"AND...for low/mid range cards, looks like Nvidia is spanking ATI. Only the 9500Pro can beat a 5600 and 5200. The value versions of ATI's cards (except the 9500pro) are NOT DX9 compliant and were built on DX8 platform, while ALL of Nvidia's cards will be DX9 compliant (<$100 to $200). Since that is where the card makers make most of their money, guess Nvidia will win again... "
You've got to be kidding me........
First of all the 9500pro has been out for months now, and can be modded for even more performance with ease.....
The funniest part about your argument is while all NV cards will be DX9 compliant.
When would this be?
WILL THEY HAVE ENOUGH HORSEPOWER TO RUN DX9 GAMES ( especially the 5200 which is what NV is stating as a major deal)?
The only info I have is from Tom's, and it is his opinion from testing:
"The gains compared to the GeForce4 MX440-8x are quite clear as well. In the entry-level segment, the FX 5200 Ultra is therefore a good choice. It's not certain, however, as to whether the moderate performance of the card really allows the DirectX 9 features in games to be used. Tests with modern games such as Splinter Cell or Aquanox 2 (internal tests with DX 9 Beta Patch) show that the card is actually too slow for this.
We'll only be able to draw a definite conclusion about the GeForceFX 5600 when ATi launches the new Radeon 9600 series. But compared to the Radeon 9500 PRO (priced about the same, at $199), NVIDIA's mainstream flagship comes up short. In addition, there's the FSAA/ anisotropic image quality of the ATi R3x0 chip, which turned out to be significantly better in our previous test."
The rest can be found here:
Just being a DX9 card doesn't mean it is going to be able to do anything with reasonable framerates( unless a slideshow is considered reasonable).. the Ti4200 lays the smack down on both the 5600/5200 in games that will be played by most folks.