In FS2K4 - From Anandtech - a site I trust.http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1890&p=12:-eek

Yes, that must be a very reliable test result. :-lolYou should purchase the 9600P for yourself! You will be very happy and can snicker knowing that your 9600 destroys all nvidia cards as well as ties even the lowly 9800XT! Must be a very trustworthy result...(still can't believe it was published).Help Ive fallen and can't get up! :-lol

This review is a little more accurate I think:http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030...on_9800-30.htmlThe card does well until the higher resolutions, but still it's only the 5900 Ultra beating it and the Nvidia's get spanked by the 9800 Pro and XT.I'm not sure what kind of test AnandTech was running - I've never seen an average framerate anywhere near 125 FPS. (maxing out the refresh rate basically) They must have been running with everything off or something. The Tom's Hardware benmark seems to be a lot closer to what actual simmers would see in game.This is very cool that review sites are using FS2004 to test cards now...Ryan

The Toms review is just as bad as the anandtech review. Those resolution numbers are way off. As I've said, from experience, there's very little difference in framerate running 1024; 1280; or 1600 resolutions. I've done it over and over and over with all kinds of different settings and at most it's a 5% to 10% difference at 1600x1200x32. Now, if I go to 1900xwhatever, I see a major difference in frames. That's because the 9700 Pro 128mb/9800 Pro 128mb cards max res is 1600x1200x32. Tom's has the 9700 Pro losing 50%. That's a joke. The best review I've seen so far is the one at hardocp. At least there they set up a controlled environment and used filtering and covered several resolutios with that filtering; but they only covered the 9800 Pro, 5900 Ultra, & 9800XT if I remember correctly.