Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Gaming on the Radeon 9550 256MB?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
April 2, 2005 4:15:11 PM

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

How is gaming on the Radeon 9550 256MB? I know by today's standards, it's
an entry level card. However, concern of keeping the noise levels low, I
want to use a card that does not require a cooling fan. I'm aware of the
Zalman passive heat sinks, for higher-end cards, but you're still generating
heat, which builds up in the box, then you need a better fan to vent the
box, equaling more noise, again.

Thanks,
Bill Crocker
April 2, 2005 10:19:16 PM

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

"Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:_qCdncT9evyHTtPfRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
> How is gaming on the Radeon 9550 256MB? I know by today's standards, it's
> an entry level card. However, concern of keeping the noise levels low, I
> want to use a card that does not require a cooling fan. I'm aware of the
> Zalman passive heat sinks, for higher-end cards, but you're still
> generating heat, which builds up in the box, then you need a better fan to
> vent the box, equaling more noise, again.
>
> Thanks,
> Bill Crocker

3DMark03 default 1024x768 benchmark about 2000-2100 or so on an A64 2800+.
About 13-15fps or so on Farcry at 1024x768. Too slow to be usable in games
like Farcry , Doom3, and the like. My old Radeon 8500 128Mb bests these by
25% or so.
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
April 2, 2005 11:55:55 PM

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

Bill Crocker wrote:
> How is gaming on the Radeon 9550 256MB? I know by today's standards, it's
> an entry level card. However, concern of keeping the noise levels low, I
> want to use a card that does not require a cooling fan. I'm aware of the
> Zalman passive heat sinks, for higher-end cards, but you're still generating
> heat, which builds up in the box, then you need a better fan to vent the
> box, equaling more noise, again.
>
> Thanks,
> Bill Crocker
>
>

I have owned and have seen a number of 9550SE's that are passively
cooled. The standard 9550's that I have seen do have a fan on though.
The difference between the 9550 and the 9550SE is that the SE has a
64bit memory bus instead of 128. From what I saw in comparing my results
to others on futuremark's ORB the 9550SE was about 30-40% slow than a
standard 9550 which is slower than a 9600/9600Pro/9600XT.

I was able to play call of duty pretty ok at 1024x768 on the 9550SE but
trying to play the doom 3 demo it was pretty slow in places. Even on my
9600XT to play it well I have it at high quality but only 800x600
resolution.

SO be sure of which 9550 you're getting if you're looking at a passive
cooling solution.
Related resources
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
April 2, 2005 11:55:56 PM

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

"ofn01" <netusr@internet.not> wrote in message
news:8fGdnTzwMNYhd9PfRVnyrQ@pipex.net...
> Bill Crocker wrote:
>> How is gaming on the Radeon 9550 256MB? I know by today's standards,
>> it's an entry level card. However, concern of keeping the noise levels
>> low, I want to use a card that does not require a cooling fan. I'm aware
>> of the Zalman passive heat sinks, for higher-end cards, but you're still
>> generating heat, which builds up in the box, then you need a better fan
>> to vent the box, equaling more noise, again.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bill Crocker
>
> I have owned and have seen a number of 9550SE's that are passively cooled.
> The standard 9550's that I have seen do have a fan on though. The
> difference between the 9550 and the 9550SE is that the SE has a 64bit
> memory bus instead of 128. From what I saw in comparing my results to
> others on futuremark's ORB the 9550SE was about 30-40% slow than a
> standard 9550 which is slower than a 9600/9600Pro/9600XT.
>
> I was able to play call of duty pretty ok at 1024x768 on the 9550SE but
> trying to play the doom 3 demo it was pretty slow in places. Even on my
> 9600XT to play it well I have it at high quality but only 800x600
> resolution.
>
> SO be sure of which 9550 you're getting if you're looking at a passive
> cooling solution.

This is at ATI's own web site, showing the Radeon 9550 with a heat sink
only, no fan:

http://www.ati.com/products/radeon9550/gallery.html

Bill Crocker
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
April 3, 2005 3:10:50 AM

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

"Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:_qCdncT9evyHTtPfRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
> How is gaming on the Radeon 9550 256MB? I know by today's standards, it's
> an entry level card. However, concern of keeping the noise levels low, I
> want to use a card that does not require a cooling fan. I'm aware of the
> Zalman passive heat sinks, for higher-end cards, but you're still
generating
> heat, which builds up in the box, then you need a better fan to vent the
> box, equaling more noise, again.
>


On a card of that strength, I wouldn't bother with any more than 128MB
unless the 256MB model doesn't cost much more.
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
April 3, 2005 4:27:56 AM

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

Get an older 9600 pro

i have one with no fan, works great, with a little gentle oc'ing (415/250)i
get a fairly steady 80fps in call of duty
and my systems so speed demon either 2600 sempron, 512mb ddr 333. mines from
gigabyte ands got 128mb of memory on board at this level 256mb is just a
waste

"Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:_qCdncT9evyHTtPfRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
> How is gaming on the Radeon 9550 256MB? I know by today's standards, it's
> an entry level card. However, concern of keeping the noise levels low, I
> want to use a card that does not require a cooling fan. I'm aware of the
> Zalman passive heat sinks, for higher-end cards, but you're still
> generating heat, which builds up in the box, then you need a better fan to
> vent the box, equaling more noise, again.
>
> Thanks,
> Bill Crocker
>
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
April 3, 2005 1:58:30 PM

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

Bill Crocker wrote:
> "ofn01" <netusr@internet.not> wrote in message
> news:8fGdnTzwMNYhd9PfRVnyrQ@pipex.net...
>
>>Bill Crocker wrote:
>>
>>>How is gaming on the Radeon 9550 256MB? I know by today's standards,
>>>it's an entry level card. However, concern of keeping the noise levels
>>>low, I want to use a card that does not require a cooling fan. I'm aware
>>>of the Zalman passive heat sinks, for higher-end cards, but you're still
>>>generating heat, which builds up in the box, then you need a better fan
>>>to vent the box, equaling more noise, again.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Bill Crocker
>>
>>I have owned and have seen a number of 9550SE's that are passively cooled.
>>The standard 9550's that I have seen do have a fan on though. The
>>difference between the 9550 and the 9550SE is that the SE has a 64bit
>>memory bus instead of 128. From what I saw in comparing my results to
>>others on futuremark's ORB the 9550SE was about 30-40% slow than a
>>standard 9550 which is slower than a 9600/9600Pro/9600XT.
>>
>>I was able to play call of duty pretty ok at 1024x768 on the 9550SE but
>>trying to play the doom 3 demo it was pretty slow in places. Even on my
>>9600XT to play it well I have it at high quality but only 800x600
>>resolution.
>>
>>SO be sure of which 9550 you're getting if you're looking at a passive
>>cooling solution.
>
>
> This is at ATI's own web site, showing the Radeon 9550 with a heat sink
> only, no fan:
>
> http://www.ati.com/products/radeon9550/gallery.html
>
> Bill Crocker
>
>

Check my post in the other thread - chances are this is an SE model.
Main thing to be aware of is which card you're getting - the SE is
fairly crippled compared to the standard. Also from what I have seen
your 5700 is much more comparable to a 9600. If noise is a problem but
your budget is not, you could consider the 'ultimate' range from
sapphire which are passively cooled...

They do a 9600XT ultimate which would definitely compete well with your
5600 (they do a 256mb version as well)

http://www.sapphiretech.com/vga/9600-xt-ult.asp
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
April 3, 2005 3:39:56 PM

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

I have a Radeon 9550 256MB made by ATI, NO FAN.

It plays all the games fine, I am enjoying Half life II on this card with
excellent results..
And it is Windows XP Meida Center Edition 2005 compatible! Recorded TV looks
fatastic both on TV and Monitor.
It is certainly the best choice in Canada right now since it is on promotion
at futureshop this week.


"ofn01" <netusr@internet.not> wrote in message
news:wLGdneyiOIulLdLfRVnyug@pipex.net...
> Bill Crocker wrote:
>> "ofn01" <netusr@internet.not> wrote in message
>> news:8fGdnTzwMNYhd9PfRVnyrQ@pipex.net...
>>
>>>Bill Crocker wrote:
>>>
>>>>How is gaming on the Radeon 9550 256MB? I know by today's standards,
>>>>it's an entry level card. However, concern of keeping the noise levels
>>>>low, I want to use a card that does not require a cooling fan. I'm
>>>>aware of the Zalman passive heat sinks, for higher-end cards, but you're
>>>>still generating heat, which builds up in the box, then you need a
>>>>better fan to vent the box, equaling more noise, again.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Bill Crocker
>>>
>>>I have owned and have seen a number of 9550SE's that are passively
>>>cooled. The standard 9550's that I have seen do have a fan on though. The
>>>difference between the 9550 and the 9550SE is that the SE has a 64bit
>>>memory bus instead of 128. From what I saw in comparing my results to
>>>others on futuremark's ORB the 9550SE was about 30-40% slow than a
>>>standard 9550 which is slower than a 9600/9600Pro/9600XT.
>>>
>>>I was able to play call of duty pretty ok at 1024x768 on the 9550SE but
>>>trying to play the doom 3 demo it was pretty slow in places. Even on my
>>>9600XT to play it well I have it at high quality but only 800x600
>>>resolution.
>>>
>>>SO be sure of which 9550 you're getting if you're looking at a passive
>>>cooling solution.
>>
>>
>> This is at ATI's own web site, showing the Radeon 9550 with a heat sink
>> only, no fan:
>>
>> http://www.ati.com/products/radeon9550/gallery.html
>>
>> Bill Crocker
>>
>>
>
> Check my post in the other thread - chances are this is an SE model.
> Main thing to be aware of is which card you're getting - the SE is fairly
> crippled compared to the standard. Also from what I have seen your 5700 is
> much more comparable to a 9600. If noise is a problem but your budget is
> not, you could consider the 'ultimate' range from sapphire which are
> passively cooled...
>
> They do a 9600XT ultimate which would definitely compete well with your
> 5600 (they do a 256mb version as well)
>
> http://www.sapphiretech.com/vga/9600-xt-ult.asp
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
April 3, 2005 5:00:08 PM

