DIGIT-ARC read-only archive · snapshot: July 23, 2026

9600GT enough for 17" (1280x1024) ???

32 posts · originally from https://geek.digit.in/community/threads/9600gt-enough-for-17-1280x1024.110351/

di9it
di9it Original post #1
Mar 8, 2009 at 11:42 PM
Hi frnds,

Im planning to buy Palit 9600GT.
Is this card sufficient for all the games available these days @ 1280x1024
Or shud I increase my budget?
uchiha_madara
Mar 9, 2009 at 1:40 AM
Definitely increase your budget if you can, HD 4850 or 9800GTX+ should be your target.
Is this card sufficient for all the games available these days @ 1280x1024
Well that depends on the games you are playing and at what setting.
damngoodman999
Mar 9, 2009 at 1:44 AM
dont worry 9600GT is ok , but all medium settings , go for HD 4850 gaming @ high settings
Ecstasy
Ecstasy #4
Mar 9, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Surely 9600 GT is good enough for most of the games. Palit 9600 GT always had a good review.
Ethan_Hunt
Mar 9, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Having owned a ATI card for quite sometime now, I would strongly suggest getting a good Nvidia card. 9600GT should be more than enough for playing at 1280x1024 resolution. But make sure he has a good PSU to back it up as well.
furious_gamer
Mar 9, 2009 at 12:46 PM
Having owned a ATI card for quite sometime now, I would strongly suggest getting a good Nvidia card.
:shock:
Well i thought that you are happy with that card, but when analyze by the statement you written, you are completely disappointed with it.Am i right? Whats wrong with that card?

Anyhow, 9600GT is a best bet for playing games at the resolution mentioned by the OP.
Ethan_Hunt
Mar 9, 2009 at 1:49 PM
I'm not satisfied with the driver support to be honest. It's extremely buggy. It keeps having conflicts with some or the other games. You can check with people who have previously used Nvidia cards & have now used ATI & ended up having issues with ATI cards, which they never had of Nvidia cards. I don't doubt it's better in terms of IQ as opposed to Nvidia, but the stability with games is better with Nvidia drivers. My friend (who has a HD4870) & myself got it around the same time & often end up having discussions of some or the other issues. He was planning on switching to a GTX260. I, on the other hand, am not going to switch anytime soon. Will buy a console, may be, but not switch my graphic card. Provided an opportunity now, I would gladly shift to Nvidia.
furious_gamer
Mar 9, 2009 at 3:09 PM
Oops, i have to revise my idea of buying a HD4850 :D
H
Mar 9, 2009 at 11:07 PM
HD 4850 rocks!!! Great Card!!!! I have no problems with it!! No heating issues. Little power consumption!!! Best value for money card ever released i guess!!!
di9it
di9it #10
Mar 10, 2009 at 5:06 PM
HD 4850 rocks!!! Great Card!!!! I have no problems with it!! No heating issues. Little power consumption!!! Best value for money card ever released i guess!!!

Aren't u facing any driver problem with this card, i mean the most of the posters say that ATI cards have driver bugs..?
desiibond
desiibond #11
Mar 10, 2009 at 5:33 PM
I faced crashes (HD2600XT) for two games till now.

1) Virtua Tennis 3
2) Burnout Paraside Ultimate box

And patches were available in no time for both. no issues with any other games.
comp@ddict
Mar 10, 2009 at 9:03 PM
Dude, 9600GT is a winner, and at 1280x1024 resolution, it will sail through every game at full settings and 4xAA, you might have to occasionally reduce to medium-high settings or 2xAA or maybe 0xAA(never I think), but it's excellent overall.
H
Mar 10, 2009 at 11:08 PM
Aren't u facing any driver problem with this card, i mean the most of the posters say that ATI cards have driver bugs..?

Absolutely Not!!!

I get frequent updates! Although Catalyst 8.11 was a problem, notjing major to say ATI makes pathetic drivers. 8.9, 8.10, 9.1.... no problems!!! Catalyst 9.1. I have had such problems with my old AGP card from nVidia! So go for ATI 4850 and enjoy gaming! :))
comp@ddict
Mar 11, 2009 at 9:07 PM
^^9.1 is a loser , get 8.12 with the hotfix or 9.2 modded.
Plasma_Snake
Mar 24, 2009 at 11:18 AM
9.3 is also out and I too faced driver related issues with my HD4850 and not to forget the cooling issues for which I had to invest another 2.5K to retro fit it with better cooling solution.
H
hellgate #16
Mar 25, 2009 at 12:36 AM
after having used 2 ATI cards i wud anyday prefer a nvidia card.
H
huntu123 #17
Mar 25, 2009 at 12:48 AM
yup, i too had hd4850 n i sold it.......m not sayn its a bad card...........but nvidia cards are more stable dan ati counterparts.......in perfomance hd4850 is very competitive against nvidia 98xx but its the other features of nvidia which makes them stand out.........
uchiha_madara
Mar 25, 2009 at 6:37 PM
yup, i too had hd4850 n i sold it.......m not sayn its a bad card...........but nvidia cards are more stable dan ati counterparts.......in perfomance hd4850 is very competitive against nvidia 98xx but its the other features of nvidia which makes them stand out.........

What other features that might be?

