[azido]

yo,

i'm just thinking about buying a cheap nvidia card, and found those both just being about 5 euro in price difference.

it was a long time since i used nvidia cards, and i wonder if there is a significant difference in between 9400GT and 9500GT, and which one i should buy.

any hints?

[althekiller]

Flip a coin? I doubt there are any significant advantages to either.

[azido]

Flip a coin? I doubt there are any significant advantages to either.

5 euro are 5 euro ~laughs~

there HAS to be a difference
just wonder because if i remember it right, version numbers like 7200,7400,7600 were better cards these days than those in between (like ie the 7500GS). does that still apply?

[tmpdir]

the 9500 is slightly faster than the 9400. I also read the 9500 could (barely) do advanced deinterlacing which the 9400 couldn't (somewhere here on the forums).

Oops just though that I could make you problem slightly more confusing
Next month nvidia will put the G210 into retail. This card is faster than the 9400, its probably a class C card (supports more video codecs, read the xbmc home page about this) and better sound support. estimated retail price = 30 euro (althoug I expect slightly more).

hope this helpes

[azido]

Next month nvidia will put the G210 into retail. This card is faster than the 9400, its probably a class C card (supports more video codecs, read the xbmc home page about this) and better sound support. estimated retail price = 30 euro (althoug I expect slightly more).

hope this helpes

where do you get that price estimation from?
and according to the nvidia homepage this card has a 64bit memory bus only - u're sure that is no bottle-neck?

anyway, i guess i wait a little bit and get myself a gts 250.

[tmpdir]

where do you get that price estimation from?

http://vr-zone.com/articles/nvidia-partn...l?doc=7272

"G210 is GT218/D10M1 based using P690 and P691 PCB designs supporting DDR3 and DDR2 respectively. G210 has 24 shader processors clocked at 600MHz core and 1425MHz shader. G210 runs on 64-bit memory interface with 512MB DDR2/3 memories clocked at 800MHz. These cards will be priced very cheaply between US$30-35 replacing the current GeForce 9400 series."

"GT 220 is GT215-300/D10M2 based and there will be 3 variants; P681 (DDR3), P682 (DDR2) and P680 (GDDR3). GT 220 has 48 shader processors clocked at 625MHz core and 1375MHz shader. It has 1GB memories onboard on 128-bit memory interface clocked at 800MHz. These cards are going to cost somewhere between US$55-60 and is going to outperform GeForce 9500 GT by much."

and according to the nvidia homepage this card has a 64bit memory bus only - u're sure that is no bottle-neck?

anyway, i guess i wait a little bit and get myself a gts 250.

I've read that the memory bus is less important for the part that does the video processing. But to be honest, I probably go for the GT220 to play light games as well.

[azido]

I've read that the memory bus is less important for the part that does the video processing. But to be honest, I probably go for the GT220 to play light games as well.

i think if the gpu can process that fast it needs to have a fast bus for transporting data, else it will be kinda useless to have a strong gpu? maybe i won't even see a difference within xbmc or standard windows usage, but i saw it only has half the bandwidth of even my current ati card. so personally i would go for the GT 220 too.. plus, according to the specs on the nvidia page, it also has support for openGL 3.0..

thanks for the link.

[tmpdir]

Your welcome.