9550 vs 9600

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

been reading some interesting reviews of 9550 performance - with the 128 bit
memory chip it appraoches 9600 pro performance. the 64 bit memory chip
performs like 9600 non-pro

what experiences to users have out there. 9550 is half the price of a 9600
pro

is the gecube 9550xt available in Canada?

 

[augustus]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

"john sharon" <jchriste@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:EpRJc.39961$od7.27227@pd7tw3no...
> been reading some interesting reviews of 9550 performance - with the 128
bit
> memory chip it appraoches 9600 pro performance. the 64 bit memory chip
> performs like 9600 non-pro
>
> what experiences to users have out there. 9550 is half the price of a
9600
> pro
>
> is the gecube 9550xt available in Canada?


I would avoid it. On an Athlon 64 XP3200 test setup it got a 3DMark 2001
score of 8187! Consider that my old Radeon 8500 128Mb did 11,512 on an
XP3200 system. I don't know which reviews you've been seeing where it
approaches 9600 Pro performance. I've seen some where it's somewhat below or
on par with a straight 9600. It's clock speeds (250 core, 200 memory) are
astonishingly slow, and it's bandwidth is 6.4 Gb sec. This is the same as a
straight 9600 non-pro, but the non pro beats it by 10% or more in almost a
lot of tests. A 9600 Pro is up at 9.8 Gb / sec.
http://www.hardavenue.com/reviews/his9550vivo3.shtml

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

thanks this is helpful. I see some major differences between cards - the
gecube 9550xt has a core clock of 400 and memory of 500 - the rest are as
you say much slower.

"Augustus" <tiberius@weeik.com> wrote in message
news:IVTJc.43005$2i3.30055@clgrps12...
>
> "john sharon" <jchriste@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:EpRJc.39961$od7.27227@pd7tw3no...
> > been reading some interesting reviews of 9550 performance - with the 128
> bit
> > memory chip it appraoches 9600 pro performance. the 64 bit memory chip
> > performs like 9600 non-pro
> >
> > what experiences to users have out there. 9550 is half the price of a
> 9600
> > pro
> >
> > is the gecube 9550xt available in Canada?
>
>
> I would avoid it. On an Athlon 64 XP3200 test setup it got a 3DMark 2001
> score of 8187! Consider that my old Radeon 8500 128Mb did 11,512 on an
> XP3200 system. I don't know which reviews you've been seeing where it
> approaches 9600 Pro performance. I've seen some where it's somewhat below
or
> on par with a straight 9600. It's clock speeds (250 core, 200 memory) are
> astonishingly slow, and it's bandwidth is 6.4 Gb sec. This is the same as
a
> straight 9600 non-pro, but the non pro beats it by 10% or more in almost a
> lot of tests. A 9600 Pro is up at 9.8 Gb / sec.
> http://www.hardavenue.com/reviews/his9550vivo3.shtml
>
>
>
>
>

 

[augustus]

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.ati (More info?)

"john sharon" <jchriste@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:b9XJc.41722$Mr4.38431@pd7tw1no...
> thanks this is helpful. I see some major differences between cards - the
> gecube 9550xt has a core clock of 400 and memory of 500 - the rest are as
> you say much slower.

Yes, the Gecube 9550xt is clocked higher at 400/350 and this does elevate it
above the other 9550's out there. There's a review (in French but the graphs
are easy enough to read) http://www.pcinpact.com/articles/a/88/0.htm?pge=1
that shows it outperforming a standard 9600 non-pro. It's performance is in
between the standard 9600 and 9600 Pro. It has very limited distribution in
North America. I could only find one US site selling it, and they won't ship
to Canada. Their price was $105US + s/h. In Canada, if available, this would
be around $140.

NCIX is selling a full blown 9600XT 128Mb for $197 with $10 shipping.
Canadian company I've dealt with many times and always been happy.
http://www.ncix.com/products/index.php?sku=11918&vpn=AA1000001501&manufacture=Celestica&promoid=1043