• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Which one is Better?

i myself would lean towards the 9550, only becuz the FX serious is somewhat garbage...my gf has a BFG 5600 Ultra,its ok... not something spectaculiar
 
Just get a new 9800pro they are 106.00 on pricewatch or get a refurbed one for 88.00
 
Shane said:
Just get a new 9800pro they are 106.00 on pricewatch or get a refurbed one for 88.00
Oh Damn it........that was the only reason i bolded the last three words
Which ONes better of these two?
 
The 9550 is the better card of the two, the 5000 series from Nvidia was not their best work, over all the ATI cards(9550,9600,9800) have the better Image quality and run a bit faster over the Nvidia counterparts (5600,5700,5900).

But Shane is right getting 9550 or 5600 is in most cases a waste of money because of the dollar to frame rate is not that good. 9800 Pro (not the LE or VE or what every else they want to put on it) is the best value card right now, other than the 6600GT or the 6800 NU which you can find sometimes for a nice price.
 
hauntedfury said:
Oh Damn it........that was the only reason i bolded the last three words
Which ONes better of these two?

one. two. three. four.

i count 4 words that are bolded. :)

go for the 9550. I had the 5600 ultra and it was utter garbage, slower than a GF3 ti200. I have a radeon 9600 which is pretty good, much better than the 5600 ultra.
 
bjornb17 said:
one. two. three. four.

i count 4 words that are bolded. :)

go for the 9550. I had the 5600 ultra and it was utter garbage, slower than a GF3 ti200. I have a radeon 9600 which is pretty good, much better than the 5600 ultra.

:D Ok my mistake

According the specs.......FX5600 Ultra is hell lot faster than 9550
Still the 9550 would be running games at better fps?
 
Is this FX5600 really that bad or do people just make it up.............

According to this review The card even beats a Radeon 9600 Pro

http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews/review.php?dXJsX3Jldmlld19JRD02MDQmdXJsX3BhZ2U9NA==

Ok i know the architechure matters.......but how much difference can it make.According to u people because of architechure a 250/400Mhz card beats a 400/800Mhz card?? Is it really that bad?
This thing makes me feel dizzy........... :confused:
 
hauntedfury said:
Is this FX5600 really that bad or do people just make it up.............

According to this review The card even beats a Radeon 9600 Pro

http://www.hexus.net/content/reviews/review.php?dXJsX3Jldmlld19JRD02MDQmdXJsX3BhZ2U9NA==

Ok i know the architechure matters.......but how much difference can it make.According to u people because of architechure a 250/400Mhz card beats a 400/800Mhz card?? Is it really that bad?
This thing makes me feel dizzy........... :confused:

well, i got the 9600 pro to REPLACE the 5600 Ultra and it was definately a step up. Nvidia had high clock speeds, but thats not the whole picture, it was really bad. I got the card based on the reviews saying it was pretty fsat, so i got it and realized that i got LOWER 3d mark scores and worse game performance compared to the geforce 3 i had. avoid the FX series of cards like the plague.

The 9600 pro was definately better, and believe it or not, i think the 9550s are faster than the 95xx series radeons. Can anybody else confirm that?
 
CleanSlate said:
the 9500 series would rape the 9550, the 9550 is a down clocked 9600

~Adam

okay thanks for clearing that up.


how much does the 5600 ultra cost?
 
What is it with folks that have access to the web but for some reson do not have the ability to look stuff like tech specs and prices for themselves?


Sorry, I just find that kind of stuff hilarious and bizarre. :D :)
 
I'm thinking the 5600u is about on par with the 9600 (non pro) which is better than a 9550. So I'd go with the 5600u. Yes, the fx series was by no means great, but there were fx cards that beat the ati cards of the generation. As far as I know the 9550 is a pretty weak card.
 
9550's can easily OC to 9600xt or pro speeds

i have a friend who bought a gexcube 9550 and it showed and performed like a 9600xt from the moment he installed it. the catalyst drivers even showed it as a 9600xt... go figure
 
In this case I'd say go for whichever brand you like better. 5600U will be a lot faster in Doom3 engine games but in D3D I would say it depends on the game.
 
daglesj said:
What is it with folks that have access to the web but for some reson do not have the ability to look stuff like tech specs and prices for themselves?


Sorry, I just find that kind of stuff hilarious and bizarre. :D :)

I have wondered this myself? I thought everyone had a dogpile searchbar :confused:

How many threads have I seen started with a question that got answered by another guy who found it........... on the web :eek:

I would go with the 9550 by the way
 
The 5600U is the better of the two cards. That 9550 really isn't on par with the 9500 or the 9600 series.
 
bjornb17 said:
one. two. three. four.

i count 4 words that are bolded. :)

go for the 9550. I had the 5600 ultra and it was utter garbage, slower than a GF3 ti200. I have a radeon 9600 which is pretty good, much better than the 5600 ultra.

[Picard]There are FOUR lights[/Picard]
 
What mistake did you make?

Did you buy the 5600ultra? I'd honestly go for that 9600pro he put up if you didn't, then OC it to XT speeds.

~Adam
 
I had both cards, The 5600 was junk, the 9550 was ok (OC like a champ though) but went back to the trust ol ti4200, runs better in my system at the time being.
 
Back
Top