Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big gap?
how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big gap?
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
"wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
> how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big gap?
>
About 10% according to most of the benching I've seen. They're still an
excellent card.
"wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
> how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big gap?
>
About 10% according to most of the benching I've seen. They're still an
excellent card.
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
Well looking at this table from Tomshardware.com:
http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/index.html
The only 2 differences are the GPU and RAM speeds the 9800 pro has an extra
55Mhz on the GPU and 80Mhz on the ram.
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 21:34:29 GMT, "wired and confused"
<johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote:
>:>how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big gap?
>:>
-----
Lee.
Well looking at this table from Tomshardware.com:
http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/index.html
The only 2 differences are the GPU and RAM speeds the 9800 pro has an extra
55Mhz on the GPU and 80Mhz on the ram.
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 21:34:29 GMT, "wired and confused"
<johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote:
>:>how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big gap?
>:>
-----
Lee.
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 22:04:41 GMT, Lee
<leecomp@REMOVETHISblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>Well looking at this table from Tomshardware.com:
>http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/index.html
>The only 2 differences are the GPU and RAM speeds the 9800 pro has an extra
>55Mhz on the GPU and 80Mhz on the ram.
wrong, they use different GPU's. There are differences in their
function, although I'm not exactly sure what they are off hand.
You should start drinking prune juice and KY jelly cocktails right now,
that will make things a lot smoother.
-Felatio Love
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 22:04:41 GMT, Lee
<leecomp@REMOVETHISblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>Well looking at this table from Tomshardware.com:
>http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20031229/index.html
>The only 2 differences are the GPU and RAM speeds the 9800 pro has an extra
>55Mhz on the GPU and 80Mhz on the ram.
wrong, they use different GPU's. There are differences in their
function, although I'm not exactly sure what they are off hand.
You should start drinking prune juice and KY jelly cocktails right now,
that will make things a lot smoother.
-Felatio Love
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer games
you'll want the 9800.
--
DaveW
"wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
> how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big gap?
>
>
The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer games
you'll want the 9800.
--
DaveW
"wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
> how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big gap?
>
>
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
DaveW wrote:
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer games
> you'll want the 9800.
>
The 9700 is absolutely DX9 capable.
DaveW wrote:
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer games
> you'll want the 9800.
>
The 9700 is absolutely DX9 capable.
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
news
uNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
games
> you'll want the 9800.
>
Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
news
uNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
games
> you'll want the 9800.
>
Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
"Augustus" <tiberius@weeik.com> wrote in message
news:KcOwc.26257$B%4.22518@clgrps12...
>
> "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
> newsuNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...
> > The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
> games
> > you'll want the 9800.
> >
>
> Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
> fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
> transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
>
Actually the 9700Pro is easily overclocked to 9800Pro speeds
(Core=378 Mem=337.5)
One real difference is the 9700Pro is 1.1 Pixel Shader and the
9800Pro is 2.0; there may be other differences but they seem to
have little if any impact on what the card can run.
Luck;
Ken
"Augustus" <tiberius@weeik.com> wrote in message
news:KcOwc.26257$B%4.22518@clgrps12...
>
> "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
> news
uNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...> > The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
> games
> > you'll want the 9800.
> >
>
> Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
> fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
> transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
>
Actually the 9700Pro is easily overclocked to 9800Pro speeds
(Core=378 Mem=337.5)
One real difference is the 9700Pro is 1.1 Pixel Shader and the
9800Pro is 2.0; there may be other differences but they seem to
have little if any impact on what the card can run.
Luck;
Ken
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
On Sun, 6 Jun 2004 20:12:37 -0500, "Ken Maltby"
<kmaltby@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>"Augustus" <tiberius@weeik.com> wrote in message
>news:KcOwc.26257$B%4.22518@clgrps12...
>>
>> "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
>> newsuNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...
>> > The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
>> games
>> > you'll want the 9800.
>> >
>>
>> Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
>> fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
>> transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
>>
>
>
> Actually the 9700Pro is easily overclocked to 9800Pro speeds
>(Core=378 Mem=337.5)
>
> One real difference is the 9700Pro is 1.1 Pixel Shader and the
>9800Pro is 2.0; there may be other differences but they seem to
>have little if any impact on what the card can run.
