Geforce 3 Ti200 Vs Ati Radeon 7500 in JKII

[DaLiX]

Id like to ask which one of these cards performs better in JKII(higher detail, better frame rate etc) on AMD chipsets for reference. If anyone has an idea, please state it here.

Im currently using an Ati Rage Fury Maxx (Dual 32mb Ati Rage Pro 128 chips) and i have to keep textures on medium while some of my other friends run at high with better framerates on Geforce 2's, so Im thinkin about getting a better card.

[ineluki]

The Ti200 will cain the 7500 even if its not OC'd.

 

I have a Ti200 OC'd to Ti500 speed runs fine in 1600x1200x32 with everything on high except shadows, which look dumb. Thats on an Athlon XP 1800+ with 512ram. I get around 60-90fps in single, and 50ish in multi.

 

I also have an 8500 running on a tbird 1ghz OC'd to 1.4 that can pull off 1280x1024x32 with full detail, cept for shadows, at quite a nice speed, 40-80 single, 40-50 multi.

[Threetall]

With the graphics issues popping up, if you can get one to work then consider yourself lucky.

[RedWolf4000]

GO WITH THE RADEON. I had a GeForce 4 MX 440, which is basically a tweaked and improved GeForce2Ti chip set, and the framerates dont compare to my radeon 7500. let me give it to you this way: while playing jk2 in 1 player, your gonna get probablly the same ammount of fps standing still, go outside in single player mode, with alot of baddies, the geforce framerate wont hold as high as the radeon. In multiplayer, there is no comparison, ATI's radeon beats out the geforce 4 mx 440 (geforce2ti) by a good ammount of frames in a big multi fight. With 10 people on the screen in a multiplayer game, expect 15fps with the geforce2ti, but with the Radeon, expect around 30fps. These 15fps, from 15 to 30 makes a world of visual difference and its much to appreciate. Now if u had a geforce4 mx 440 id say the only advantage is you can run 4x antialiasing no problem (which you cant as well with the radeon) but your talkin about a gf2ti, so no doubt, you should go with the Radeon 7200 or higher. Dont listen to under-estimations from others about the radeon cards, there cards are great, in fact they JUST released new drivers that cleared up any complications with JK2. The radeon is my reccomendation.

[RedWolf4000]

Forgot to add: all those fps comparisons are if your running a lower-end system. On my system currently i have a 1.33 athlon, 256mb pc133, and the radeon 7500, i get 35-110fps in single player, and 25-65 in multiplayer. Keep in mind, that The GeForce 3 Ti is a great buy and can really have high FPS if placed in a high end system.

[DaLiX]

My sys specs are :

AMD Duron 850Mhz

Abit KT7A motherboard

256 PC100

Ati Rage Fury Maxx (dual 32 ati rage pro 128 chips)

 

JKII settings

1027x768/32b all at high except textures, I keep them at medium, anything higher makes it impossible to play.

 

Result?

Single player fps -> 15-50 (the jungle on yavin causes some seriously slow gameplay)

Multiplayer fps -> 10-35 (the more players, the worse framerate)

(the fps doesnt change much to the better when i switch to 800x600 or even lower)

 

The Radeon 7500 seems good , but according to 3dMark charts the GeForce 3 Ti200 (you mentioned the GeForce2 but i mean the 3) gets higher scores on an athlon 1Ghz system.

 

I basicly want to get higher frame rates and higher texture quality, what should i go into with my system? I will be changing that duron to a faster one sooner or later too.

[WhiteChedda]

Originally posted by RedWolf4000

GO WITH THE RADEON. I had a GeForce 4 MX 440, which is basically a tweaked and improved GeForce2Ti chip set, and the framerates dont compare to my radeon 7500. let me give it to you this way: while playing jk2 in 1 player, your gonna get probablly the same ammount of fps standing still, go outside in single player mode, with alot of baddies, the geforce framerate wont hold as high as the radeon. In multiplayer, there is no comparison, ATI's radeon beats out the geforce 4 mx 440 (geforce2ti) by a good ammount of frames in a big multi fight. With 10 people on the screen in a multiplayer game, expect 15fps with the geforce2ti, but with the Radeon, expect around 30fps. These 15fps, from 15 to 30 makes a world of visual difference and its much to appreciate. Now if u had a geforce4 mx 440 id say the only advantage is you can run 4x antialiasing no problem (which you cant as well with the radeon) but your talkin about a gf2ti, so no doubt, you should go with the Radeon 7200 or higher. Dont listen to under-estimations from others about the radeon cards, there cards are great, in fact they JUST released new drivers that cleared up any complications with JK2. The radeon is my reccomendation.

 

This is incorrect. A Gf4 MX is a GF2 GPU, but the memory is NOT the same as that on a Gf2, if you investigate you will find MX cards use slower ns rated memeory and only a 64Bit bus, while Ti cards [including GF2 cards] use higher rated memory and 128Bit bus................... Don't ever judge a real card by a budget version, even when the real card is 2 years older. Memory bandwidth is what its all about these days, if your looking for a budget card today, and your not running XP, I would suggest a Kyro II based card, because even with the abscence of hardware T&L, its memory design is superior due to tile based rendering, however be ready for some odd visual abnomalies, not that you don;t get these with other bargain cards though.

 

 

AS to the two card, my understanding is if Framerate is what you want go with an Nvidia, if visual quality is, go with the ATI.

 

Note this does not imply thtat nvidia cads have BAD visual quality, nor that ATI cards have bad framerates, just that nvidia accelerates at speed, and ATI at quality. Both companies do admirably in those two ratings, just one does better in each respectively.