BigKid.com.au

Does anyone know of the release date for the geForce FX 5900 Ultra?

so what are the results

Yep middle end of June 2003 around $1000

This is the laedtek version I want one big expense though

umm…

$1000 bucks?

I think not…

the suggested retail price on the 5900 Ultra (the 256 meg version) will be 500 bucks, so you will probably be able to pick it off of pricegrabber.com for near 400…

it will be around AUD$1000, where did you hear that "suggested retail price" of $500, you had probaly seen that price on an overseas site, they mean $500 in U.S dollars and the price is nearly doubled in australian currency, considering this is australian site i think you should talk in australian dollars…

http://www.lynncomp.com/sho… < you can already preorder the 128mb version here for $365

LOL @ da losser who reconed "AU $500" COUGH COUGH

lol u n00b

um first of all…. u should knw dat its an expensive card… second of all if u saw dat price on da interent just asume its US not auzzie dollar

lol retart

i mean u were all like "um 1000 bucks… no"

lol

lol

lol

Gawd the standard of comments just seems to keep going up and up…

Was just thinking that. Maybe anonymous posts should all carry a lameness disclaimer.

ZNet has posted an expected price of (~AU$772) for the FX 5900 256MB card

You could always try this bruce:

http://www.kottke.org/03/06…

try http://www.navada.com.au (28-06-03 Leadtek FX5900 A350, 128MB) in stock for $714.60 (and yeah, that’s Aussie $’s)

That’s for the FX 5900 not the FX 5900 Ultra

Go "some guy" trying to bag everyone. he did "dis" and "dat" !!! ya reckon anyone will listen when you type like your still in kindergarden!!!!

I just looked up some sites at da 5900 FX Ultra and it is $499 US, so depending on the AUD, I would b around 63% more dan $499, bout $800 if at 63 cents in a dollar, bloody epensive, but WORTH IT!

Also, lookin at some stats, comparing the FX 5900 Ultra to the Raedon 9800 Pro 256MB, they are very similar stats in extremely high resolutions, but Overall in gamin quality, speed and graphics, the FX 5900 Ultra is the winner for sure!

hi im new and i just wannted to no whether to get a FX 5900 Ultra 256MB or a Radeon 9800 Pro 256MB i got $1000 bucks in da bank for this so please post back.

thanks.

p.s

from my resurch i think the radeon is a hell of a lot better

I dont think there is much diffrerence between the 9800pro and the 5900ultra, unless ure running 1600x1200x32 and the 5900ultra leads a bit, has anyone noticed that the radeon 9700pro is half the price and is still up there with the other 2.

<rant>

Are you trying to be ‘l337′, some guy? Well you aren’t. Do us all a favour, and log off, and try to talk like you just did to ‘real world’ people. I’m getting so damn SICK of kiddies plaguing the ‘net with their trailer-trash ’skillz’. The real- and the online- worlds are steadily blurring, so try to be nice. And learn how to spell, not type. Sheesh.

(j00 n00b).

</rant>

Having been in the market for a high-end 3D card, I’ve done a lot of research and compared a lot of sources. It seems the Radeon 9800 Pro is slightly faster than the GeForce FX 5900 at lower resolutions but high detail. At higher resolutions the FX is slightly faster. However with the upcoming new nVidia drivers the FX should beat the Radeon in both cases. In a real-world situation the difference between the two isn’t noticable though. I guess it boils down to which is the cheaper, what you intend to use it for, which company to like and trust etc.

Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiin the left corner we have the Radeon 9800 Pro … Aaaaaaaaand in the right corner we have the FX5900 Ultra making a deafening whining sound like a vacuum clearner. I want a good clean fight guys! Speaking of clean, the FX5900 Ultra can be used as a vacuum cleaner.

Yes, the 5900 ultra does sound like a vacuum cleaner, and I know because I owned one for a month. It was superior to the Radeon 9800 Pro in every fashion, except image quality. The IQ of the FX is very poor, and that’s why it is able to outperform the Radeon FPS wise. Now, when I saw the benchmarks for the upcoming Half Life 2, and Halo 2, both DX9 games, the Radeon got TWICE the FPS of the FX card. The 5900 ultra was actually outperformed by the Radeon 9600 pro. Sad isn’t it? The nvidia has half-assed DX9 performance because they did not follow the microsoft standards when they made it, and now they pay for it. I swifty returned my FX 5900 Ultra for a Radeon 9800 PRO w/ 256 mb of DDR II, and am awaiting HL2 with open arms.

I think that was a wise move Samuel. I know for a fact my next video card is going to be a Radeon, no questions asked.

no! the fx 5900 ultra is heps better,that was a stupid move smuel! That was just only one game it overrules it in not doom 3 and ut2004. Also if you have a good computer it will run pretty darn good.

I CANN’T DECIDE PLEASE HELP ! :’(

look at the benchmarks for halflife2 and doom 3

halflife2: http://www.tomshardware.com…

doom3: http://www.hardocp.com/arti…

should i get pro or non pro-9800

You won’t have much time to cry about which is better and what do i get when.

YOUR LIVIN IN A VAN, DOWN BY THE RIVER.

Bravo, A Chris Farley (RIP) quotation is always a good ending.

David. Your posts contradict themselves. On the first one you claim the fx 5900 is "heps"(I assume you meant ‘heaps’)better. Then you say to check out the benchmarks. I don’t know if you actually looked at the results but it shows the 9800 beating the 5900 in EVERY benchmark. And yes EVEN the 9600 proved to be faster in one benchmark. As for which one to buy? whichever ones cheaper as anything over 40 fps can’t be detected by the human eye. My personal opinion. Go with a radeon.