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

Bill Crocker wrote:
> How is gaming on the Radeon 9550 256MB? I know by today's standards, it's
> an entry level card. However, concern of keeping the noise levels low, I
> want to use a card that does not require a cooling fan. I'm aware of the
> Zalman passive heat sinks, for higher-end cards, but you're still generating
> heat, which builds up in the box, then you need a better fan to vent the
> box, equaling more noise, again.
>
> Thanks,
> Bill Crocker
>
>
The Sapphire 9550 that I have does have a fan, but you can't really
hear.. It plays Il-2 Pacific Fighters, Call of Duty: UO, Dangerous
Waters and like titles well
for an entry level 128but card. However, remember the the 9550 core
frequency is 250 Mhz and the memory is 200 Mhz DDR (400 Mhz effective).
For a few dollars extra it would be good if you could buy a 9600 as it
will give acceptable frame rates in todays games.
Btw don't expect to see framerates at or over 60 fps for any game if
you're playing at or above 1024x768x16. The only exception to
this rule might be XPlane 763

--Looker007
..
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
April 3, 2005 7:14:33 PM

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

I ended up buying a VisionTek Xtasy Radeon 9600 256MB. It was $119.99,
after a $30.00 rebate, at Circuit City. It has a passive heat sink (no fan,
no noise). It works great! Thanks for all of your input!

Bill Crocker


"Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:_qCdncT9evyHTtPfRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
> How is gaming on the Radeon 9550 256MB? I know by today's standards, it's
> an entry level card. However, concern of keeping the noise levels low, I
> want to use a card that does not require a cooling fan. I'm aware of the
> Zalman passive heat sinks, for higher-end cards, but you're still
> generating heat, which builds up in the box, then you need a better fan to
> vent the box, equaling more noise, again.
>
> Thanks,
> Bill Crocker
>
April 3, 2005 8:04:02 PM

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

"Idiscuss" <idiscuss@fake-email-address.com> wrote in message
news:q7U3e.116$6k4.46215@news20.bellglobal.com...
>I have a Radeon 9550 256MB made by ATI, NO FAN.
>
> It plays all the games fine, I am enjoying Half life II on this card with
> excellent results..
> And it is Windows XP Meida Center Edition 2005 compatible! Recorded TV
> looks fatastic both on TV and Monitor.
> It is certainly the best choice in Canada right now since it is on
> promotion at futureshop this week.

$170 Cdn sale price ($199 regular) for a Radeon 9550 is not a good deal at
all. NCIX (Canada) has the Sapphire 9800 Pro 128Mb on sale right now for
$199.
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
April 3, 2005 10:42:35 PM

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

> "ofn01" <netusr@internet.not> wrote in message
> news:wLGdneyiOIulLdLfRVnyug@pipex.net...
>
>>Bill Crocker wrote:
>>
>>>"ofn01" <netusr@internet.not> wrote in message
>>>news:8fGdnTzwMNYhd9PfRVnyrQ@pipex.net...
...snipped..
>>>
>>>
>>>This is at ATI's own web site, showing the Radeon 9550 with a heat sink
>>>only, no fan:
>>>
>>>http://www.ati.com/products/radeon9550/gallery.html
>>>
>>>Bill Crocker
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Check my post in the other thread - chances are this is an SE model.
>>Main thing to be aware of is which card you're getting - the SE is fairly
>>crippled compared to the standard. Also from what I have seen your 5700 is
>>much more comparable to a 9600. If noise is a problem but your budget is
>>not, you could consider the 'ultimate' range from sapphire which are
>>passively cooled...
>>
>>They do a 9600XT ultimate which would definitely compete well with your
>>5600 (they do a 256mb version as well)
>>
>>http://www.sapphiretech.com/vga/9600-xt-ult.asp
>
>
>
Idiscuss wrote:
> I have a Radeon 9550 256MB made by ATI, NO FAN.
>
> It plays all the games fine, I am enjoying Half life II on this card
with
> excellent results..
> And it is Windows XP Meida Center Edition 2005 compatible! Recorded
TV looks
> fatastic both on TV and Monitor.
> It is certainly the best choice in Canada right now since it is on
promotion
> at futureshop this week.
>
>