I haven't had any issues with my card, though I only install only no CCC and ****.
Ethan_Hunt
Mar 25, 2009 at 6:44 PM
^Only one I guess, PhysX. :grin:
H
huntu123 #20
Mar 26, 2009 at 4:28 PM
physix and cuda really..............n der driver support is far ahead of ati's catalyst ........even though the implementation of both cuda n physics is very less in real world but they are there................. in future, software developers wl use cuda n physix to develop games n softwares whereas havok enjine of ati is nowhere to be seen...........and dnt forget nvidia's hybrid power n hybrid boost are some features which are very useful to conserve energy.........but in ati only one of them is present.......so overall nvidia is better dan ati.............

correct me if m wrong..........
uchiha_madara
Mar 26, 2009 at 7:50 PM
physix and cuda really..............n der driver support is far ahead of ati's catalyst ........even though the implementation of both cuda n physics is very less in real world but they are there................. in future, software developers wl use cuda n physix to develop games n softwares whereas havok enjine of ati is nowhere to be seen...........and dnt forget nvidia's hybrid power n hybrid boost are some features which are very useful to conserve energy.........but in ati only one of them is present.......so overall nvidia is better dan ati.............

correct me if m wrong..........
I will :)
How do you judge that driver support of nvidia is better?
IMO it's just your personal opinion.
Yeah CUDA has something going for it but its future is uncertain as OpenCL standard is here which is going to be supported by more companies than one proprietary standard being pushed by nVidia.Though there are a couple of softwares I know that do use it like Coreavc and this one *neuron2.net/dgmpgdecnv/dgmpgdecnv.html.

AFAIK Physx has been incorporated into just two games Mirror's edge and UT 3(I have read on some forums that cryostasis used Physx only in the demo ,not retail game).So much for basing your purchase decisions on just two games.

Then there is this debacle of nvidia moving out components with shoddy soldering leading to premature failure of the hardware and also the selling of old hardware rebadged with new stickers.

Havok is Intel's property and if you wanna talk future, Havok is gonna beat out any thing out there because it is software based and every CPU can run that ,plus AMD in partnership with Havok is going to get that engine hardware support and don't forget in pure theoretical performance Ati card of 4800 series beats the 98xx series so the hardware physics won't be constrained by computing power.
For hybrid have a look at this *ati.amd.com/technology/hybridgraphics/index.html.
So there you have it ,please try to get your facts straight and please do construct complete words if a sentence is too, tiresome.
mikael_schiffer
Mar 27, 2009 at 10:38 AM
I'm not satisfied with the driver support to be honest. It's extremely buggy. It keeps having conflicts with some or the other games.
Yep. I had HD2600XT Super 1GB. Bloody card cannot run BIOSHOCK. All textures are blacked out. Seriously ATI shuxx when it comes to driver support.
The reason why Ati HD48xx series is owning the gaming scene is because top games in the market support it properly. Else, good luck with ur ATI card playing other "not so famous"games.

@thread opener.

Your 9600GT is good enough for mid-end gaming. Dont crank ur AA and stick to Medium-high graphical settings. 90% games in the market will run at MAX settings except for certain few like CRYSIS and World in Conflict.

As for power requierement, any 350-400W PSU with dedicated PCI-E connector will do. Dont rely on cheap unbranded ones though. Specially those iBALL cases with bundled PSUs >_<
di9it
di9it #23
Mar 29, 2009 at 9:09 PM
Hey Friends,

Thank you all for your wonderful opinions...:)...

Finally, I come to a conclusion:
nVidia = Stability/Reliablity
ATI = Compatibility Issue/Wait for drivers

May be I go for a better card than 9600GT but it won't be an ATI.
Shall 9800GT work better as compared to HD4850 as suggested by some posters in this thread?

Any pros/cons are welcome...
damngoodman999
Mar 29, 2009 at 10:00 PM
May be I go for a better card than 9600GT but it won't be an ATI.
Shall 9800GT work better as compared to HD4850 as suggested by some posters in this thread?

NO!!

HD 4850 even beats 9800GTX , its far more performance than 9800GT
j1n M@tt
j1n M@tt #25
Mar 29, 2009 at 10:08 PM
I was planning to get a HD4670...is 9600GT better than HD4670 when it comes to playing games at higher resolution??...I hav 17" widescreen LCD with 1440x900res.
damngoodman999
Mar 29, 2009 at 10:15 PM
^^^ GO FOR 9600GT its really good under medium budget
j1n M@tt
j1n M@tt #27
Mar 29, 2009 at 10:22 PM
under medium budget?!!!....I hav to get a decent PSU too with this power hunger monster!
damngoodman999
Mar 29, 2009 at 10:52 PM
9600GT is not power hunger !! u can have 500 watts PSU thats enough
j1n M@tt
j1n M@tt #29
Mar 30, 2009 at 2:25 PM
but my Zebronics 500W PSU sux...hav to get at least a CM 469W PSU
H
huntu123 #30
Mar 31, 2009 at 3:08 AM
thats true.................... dnt rely on zebronics psu............go for cm 450w or better........for 9600GT it wl suffice.........its a gud decision u r goin with nvidia.............
comp@ddict
Mar 31, 2009 at 8:17 PM
Man, all you don't know is that Catalyst Drivers are WAY WAY WAY better optimised that Forceware Drivers.

How else do you think the HD4870 with 160 Shaders(if you compare on the basis of technology used, ATi's Stream Proccessors are 5 times the no. of Shaders that nVidia refers to. So 800/5=160) beats the 216 Shader GTX260 in some games, although it lacks behind in many.

And about CUDA, yes that's nVidia's call. But ATi is going ahead with Havok against nVidia's PhysX, and ATi's Havok is already used in over 100 games, and another 100 games are gonna support it real soon.

Just my 2 cents.

P.S.-I'm no INTEL, AMD or nVidia fanboi.
H
huntu123 #32
Apr 1, 2009 at 7:04 PM
lol tell dat thng to ati graphics card owners who r havn problems with d drivers, i wonder wat wl b der reply.....:sad: