porpoise wrote:

phobos wrote in message


My brother has a 9600 Pro, and as far as I know the regular 9600 just
has a slower clock speed (possibly ram timings too). I doubt it would
be all that much slower on a mid-range system.


I'm running a XP 2200+ (1.8GHz).


I like the 9600 better than the GF4's as personal preference, so I'd go
with them if that was the only choice. Otherwise I'd save a few more
bucks and get a FX5700U shortly, it's got much better bang for the buck
and it's a good price.


I've got the choice of a Chaintech Ti4200 64MB for $94US or a Sapphire
9600 128MB for $113US (both with TV and DVI out). My old Ti4200 just
died on me (see another thread I started recently) and I need to get a
new card. If the 9600 will do as good as the 4200, I'd take it,
especially since the 9600 seems to run cooler and doesn't require a
onboard fan., just a passive heatsink. For the extra $20 I'd pay, the
lack of noise and the extra 64MB might be worth it to me, assuming the
rest of the performance is equal.

Sounds like you need one quick then. Definitely go for the regular 9600
right now. It'll tide you over for quite a while as a bargain card. I
know the Pro version can get kinda hot if you overclock it, but a plain
9600 fanless model should be no hotter than ambient case temp.