>
>Luck;
> Ken
If you're talking about smartshader the 9700pro is 2.0 to
>
On Sun, 6 Jun 2004 20:12:37 -0500, "Ken Maltby"
<kmaltby@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>"Augustus" <tiberius@weeik.com> wrote in message
>news:KcOwc.26257$B%4.22518@clgrps12...
>>
>> "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
>> news
uNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...>> > The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
>> games
>> > you'll want the 9800.
>> >
>>
>> Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
>> fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
>> transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
>>
>
>
> Actually the 9700Pro is easily overclocked to 9800Pro speeds
>(Core=378 Mem=337.5)
>
> One real difference is the 9700Pro is 1.1 Pixel Shader and the
>9800Pro is 2.0; there may be other differences but they seem to
>have little if any impact on what the card can run.
>
>Luck;
> Ken
If you're talking about smartshader the 9700pro is 2.0 to
>
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
newsuNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable.
Say what now? If it were not DirectX9 capable I would not be able to
complete the DX9 tests in 3dmark 03 would I?
Please explain.
"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
news
uNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable.
Say what now? If it were not DirectX9 capable I would not be able to
complete the DX9 tests in 3dmark 03 would I?
Please explain.
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
> Actually the 9700Pro is easily overclocked to 9800Pro speeds
> (Core=378 Mem=337.5)
>
> One real difference is the 9700Pro is 1.1 Pixel Shader and the
> 9800Pro is 2.0; there may be other differences but they seem to
> have little if any impact on what the card can run.
>
> Luck;
> K
True, but if you overclock the 9800 Pro by the same amount it's still about
10% faster. A person who overclocks will overclock everything....even an
9800XT. So the 9700 Pro is still going to be a bit slower. I'd be perfectly
happy with either.
> Actually the 9700Pro is easily overclocked to 9800Pro speeds
> (Core=378 Mem=337.5)
>
> One real difference is the 9700Pro is 1.1 Pixel Shader and the
> 9800Pro is 2.0; there may be other differences but they seem to
> have little if any impact on what the card can run.
>
> Luck;
> K
True, but if you overclock the 9800 Pro by the same amount it's still about
10% faster. A person who overclocks will overclock everything....even an
9800XT. So the 9700 Pro is still going to be a bit slower. I'd be perfectly
happy with either.
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
> Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
> fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
> transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
And I screwed up here....that should read R300 and R350....the RV350 is the
9600 core.
> Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
> fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
> transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
And I screwed up here....that should read R300 and R350....the RV350 is the
9600 core.
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 23:09:23 GMT, "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote:
>The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer games
>you'll want the 9800.
I've corrected you already on this matter. The 9700 PRO is a Direct X
9 capable card, the first as a mater of fact.
Pluvious
On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 23:09:23 GMT, "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote:
>The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer games
>you'll want the 9800.
I've corrected you already on this matter. The 9700 PRO is a Direct X
9 capable card, the first as a mater of fact.
Pluvious
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
On Sun, 6 Jun 2004 20:12:37 -0500, "Ken Maltby"
<kmaltby@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>"Augustus" <tiberius@weeik.com> wrote in message
>news:KcOwc.26257$B%4.22518@clgrps12...
>>
>> "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
>> newsuNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...
>> > The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
>> games
>> > you'll want the 9800.
>> >
>>
>> Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
>> fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
>> transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
>>
>
>
> Actually the 9700Pro is easily overclocked to 9800Pro speeds
>(Core=378 Mem=337.5)
>
> One real difference is the 9700Pro is 1.1 Pixel Shader and the
>9800Pro is 2.0; there may be other differences but they seem to
>have little if any impact on what the card can run.
>
>Luck;
> Ken
>
The drivers I use enable Pixel Shader 2.0. Omega's 4.5's. And my
overclock is currently 378/324. The difference is minor between the
9700 and 9800.
Pluvious
On Sun, 6 Jun 2004 20:12:37 -0500, "Ken Maltby"
<kmaltby@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>"Augustus" <tiberius@weeik.com> wrote in message
>news:KcOwc.26257$B%4.22518@clgrps12...
>>
>> "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
>> news
uNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...>> > The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
>> games
>> > you'll want the 9800.
>> >
>>
>> Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
>> fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
>> transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
>>
>
>
> Actually the 9700Pro is easily overclocked to 9800Pro speeds
>(Core=378 Mem=337.5)
>
> One real difference is the 9700Pro is 1.1 Pixel Shader and the
>9800Pro is 2.0; there may be other differences but they seem to
>have little if any impact on what the card can run.