"anything over 40 fps can’t be detected by the human eye"

… not entirely true. With film that has natural motion blur, that may be true. With computer games that have none, it is very easy to see a difference up to 60 fps, and often higher. A card which can maintain 70+fps at a reasonable resolution during high load times (lots of enemies on screen, lots of polygons, lots of particles, lots of lighting etc.) is going to be noticeably smoother than one that can’t. And that means a better game experience.

I’ve got a 9800 Pro now, and when I actually find a game I want to play that uses the DX9 extras, I’ll let you know how it goes :)

http://www.ping.be/powervr/…

As long as Doom 3 can be sustained at 60fps, no dramas. As for the good old "The human eye can’t notice yada yada yada above yada", it isn’t really the issue at hand. If the video card can keep pumping out scenes at 60fps without slowdown, that is really the issue at hand.

The cheaper, the better. Nuf said!

By the way, after christmas a lot of new shit is commin out so prises will drop dramaticaly. That is when i am buying by pc with a kick ass radeon 9800. O what is better pentium 4 or amd?

at the moment i am going for pentium.

Once you go AMD you never look back. Half the price and often faster.

I went back.. but only because the heat of AMD chips makes them hard to use in a SFF case.

LOL

shazbutt!

The money you spend on AMD would almost be half of what you would spend on an equivalent Pentium, you could get liquid-coolant and overclock your AMD to 20-30% of the regular speed, and you would be 30% ahead of Pentium for the same price, with liquid coolant!

I used to be a big AMD fan. I had 3 Barton cored XP’s. I now have 3 P4C’s instead. I like the P4’s better. The AMD’s benchmark pretty much on par but the benchy’s don’t tell the whole story. The Hyperthreading makes these babies so smooth particularly when your doing more than one thing at a time. BTW as far as overclocking goes the intels are better too. I have 2 2.6C’s running at 3.4Ghz and a 2.4C running at 3.7. the 2.4 is watercooled but the two 2.6’s are using the stock intel pos cooler. Granted the AMD’s are cheaper and offer awesome performance for the money. If you want the fastest go for intel, if you want mucho bang for your buck get XP2500+ and oveclock it to 2.4-2.5 ghz.

I think youll find some of the benchmarks tell a different story now Nvidia has released its next gen drivers…. the 9800 pro is currently $100 more expensive….. and is offering nothing better than nvidia…. one thing I am sure of is that nvidia pumps a lot of developement into its drivers, I am sure ATI do similar but you just watch Nvidia…

Oh I missed one comment… a crap card can never be made better…. thats why the fx5800 remains pitiful, but dont confuse it with the fx5900 esp. the Ultra. Check the stats and do the math, my issue is no one will benchmark the fx5900 ultra against the ATI 9800 pro with the current drivers…… finally - you can have the best gpu in the world stuck on a shit poorly designed board its completely useless :)

I’ve got a AMD 1700+ thats 1.47g and I’m going to buy the 9800 pro I currently have an MX440 in my machine at the moment, it’s good for most games exept Postal 2. Will the 9800 or FX 5900 be better for me in my curcumstances ? I’m currently in Korea so I want to get a good one, because the prices are very reasonable here, also I will be upgrading later this year to a AMD 2500+ help would be greatly appreciated.

I’m going to buy the FX5700 Ultra (SUMA) , after lots of looking around this card is priced right and delivers the goods!!

IF I WERE YOU I WOULD STICK WITH ATI, nvidia has a 256mb card wich performs like a shitty 128 and nvidia should merge with ati before nvidia dies off the market. I just got ATI 9800pro and it performs like a 256 card especially with the cat driver. And ATI is much cheaper than its rival FX5900 ultra.

And you can get a cheaper ATI card that outperforms the FX5700. ITS TRUE, look at the benchmarks

I currently have a radeon 9800 in my pc and I must say I am very pleased. It runs smooth, and the graphics are crystal clear. I’d never buy the overpriced Nvidia cards. As for the CPU argument, I say that Pentiums are better. I used to buy AMD’s and they worked good, especially for the money. BUT, my P4 is much more stable and QUIET. I have never had a system lock-up and I’ve had this 2.4Ghz P4 for a year. And you can barely hear it running. My friend has an XP, and it’s like a vacuum cleaner

that is, sounds like a vacuum cleaner

I wanna know where you guys are? The fx 5900 ultra is currently cheaper than its radeon counterpart………

I Personally prefer the ATI Because it is much faster than the 5900 ultra and cheaper too. when ATI comes out with their new card it will be a god compared to the geforce cards.

Once again I ask where you people are? The Radeon 9800 pro has never been cheaper than the fx 5900 ultra…. unless your comparing a crap card to say leadtek or something. Also this is about 9800 Pro Vs. GeForce FX 5900 Ultra nothing else …… so whats a fx 5700 got to do with it? Also Dude said “And you can barely hear it running. My friend has an XP, and it’s like a vacuum cleaner” ummm wtf - CPU’s dont make any noise at all… its the CPU fan thats making the noise….. maybe your friend got an unboxed CPU and bought a shoddy fan? Im runnin a 3200 + 64 bit chip - my system is as stable as shocks on a carerra. Personally my box does make a little noise - x5 fans outake and one intake made sure of that… plus a big cooler master aero 7 on the CPU - if you want a quiet machine easy - go low end. Dude you also said “I currently have a radeon 9800 in my pc and I must say I am very pleased. It runs smooth, and the graphics are crystal clear. I’d never buy the overpriced Nvidia cards” - erm the nvidia 5900 is cheaper than yours?