Fast sen gällandes bildkvalite i tex spel så är faktiskt FX efter alla ATI kort. Kolla bilderna på denna länk för att se skillnaden i bildkvalite(har och göra med att FX kör shaders 1.1 mot ATI som kör 2.0, stor skillnad i bildkvalite). Samt kolla prestanda i tex FarCry eller lite nyare spel. ATI 9600XT ligger inte långt efter och de med mycket snyggare bild.
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTk5
Citat från sidan:
In the FarCry demo we have an interesting situation since the GeForceFX cards are running at a lower pixel shader version. Yet even though this is the case the 9600XT ultimately performed and looked better. From what we have shown you in the screenshots, the Pixel Shader 2.0 does seem to us to have a visible difference over PS 1.1 in FarCry.
So what we have here is a sort of back and forth power struggle with the 5900XT and the 9600XT totally depending on the game and the level of shaders being used. What is clear though is image quality; overall the 9600XT came off with the wins in better image quality in games.
Even though the 5900XT does make for excellent competition to the 9600XT, you have to consider all the factors. Considering those prices differences and the performance evaluated in this review and the image quality being shown in these games I don’t think anyone can argue that the 9600XT is the better value overall based on the hardware alone. With the case of the MSI 5900XT you do have to factor in the extras if they are a value to you.
Har själv suttit och jämfört bilder i spel mot ett FX kort nu med mitt sunkiga 9500Pro. Kan bara säga en sak och de är att ATIs Dx9 stöd i spel gör dem mycket snyggare.
Men som en redan sagt så är FX5900XT enda prisvärda FX kortet men tyvärr så har alla FX kort mediokert Dx9 stöd.