>
>Luck;
> Ken
>
The drivers I use enable Pixel Shader 2.0. Omega's 4.5's. And my
overclock is currently 378/324. The difference is minor between the
9700 and 9800.
Pluvious
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
Augustus wrote:
>> Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
>> fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
>> transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
>
> And I screwed up here....that should read R300 and R350....the RV350 is
> the 9600 core.
Not really a different architecture. Just an added feature--they increased
the instruction depth for the pixel shader.
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Augustus wrote:
>> Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
>> fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
>> transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
>
> And I screwed up here....that should read R300 and R350....the RV350 is
> the 9600 core.
Not really a different architecture. Just an added feature--they increased
the instruction depth for the pixel shader.
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
FWIW, if you review DaveW's posting history you'll find that he didn't
"screw up", he's either trolling or denser than concrete because he's been
corrected on this point hundreds of times and continues to post this
garbage. Sometimes I think he's a bot set up to autoreply to posts
containing "9700" and "DX9" with his message.
Augustus wrote:
>
> "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
> newsuNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...
>> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
> games
>> you'll want the 9800.
>>
>
> Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
> fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
> transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
FWIW, if you review DaveW's posting history you'll find that he didn't
"screw up", he's either trolling or denser than concrete because he's been
corrected on this point hundreds of times and continues to post this
garbage. Sometimes I think he's a bot set up to autoreply to posts
containing "9700" and "DX9" with his message.
Augustus wrote:
>
> "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
> news
uNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...>> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
> games
>> you'll want the 9800.
>>
>
> Glad to see I'm not the only one who screws up sometime. 9700 series all
> fully DX9. 9700 Pro has an RV300 GPU, the 9800 has RV350. Different
> transistor count, architecture. And like I said, about 8-10% slower.
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is.
--
DaveW
"wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
> how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big gap?
>
>
The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is.
--
DaveW
"wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
> how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big gap?
>
>
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
Not true in any way. The 9700 was one of the first DX9 compatible video
cards put out.
Don Burnette
DaveW wrote:
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is.
>
>
> "wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
>> how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a
>> big gap?
Not true in any way. The 9700 was one of the first DX9 compatible video
cards put out.
Don Burnette
DaveW wrote:
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is.
>
>
> "wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
>> how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a
>> big gap?
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 23:16:58 GMT, "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote:
>The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is.
You're just being stupid now.
Pluvious
On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 23:16:58 GMT, "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote:
>The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is.
You're just being stupid now.
Pluvious
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
news:KH6xc.18462$Sw.15673@attbi_s51...
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is.
>
> --
> DaveW
>
>
OMG, roflmao!! Come on DaveW!! One more time!!
Let's see....um... 9700 9800 DX9 ...Will that get the auto reply?
"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
news:KH6xc.18462$Sw.15673@attbi_s51...
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is.
>
> --
> DaveW
>
>
OMG, roflmao!! Come on DaveW!! One more time!!
Let's see....um... 9700 9800 DX9 ...Will that get the auto reply?
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
news:KH6xc.18462$Sw.15673@attbi_s51...
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is.
>
> --
> DaveW
>
>
>
> "wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
> > how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big
gap?
> >
> >
>
>
http://mirror.ati.com/products/radeon9700/radeon9700pro/specs.html
Features
Eight parallel rendering pipelines
Four parallel geometry engines
256-bit DDR memory interface
AGP 8X support
SMARTSHADERT 2.0
Programmable pixel and vertex shaders
16 textures per pass
Pixel shaders up to 160 instructions with 128-bit floating point
precision
Vertex shaders up to 1024 instructions with flow control
Multiple render target support
Shadow volume rendering acceleration
High precision 10-bit per channel frame buffer support
Supports DirectX® 9.0 and the latest version of OpenGL®
"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
news:KH6xc.18462$Sw.15673@attbi_s51...
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is.
>
> --
> DaveW
>
>
>
> "wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
> > how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big
gap?
