit though, sorry.

    By The Grinch October 23, 2000, 02:55 PM

    If you use Win2k and an AMD CPU you will have some speed issues with the "current" ATI drivers. But if you're using plain old Win9x or ME, there aren't any real problems. The Radeon cards are brand new as well as the drivers. There are some tiny ussues for ATI to work out, but it's not enough to hurt your gaming experience. This is no different for any other brand on the market.

    There is no VIVO for the 32MB version unless you get the All-in-wonder version like I did. It aint cheap but sports more features than you can shake a stick at.

    In my opinion, compaired to the MX, the Radeon is an all around a better card for the money.

    By zzeminsky October 23, 2000, 03:01 PM

    That's just the SDR, the Radeon DDR which is also $150 (after rebate) is much faster than both the SDR and the MX.

    By GTaudiophile October 23, 2000, 04:02 PM

    Radeon all the way if you're running Win9x or ME.

    OT:

    ZZeminsky,

    What do you think of those "little" BA635 speakers?

    By Mighty Mighty Me October 23, 2000, 04:07 PM

    There both great cards.

    MX Pluses
    +cheaper(and diffrent features available)
    +fast at low resolutions
    +fast at 16bit
    +faster normal quality
    +Dual Head Display or TV-out
    +Win2k support

    Radeon Pluses
    +fast at high resolutions
    +fast at 32bit
    +fast at high quality
    +better quality display

    And even the speed isn't really as much of a difference honestly. Both great cards, its just about the features and the price.

    By The Grinch October 23, 2000, 04:58 PM

    quote:Originally posted by Mighty Mighty Me:
    There both great cards.

    MX Pluses
    +cheaper(and diffrent features available)
    +fast at low resolutions
    +fast at 16bit
    +faster normal quality
    +Dual Head Display or TV-out
    +Win2k support

    Radeon Pluses
    +fast at high resolutions
    +fast at 32bit
    +fast at high quality
    +better quality display

    And even the speed isn't really as much of a difference honestly. Both great cards, its just about the features and the price.

    If you're gonna get specific, you forgot two major items for the Radeon. It has the best DVD decoding/quality (right out of the box) and is DirectX8 ready. Not that anyone's counting.

    By Vitto October 23, 2000, 10:52 PM

    Do you have any information on the $50 rebate mentioned in Sharkey's review? I purchased a retail boxed version ... no mention of the rebate in the box or on ATI's site.

    By AMD_Forever October 23, 2000, 10:58 PM


    *INSERT SARCASM HERE*
    get a voodoo 4 4500 !! theyre so cool with the face on the box and word voodoo!!

    *END SARCASM*

    By Elxman October 23, 2000, 11:11 PM

    hehe voodoo4...
    anyways you can't go wrong with either cards but if I were to choose I'd go for the Radeon since it has hyperZ and all those other Z stuff that helps with bandwith that equals performance. and also I dont like nvidia's name..it's dumb..

    By sapasion October 24, 2000, 02:08 AM

    Radeon ddr is a better card than the Mx. Though the Mx is a better value at $100. Also forget the sdr. If you have to choose between sdr and Mx go with Mx. I got the Mx two months ago when the Radeon ddr was even out. I realize the ddr is a bit better especially in 32 bit and higher resolutions. But when I traded-in my old V3 I only had to pay $58 for my Mx and that makes it a much better value than the radeon. Besides with video cards, this time next year I'll be able to get a Radeon 2 on a trade-in for $58 probably.

    By OOAgentFiruz October 24, 2000, 03:28 AM

    Someone pronounce nVidia .......how the hell is it pronounced?

    By sapasion October 24, 2000, 03:31 AM

    n-vid-e-ah

    By GTaudiophile October 24, 2000, 08:04 AM

    Well, I sometimes pronounce it like how we fondly pronounce G. Dubya Bush's name: N-Vid-Ya.

    But I agree, the proper way to pronounce it is In-Vid-E-Ah.

    By Thatoneguy October 24, 2000, 12:45 PM

    If you get the mx get the hercules one. It has a 183 mhz memory bus up from 166. Just having the faster bus gives it about 10% performance gain over all of the others. I have one and it rocks.

    By Narchwoogle October 24, 2000, 02:37 PM

    The Radeon SDR may have higher frame rates at 1600x1200, but when you are talking about 26 FPS, that isn't anything to get excited about. To be honest, neither the Geforce 2 MX nor the Radeon SDR is playable above 1024x768 unless you like torturing yourself with low frame rates. Both cards are really designed to be used at low frame rates. With that said, the Geforce 2 MX is a much better deal because not only is it faster at playable resolutions and the key here is playable, but it's cheaper too.
    As far as bringing the Radeon DDR into the picture, you are talking about comparing a $100 Geforce 2 MX with a $150 Radeon DDR. That's a $50 dollar difference. You can also argue that for about $200 you can get a Geforce 2 GTS which blows both of them away.
    What has to be answered is what is the maximum about you are willing to spend? If you can afford $150 then get the Radeon DDR with rebate. If it's $149 or lower, then get the Geforce 2 MX.

    By Balefire October 24, 2000, 03:18 PM

    Ok say I have 150 bucks, but am in a debate on whether the tv out on the mx at that price is worth getting over the performce of the ddr radeon.

    By The Grinch October 24, 2000, 03:41 PM

    quote:Originally posted by Narchwoogle:
    The Radeon SDR may have higher frame rates at 1600x1200, but when you are talking about 26 FPS, that isn't anything to get excited about. To be honest, neither the Geforce 2 MX nor the Radeon SDR is playable above 1024x768 unless you like torturing yourself with low frame rates. Both cards are really designed to be used at low frame rates. With that said, the Geforce 2 MX is a much better deal because not only is it faster at playable resolutions and the key here is playable, but it's cheaper too.
    As far as bringing the Radeon DDR into the picture, you are talking about comparing a $100 Geforce 2 MX with a $150 Radeon DDR. That's a $50 dollar difference. You can also argue that for about $200 you can get a Geforce 2 GTS which blows both of them away.
    What has to be answered is what is the maximum about you are willing to spend? If you can afford $150 then get the Radeon DDR with rebate. If it's $149 or lower, then get the Geforce 2 MX.

    I have to disagree. The Radeon 32MB DDR can hold frame rates steadily over 30 at 1600x1200x32 on a decent system. When your watching a TV show or movie, you're watching at exactly 30fps. Using your math, TV should be un-watchable. The Radeon card IS suitable for today's greatest games @ hi-res. However, tomorrows games might be a different story. We'll have to wait and see.

    Unfortunately I can't comment on the MX @ hi-res since I don't own one.

    By qwex October 24, 2000, 04:38 PM

    I've been looking into this issue for quite some time, and I went radeon...it seems to be a higher performance card than the mx, and at $150 it's comparably prices to the better retail mx cards. as for *only* 30fps at 1600x1200, for some people that's enough; some hardcore gamers want 60+. I'm fine with 30 or 40. I'd say radeon, unless the extra features (TV out, twinview, etc.) on the mx cards are things you really want.

    By zzeminsky October 24, 2000, 04:53 PM

    Their great for the price, I liked them better than the Cambridge Soundworks. Actually a friend who has the soundworks speakers is thinking of buying the 635's.

    By Narchwoogle October 24, 2000, 05:10 PM

    quote:Originally posted by The Grinch:
    I have to disagree. The Radeon 32MB DDR can hold frame rates steadily over 30 at 1600x1200x32 on a decent system.

    I don't know what you are disagreeing with. I didn't say the Radeon DDR I said the Radeon SDR. I know the DDR is capable of 1600x1200 at playable rates. The Radeon SDR is not playable at 1600x1200. I don't think an average fps of 26 is good. Keep in mind that's an average. That means that often it falls well below that and the game will look awful.

    quote:Originally posted by Balefire:

    Ok say I have 150 bucks, but am in a debate on whether the tv out on the mx at that price is worth getting over the performce of the ddr radeon.

    Do you currently use TV out? I've got a good, large monitor on my comp, so I don't use it even though my card supports it. I would go with the Radeon DDR if you are willing to spend $150 for it. It has better high end resolution performance than the Geforce 2 MX and the Radeon SDR. The TV out just seems like a novelty to me, but how important it is to you is something you'll have to decide. I would rather have the Radeon DDR.

    By sapasion October 24, 2000, 05:20 PM

    Just remember that the Radeon ddr is not actually $150. Supposedly, there is/was this $50 rebate on Radeon but most people do not have it or did not use it. Even if they did waiting 6 weeks to receive your check from ATI hardly makes the initial purchase seem like $150.

    By OmegaRed October 24, 2000, 06:47 PM

    the rebate is there, i bought mine at best buy and it came with 2 $50 rebates. i can only use one because of having to use the original UPC, but it is very real and lasts until 2001 i think.

    By Elxman October 24, 2000, 06:57 PM

    to Narchwoogle.
    gts does not blow away the radeon ddr.
    even in very rare scenarios it does it'll be momentary when games start using dx8. now don't jump to conclusions and say by that time they'll have new stuff out but would you upgrade every 6months on $350+ cards?
    if you do, damn u rich mustard
    just my thoughts

    By reznor13 October 24, 2000, 09:09 PM

    omegared if u bought your radeon at best buy u paid $270 with a $50 discount not $200 with a $50 discount. i know because i intially bought one there. the price has not changed.

    By OmegaRed October 24, 2000, 09:31 PM

    no, they had a price cut, its $200 -$50 rebate = $150
    everywhere had a price cut to my knowledge, such as frys and i believe compusa
    (i think i would know what i paid)

    By Hey Yoda October 25, 2000, 01:12 PM

    What about Canada????

    I bought my MX (Asus V7100) for $230 Canadian because it was the ONLY Mx I could find at the time. The Radeon 32 DDR was $350 with NO REBATE. Now that's a pretty big price difference to me.

    Damn you Americans and your low prices! And most online stores refuse to sell to Canadians

    By Ironbar October 25, 2000, 09:00 PM


    Damn you Americans and your low prices! And most online stores refuse to sell to Canadians [/B][/QUOTE]

    I got a Radeon 32 DDR from www.outpost.com for $188 USD shipped. Which works out to about $280 CDN. Oh yeah... NO taxes either. Ha ha... i'm getting my socialist medicine for free! Well... almost.

    By agg123456789 October 25, 2000, 10:55 PM

    quote:Originally posted by Thatoneguy:
    If you get the mx get the hercules one. It has a 183 mhz memory bus up from 166. Just having the faster bus gives it about 10% performance gain over all of the others. I have one and it rocks.

    i am in complete aggreement. i have the hercules one too and i LOVE it....from my old Voodoo 3 3000 there is no comparision, and it was CHEAP! i got it for a grand total of 6o bucks. cant beat that. i love the mx. for everyone who has a budget -- GET ONE!!!!!

    By Titanium October 25, 2000, 11:11 PM

    You are forgetting the Radeon has much lower frame rate fluctations than GeForce2 cards, at 35fps Radeon is very playable while the GeForce2 MX\GTS is definitely not. I noticed how much smoother games are now compared to my old GeForce2 GTS. I would recommend a Radeon SDR\DDR over any GeForce2 product simply because of the higher quality 2D and 3D. Buy both and I bet you will return the MX and keep the Radeon. Radeon SDR is available for $120 at a local computer store here, Radeon DDR $150, you can't get better value than that. I really can't find any advantages a GeForce2 has over the Radeon other than faster 16-bit and TwinView. DX8 is going to be released next month, Microsoft used the Radeon to demo DX8 since it supports all of the most important DX8 features, don't feel left out. You may find yourself returing the MX and buying a Radeon in the future.

    By Sewer Urchin October 25, 2000, 11:26 PM

    Gimmeny gillicers batman!!! a cheap Geforce 2 mx in canada is only $189.99, while the radeon is 334.99!!!!!!!!!! (come with $75 reabte not added)

    By Vegeta [SS] October 25, 2000, 11:30 PM

    quote:Originally posted by Sewer Urchin:
    Gimmeny gillicers batman!!! a cheap Geforce 2 mx in canada is only $189.99, while the radeon is 334.99!!!!!!!!!! (come with $75 reabte not added)


    I live in Minnesota, is it worth it for me to drive up to Canada to save th money? How much is the Ati Radeon 32mb DDR up there anyway? Thanks!

    By Narchwoogle October 26, 2000, 03:23 PM

    quote:Originally posted by Balefire:
    Ok say I have 150 bucks, but am in a debate on whether the tv out on the mx at that price is worth getting over the performce of the ddr radeon.

    I saw this on another post by SiNOMan.
    "you can actually get the [Geforce 256] DDR verson for only $155 at www.sg3d.com plus shipping."
    So, you might want to consider getting the Geforce 256 DDR.

    By blankman October 26, 2000, 04:16 PM

    the radeon has less fluctuations in frame rate because of the third texture unit. Notice how using a geforce card, when you are looking directly at a shader or several shaders in quake 3, the framerate drops quite considerably. Using a radeon with it's third texture unit, the drop in framerate will be less significant.

    By Ironbar October 26, 2000, 10:07 PM

    I live in Minnesota, is it worth it for me to drive up to Canada to save th money? How

    NO it is definately not worth it. He is quoting a 32 DDR price, but you have to add on 15% sales tax, which makes it about $255 USD. Order online from the states, i did from canada and i saved a whack 'o cash. Cheapest local price is $380 CDN.. pfff..

    By Vegeta [SS] October 26, 2000, 10:32 PM

    Thanks for letting me know! Why is it so expensive!?! Aren't they based out of Ontario or something like that? I feel sorry for Canadians : (


    Contact Us | www.SharkyForums.com

    Copyright 1999, 2000 internet.com Corporation. All Rights Reserved.


    Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46

    previous page
    next page





    Copyright 2002 INT Media Group, Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. About INT Media Group | Press Releases | Privacy Policy | Career Opportunities