9800 (no-pro) 'vs' 5900(non-ultra)

[Aryzel]

I'm building a computer system for myself and basically need to choose between a:
Creative 3DBlas GeForce FX5900 (non-ultra) for 372 Euros
And a
Sapphire Radeon 9800 (non-pro) for 339 euros

The prices are a bit high by US standards, but thats ireland for ya.
I've read the discussion on the FX's failings with DX9 and in particular with PS 2.0.

So overall which would ye go for, 9800 or 5900?
The rest of the system will be
Athlon XP 2600,
1GB DDR Ram,
17in TFT monitor (1248x1024)

 

[marneus]

price is how I would go as they perform fairly similarly (a 9800nonpro=9700pro if that helps)



Trust me I know what I'm doing... ooops, grab the cat...

 

[sargeduck]

I'd go with the 9800. It's cheaper, and the performance in non-dx9 games are very close. That, and the whole thing with dx9. I'd say the 9800 is just a beter deal overall.

 

[ufo_warviper]

I would have to agree 100% with Sargeduck about the 9800 non-pro being the best choice in this case.

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!