> >
> >
>
>
http://mirror.ati.com/products/radeon9700/radeon9700pro/specs.html
Features
Eight parallel rendering pipelines
Four parallel geometry engines
256-bit DDR memory interface
AGP 8X support
SMARTSHADERT 2.0
Programmable pixel and vertex shaders
16 textures per pass
Pixel shaders up to 160 instructions with 128-bit floating point
precision
Vertex shaders up to 1024 instructions with flow control
Multiple render target support
Shadow volume rendering acceleration
High precision 10-bit per channel frame buffer support
Supports DirectX® 9.0 and the latest version of OpenGL®
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message news:<KH6xc.18462$Sw.15673@attbi_s51>...
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is.
>
> --
> DaveW
>
>
You again? It must be truly lonely to be you!
As everybody nowadays know, not only did the 9700 serie does DX9 ..it
also does it better then most of the FX series
"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message news:<KH6xc.18462$Sw.15673@attbi_s51>...
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is.
>
> --
> DaveW
>
>
You again? It must be truly lonely to be you!
As everybody nowadays know, not only did the 9700 serie does DX9 ..it
also does it better then most of the FX series
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
Oops. Sorry guys. I just realised i've been talking bollocks about the
capabilities of the 9700 all this time. LOL!
Once again, sorry people. I have successfully extracted my head from my arse
and stopped overclocking my brain cell.
"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
newsuNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...
> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
games
> you'll want the 9800.
>
> --
> DaveW
>
>
>
> "wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
> > how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big
gap?
> >
> >
>
>
Oops. Sorry guys. I just realised i've been talking bollocks about the
capabilities of the 9700 all this time. LOL!
Once again, sorry people. I have successfully extracted my head from my arse
and stopped overclocking my brain cell.
"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
news
uNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
games
> you'll want the 9800.
>
> --
> DaveW
>
>
>
> "wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
> > how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big
gap?
> >
> >
>
>
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:31:12 +0800, "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote:
>Oops. Sorry guys. I just realised i've been talking bollocks about the
>capabilities of the 9700 all this time. LOL!
Its a shame it has taken you about a year of people telling you that
you were wrong before you bothered to work out why.
--
Andrew. To email unscramble nrc@gurjevgrzrboivbhf.pbz & remove spamtrap.
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:31:12 +0800, "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote:
>Oops. Sorry guys. I just realised i've been talking bollocks about the
>capabilities of the 9700 all this time. LOL!
Its a shame it has taken you about a year of people telling you that
you were wrong before you bothered to work out why.
--
Andrew. To email unscramble nrc@gurjevgrzrboivbhf.pbz & remove spamtrap.
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:31:12 +0800, "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote:
>Oops. Sorry guys. I just realised i've been talking bollocks about the
>capabilities of the 9700 all this time. LOL!
>
>Once again, sorry people. I have successfully extracted my head from my arse
>and stopped overclocking my brain cell.
>
>
And I apologize for going off on ya then. You can imagine how
frustrating it was to keep having to correct you when you would keep
posting that.
Its all good.
Pluvious
>"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
>newsuNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...
>> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
>games
>> you'll want the 9800.
>>
>> --
>> DaveW
>>
>>
>>
>> "wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
>> > how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big
>gap?
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:31:12 +0800, "DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote:
>Oops. Sorry guys. I just realised i've been talking bollocks about the
>capabilities of the 9700 all this time. LOL!
>
>Once again, sorry people. I have successfully extracted my head from my arse
>and stopped overclocking my brain cell.
>
>
And I apologize for going off on ya then. You can imagine how
frustrating it was to keep having to correct you when you would keep
posting that.
Its all good.
Pluvious
>"DaveW" <none@zero.org> wrote in message
>news
uNwc.50295$pt3.34453@attbi_s03...>> The 9700 is NOT DX9 capable. The 9800 is. If you want to play newer
>games
>> you'll want the 9800.
>>
>> --
>> DaveW
>>
>>
>>
>> "wired and confused" <johnsongerry@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:F5Mwc.49858$pt3.27060@attbi_s03...
>> > how close is the 9700 pro to a 9800 pro in performance is there a big
>gap?
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
News Microsoft updates Windows 11 24H2 requirements, CPU must support SSE4.2 or the OS will not boot- Started by Admin
- Replies: 14
-
-
-
Question New Build GPU help- ASRock Steel Legend OC Radeon RX 7900 GRE - Keeps turning off
- Started by bp240
- Replies: 6
-
Question How can I make my AMD GPU scale *all* resolutions to 1080p, even resolutions that are "supported" by my TV?
- Started by Sol33t303
- Replies: 7
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram