Stealth 9550 - Any good vs the Radeon 9200SE?

[Guest]

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

I see that MicroCenter has a sale on the 256MB Stealth 9550 AGP card and
I would like to get better game play for FarCry, Counter-Strike, and
Doom3. My current P4/1.8 is running a retail Radeon 9200SE VIVO.

While I would love to have the VIVO, if the card performs significantly
better I might buy it - they want $99 for it.

Anyone know the performance differences between the 9200SE VIVO and the
Stealth 9550?

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me

 

[Guest]

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

Leythos wrote:
> I see that MicroCenter has a sale on the 256MB Stealth 9550 AGP card and
> I would like to get better game play for FarCry, Counter-Strike, and
> Doom3. My current P4/1.8 is running a retail Radeon 9200SE VIVO.
>
> While I would love to have the VIVO, if the card performs significantly
> better I might buy it - they want $99 for it.
>
> Anyone know the performance differences between the 9200SE VIVO and the
> Stealth 9550?
>

On my old 9600XT I was able to play Doom 3 at 800x600 on high, Far cry
at 1024x768 on medium and HL2 at 1024x768 on high. The 9550 has half the
core clock speed and 1/3 less memory speed so you would be taking a bit
of a hit. Personally I suggest saving up for a 9600 Pro unless the 9550
stealth card is a potentially good overclocker and you're willing to
gamble on this.

Having said that, prior to the 9600XT I had a 9550SE (SE being about 60%
slower than a standard 9550 due to a 64bit vs 128bit memory bus), and I
was able to play Call of Duty at 1024x768 on medium fine. I tried the
doom demo, but I was trying it at 1024x768 on medium and it was no good.

One other thing, I found that upgrading from 512mb of ram to 1gb of RAM
gave Far Cry and Doom 3 a major boost, smoothing everything out...

 

[sleepy]

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

"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:FRX9e.17765$Qu2.1195@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
>I see that MicroCenter has a sale on the 256MB Stealth 9550 AGP card and
> I would like to get better game play for FarCry, Counter-Strike, and
> Doom3. My current P4/1.8 is running a retail Radeon 9200SE VIVO.
>
> While I would love to have the VIVO, if the card performs significantly
> better I might buy it - they want $99 for it.
>
> Anyone know the performance differences between the 9200SE VIVO and the
> Stealth 9550?
>
> --
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
>
If this is the card you're looking at
http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0181725
it has 2 programmable vertex shader pipelines whereas your 9200 has 1 I
think
it has 400mhz DDR memory whereas a 9200 will be 200-250mhz DDR
and its 128-bit whereas a SE will be 64-bit.
it also does directx 9 shaders whereas a 9200 is directx8 only.
its a much better card than a 9200SE

 

[Guest]

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

ofn01 wrote:
> Leythos wrote:
>
>> I see that MicroCenter has a sale on the 256MB Stealth 9550 AGP card and
>> I would like to get better game play for FarCry, Counter-Strike, and
>> Doom3. My current P4/1.8 is running a retail Radeon 9200SE VIVO.
>>
>> While I would love to have the VIVO, if the card performs significantly
>> better I might buy it - they want $99 for it.
>>
>> Anyone know the performance differences between the 9200SE VIVO and the
>> Stealth 9550?
>>
>
> On my old 9600XT I was able to play Doom 3 at 800x600 on high, Far cry
> at 1024x768 on medium and HL2 at 1024x768 on high. The 9550 has half the
> core clock speed and 1/3 less memory speed so you would be taking a bit
> of a hit. Personally I suggest saving up for a 9600 Pro unless the 9550
> stealth card is a potentially good overclocker and you're willing to
> gamble on this.
>
> Having said that, prior to the 9600XT I had a 9550SE (SE being about 60%
> slower than a standard 9550 due to a 64bit vs 128bit memory bus), and I
> was able to play Call of Duty at 1024x768 on medium fine. I tried the
> doom demo, but I was trying it at 1024x768 on medium and it was no good.
>
> One other thing, I found that upgrading from 512mb of ram to 1gb of RAM
> gave Far Cry and Doom 3 a major boost, smoothing everything out...

Sorry above I meant to say that a 9550SE is about 30% slower than a
standard 9550.

 

[Guest]

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

Hi

I bought a Sapphire 9550 128 Mb for the AGP and later I
flashed the bios of it to turn it into a 9600 Pro.
That is RV350 to RV360, w/ 128-bit mem bus.

I´ve got it running 400MHz Gpu & 230MHz Mem. The 9600 has a
wide range of performance values, but you have to probe your
card with ATITool and later flash it with a suitable bios from
the 9600 series.


D-Lito


Leythos wrote:
> I see that MicroCenter has a sale on the 256MB Stealth 9550 AGP card and
> I would like to get better game play for FarCry, Counter-Strike, and
> Doom3. My current P4/1.8 is running a retail Radeon 9200SE VIVO.
>
> While I would love to have the VIVO, if the card performs significantly
> better I might buy it - they want $99 for it.
>
> Anyone know the performance differences between the 9200SE VIVO and the
> Stealth 9550?
>

 

[Guest]

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

On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 09:34:59 +0000, Sleepy wrote:
>
> "Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
> news:FRX9e.17765$Qu2.1195@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
>>I see that MicroCenter has a sale on the 256MB Stealth 9550 AGP card and
>> I would like to get better game play for FarCry, Counter-Strike, and
>> Doom3. My current P4/1.8 is running a retail Radeon 9200SE VIVO.
>>
>> While I would love to have the VIVO, if the card performs significantly
>> better I might buy it - they want $99 for it.
>>
>> Anyone know the performance differences between the 9200SE VIVO and the
>> Stealth 9550?
>>
>> --
>> spam999free@rrohio.com
>> remove 999 in order to email me
>>
> If this is the card you're looking at
> http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0181725
> it has 2 programmable vertex shader pipelines whereas your 9200 has 1 I
> think
> it has 400mhz DDR memory whereas a 9200 will be 200-250mhz DDR and its
> 128-bit whereas a SE will be 64-bit. it also does directx 9 shaders
> whereas a 9200 is directx8 only. its a much better card than a 9200SE

That's the one, thanks for the direct review. I was thinking it would be
better than the 9200SE VIVO.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me