I have tested the Ati Radeon 7500 (64mb) on a P4 1.6 GHz and the result was 59xx (3D Mark 2000) and Ati mobility radeon 7500 (32mb) On a P4 2.8 notebook and the the result was 61xx. My geforce 2 GTS(32mb) was put in the test on a P3 933 and the result is about 65xx, the same card is then put in the athlon xp 2000+ and the result was 8xxx.

In the test i make a conclusion that Nvidia card rely much on processor speed while ATI does not. It is good to choose ATI if you have a not quite demanding CPU (1.8Ghz), If you have a fast CPU and you are an overclocker, nvidia is the one.

This is only base on the older card, iam not sure about the new one. Have any one tested both card(newer ati and nvidia) on different CPU. Please make you opinion.

1001 thanks!

hmmm not really .... you comepare two totally different situations ....
the GF2 is a awesome card ... and its well know that it needs quite a lot of CPU power to show its full potential since the card is so fast that it need to wait for the CPU .... the rule is .... at least 1gig to make the card rollin .... that gives the big difference
now the 7500 is a really sucky cards ... I mean it does not give half the performance of a GF2PRO .... this card is with a 1,x gig CPU at its max ... you can't really get anything more outa it ...

oh and btw .... comparing a P3 vs a XP is not a very good benchmark ... go set the XP to 900MHz and try again ...

A true word @ Mertsch :beer:

Yeah also useing cards that are a few years old doesn't help either.

Yeah, in fact benchmarks I've seen of today's card show the opposite, nvidia's cards tend to scale better nowadays.

My point here is that have anyone tested the newer card, the benchmark i made is only an example of olden day ( i don't have them now). Because a lot and a lot people have been switching to ATI because of the Geforce FX. I like the Geforce FX 5900 non-Ultra currently, but i don't own it.

Again have anyone tested the newer card? Please kindly share your result.

Thanks very...very much. :angel:

mmmmh keeeee lets have a look @ it

A lot of people switch to ATi, thats their choice. In the end you want whats best for you, so just grab any card thats cheapest and is in roughly the same performance area you want. After that, whether the Radeon 9800 XT is better or if its the 5950, shouldn't matter too much.

Actually the older radeons are more dependant on processors over the older nvidia's. Especially, if the card doesnt support hardware T/L.

how true,
since I have my 9800PRO I haven't seen any more low FPS in games for now .... and since I totally dislike AA it will take some time that I see that again
and if games now run with 120 or 122 FPS is that much equal

I think the moral to this story is, either way, if your buying into medium or high end markets, your getting a kick ass card equal to the other side of the bean stock, ATI + Nvidia.

Yeah i guess that right buy waht the faster, brand doesm't matter. But i am curious to which is more CPU depandent?

Thanks for the comments

101% right and btw that ATi is more quite ?! ... thats a lie the fu**in cooler sucks ass

What I said ^^