8/23 Nvidia OEM 4600 price war. Get a 4600 for $235. http://pricewatch.com
\_ 235 isn't cheap. For that price range I'm waiting for a DX9 part.
On a price/performance basis a Radeon 9700's retail price isn't
that far off and cheaper versions are coming...I want to turn on
FSAA and anisotropic filtering without the 4600's huge penalty.
\_ Should I care about these cards if I don't play first-person
type games?
\_ You're nuts. 235 is the cheapest the 4600 has *ever* been.
Until 10 days ago you couldn't get one off the back of a truck
for under $300 for an off brand OEM card. You're sure as hell
not going to get a 9700 for 235 anytime soon. The retail is
going to be 399 which means you *might* get it for 350, maybe,
if you're lucky. 350 in a few weeks, when the 4600 will probably
be 200 or so. How is 200 == 350?
\_ I said on a price/performance basis. Radeon 9700 is easily 1.5x
the overall performance of 4600. 1.5*235 = $352.5. Personally,
I consider it a bit more than 1.5x cuz it will last longer and
has more features etc.
\_ Easily? No. Go read tomshardware. On some things, yes,
on others no. Anyway, you're still wrong because I can get
a 4600 right now for 235 and have it running by mid-week.
I can't get a 9700 at any price. By the time it ships, and
assuming you can get a 9700 for only 350 (big "if") then
it still doesn't hit the price/performance mark. As far as
'lasts longer' goes, there's *always* a newer bigger better
faster thing on the horizon. In this case, your 9700 will
last until the end of November when you can get an NV30 for
about the same money which will be at least 30% faster.
Anyway, it's your money and I'd guess 99% of the people
here won't use the full power of a 4600 much less a 9700
or NV30. I doubt you're one of the 1% who needs to run
quake3 at 350 FPS for some reason.
\_ shit, and I just bought one for $315. --aaron |
http://csua.com/feed/