Looks like ATI/Sapphire release standard 9550's both with and without
heatsinks - maybe they've changed recently but I know my 9550SE from
sapphire has no HSF and when looking on their website they show the 9550
with a fan (and from what I gather sapphire make ATI branded cards)

What resolution/settings are you running for HL2 and what CPU/RAM do you
have backing the 9550 up?
April 4, 2005 1:35:08 PM

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

On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 13:00:08 GMT, Looker007 <Looker007@peek-a-boo.org>
wrote:

>Bill Crocker wrote:
>> How is gaming on the Radeon 9550 256MB? I know by today's standards, it's
>> an entry level card. However, concern of keeping the noise levels low, I
>> want to use a card that does not require a cooling fan. I'm aware of the
>> Zalman passive heat sinks, for higher-end cards, but you're still generating
>> heat, which builds up in the box, then you need a better fan to vent the
>> box, equaling more noise, again.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bill Crocker
>>
>>
>The Sapphire 9550 that I have does have a fan, but you can't really
>hear.. It plays Il-2 Pacific Fighters, Call of Duty: UO, Dangerous
>Waters and like titles well
>for an entry level 128but card. However, remember the the 9550 core
>frequency is 250 Mhz and the memory is 200 Mhz DDR (400 Mhz effective).
>For a few dollars extra it would be good if you could buy a 9600 as it
>will give acceptable frame rates in todays games.
>Btw don't expect to see framerates at or over 60 fps for any game if
>you're playing at or above 1024x768x16. The only exception to
>this rule might be XPlane 763
>
>--Looker007
>.
I have a Sapphire 9550 256Mb from ebuyer too. Basically the 9550 is a
downgraded 9600Pro. The clock speed has been artifically lowered, and
the price lowered too, to appeal to the budget gamer.

I flashed the bios to a 9600 Pro with no probs. Now core is running at
400Mhz and the memory at 230Mhz.

Yes, it has active cooling, but the sound is unnoticable.

Now I have a 9600Pro for the cost of a 9550. :o )
April 5, 2005 9:12:55 PM

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

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 09:35:08 +0100, Harry <A@A.A> wrote:

>I have a Sapphire 9550 256Mb <snip> I flashed the bios to a 9600 Pro with no probs.
>Now core is running at 400Mhz and the memory at 230Mhz.

Hi Harry

Couple of questions for you if you don't mind?

Looking for a budget gaming solution for myself right now, I'm tossing
up between either a Sapphire or PowerColor 256MB 9550. Did you
actually flash your 9550's bios with an update for Sapphire's 9600Pro
bios? Or did you just tweak the core and memory speeds with Redline or
Rage3D Tweak?

Stable?

Did you add any additional passive or active cooling to the
chips/card?
April 5, 2005 9:12:56 PM

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

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 17:12:55 +1000, seagull <acer@tpg.com.au> wrote:

>On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 09:35:08 +0100, Harry <A@A.A> wrote:
>
>>I have a Sapphire 9550 256Mb <snip> I flashed the bios to a 9600 Pro with no probs.
>>Now core is running at 400Mhz and the memory at 230Mhz.
>
>Hi Harry
>
>Couple of questions for you if you don't mind?
>
>Looking for a budget gaming solution for myself right now, I'm tossing
>up between either a Sapphire or PowerColor 256MB 9550. Did you
>actually flash your 9550's bios with an update for Sapphire's 9600Pro
>bios? Or did you just tweak the core and memory speeds with Redline or
>Rage3D Tweak?
I actually flashed the bios to a 9600 BIOS.

I used the Sapphire 9600 Pro 256 MB 400 / 227.5 Samsung 4.0 from
http://www.techpowerup.com/bios/

If you get a 9550 double check the memory chips on it. Sapphire have
Samsung or Hynix. Mine was Samsung. I got it from Ebuyer.com

>
>Stable?
Perfectly stable. No lock ups. Cooling seems to be fine - under load
the temps will rise by about 4C.
>
>Did you add any additional passive or active cooling to the
>chips/card?
Nope, the card came with a light blue fan and this is all I use.

HTH

Harry



a word of warning....

I was very very methodical when doing this. I checked the speeds
(using ATITool) before flashing the card. The only issue I had was
Windows XP getting is a muddle once the BIOS had been flashed. A few
reboots cured it.

Make sure you remove all drivers and utils from your PC before the
flash and keep a backup of the BIOS handy along with the exact command
to type in to flash it back to the original. If the flash fails you
will see nothing on the screen until you flash it back. So you have to
be able to boot to DOS and type in the flash command "BLIND"

Finally, I have to say that you may end up trashing the card if you
flash to wrong BIOS or overclock it too much.
!