8500 LE vs. 9200

gmitra

Distinguished
Dec 29, 2002
22
0
18,510
On newegg.com the Radeon 8500 LE 128 MB card and the Radeon 9200 128MB are priced about the same. Can anyone tell me which one is overall better?
 

Spitfire_x86

Splendid
Jun 26, 2002
7,248
0
25,780
First of all, I need to say that 128 MB VRAM is 100% waste for both Radeon 8500LE and Radeon 9200. Buy a 64 MB card and save money.

Then, 128 MB Radeon 8500LEs' have slower memory compared to 64 MB versions. It makes 128 MB R8500LEs' slower than 64 MBs'.

Finally, Radeon 8500LE/9100 is better than Radeon 9200. (Radeon 9100 is rebadged Radeon8500LE)

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new"> My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new"> My Rig</A></b>
 

phial

Splendid
Oct 29, 2002
6,757
0
25,780
8500le=9100

9000=9200


the 9000 is a stripped down version of the 8500. it has 4x1 pixel pipelines compared to the 8500 which has 4x2. this means higher potential maximum frame rate and can render textures faster. especially when multitexturing which most games use nowadays, which is when 2 texutres are placed on top of eachother (like the water in BF1942)

also the 9000/9200 only has 1 pixel shader. the 8500/le has 2. so games like UT2003 that use pixel shaders alot will run slower on the 9200/9000

-------

<A HREF="http://www.quake3world.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001355.html" target="_new">*I hate thug gangstas*</A>
 

Spitfire_x86

Splendid
Jun 26, 2002
7,248
0
25,780
9000 and 9200 aren't equal.

R9000 = 6 × 1, 250 Mhz clock (275 for Pro), 200 MHz memory (275 for Pro)

R9200 = 4 × 1, 250 MHz clock, 250 MHz memory (Pro version not available yet)


also the 9000/9200 only has 1 pixel shader. the 8500/le has 2. so games like UT2003 that use pixel shaders alot will run slower on the 9200/9000
I haven't seen anywhere (including THG) that R9000/9200 has 1 pixel shader. In 3DMark 2001 pixel shader tests R9000 Pro (275/275) and R8500 (275/275), R9000 Pro was ahead of R8500 (because of newer drivers). Otherwise R8500/9000 is equal in terms of pixel shader performance. <A HREF="http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/200207181/radeon9000-12.html" target="_new"> Click to see</A>

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new"> My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new"> My Rig</A></b>
 

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
The 8500LE or 9100 would be your best choice. They are the same card.

In both cases, the 128MB version uses MUCH slower memory than the 64MB version, making the 64MB version a MUCH better performer.

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>
 

gmitra

Distinguished
Dec 29, 2002
22
0
18,510
I see, so the 8500 64MB (not the 8500 64MB LE card) is better than the 8500 128MB LE, and the the 8500/9100 series is just overall better than the 9200 series. Thanks for the help.
 

phial

Splendid
Oct 29, 2002
6,757
0
25,780
The 8500LE or 9100 would be your best choice. They are the same card.

In both cases, the 128MB version uses MUCH slower memory than the 64MB version, making the 64MB version a MUCH better performer.

always listen to Crashman. he is teh man

:)

-------

<A HREF="http://www.quake3world.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001355.html" target="_new">*I hate thug gangstas*</A>
 

phial

Splendid
Oct 29, 2002
6,757
0
25,780
notice that in 1 test out of 4 the 9000pro is ahaed. i shoudl have stated that that it uses a more "advanced" pixel shader engine, as ATI stated, from the R300. my bad. but in most games this dosnt make up for the fact that the 8500 has 2.




i cant remember where i got it from Spitfire, but i DO remember reading it. more than a couple times in fact do i remember reading it. ill try to find some articles in the next couple days and post it here to back up what i sa9d



-------

<A HREF="http://www.quake3world.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001355.html" target="_new">*I hate thug gangstas*</A>
 

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
NO!

The 8500 Retail (both 64MB and 128MB) has 275MHz memory.

The 8500LE 64MB has 3.6ns memory, which is clocked at 250MHz, but specified to run up to 275MHz. The 9100 64MB is also 250MHz with 3.6ns memory.

The 8500LE 128MB has 5ns memory clocked at 200MHz. You won't overclock far as 5ns memory is specified to run that speed. The 9100 128MB also has 200MHz with 5ns memory!

So the 8500 Retail is always faster, the 8500LE/64MB and 9100/64MB are next in line and the 8500LE/128MB and 9100/128MB are the slowest.

You seem to think that all the 8500LE/9100 cards have the same speed memory, this is NOT true. The 64MB version of the 8500LE/9100 is faster than the 128MB version!

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>
 

selfbuilt

Distinguished
Jan 30, 2003
67
0
18,630
I agree, core and mem clocks vary considerably among 8500/9100 cards. However, my recent ATI-built Retail 8500LE 64MB comes with only 4ns ram and is clocked at 230/230. In comparison, a sapphire 9100 64MB comes at 250/230 (and the 128MB version at 250/200). You just have to be careful with any specific card (I've seen as low as 166/183 for some of the cheap OEMs!).

Where does good judgement come from? Experience. Where does experience come from? Bad judgement.
 

Crashman

Polypheme
Former Staff
The correct speeds for the 64MB card's memory is 250MHz, and 200MHz for the 128MB version. The 8500LE from ATI with 230MHz memory was once called the LELE. At any rate, even 4ns memory supports 250MHz clocks, while ALL standard 128MB 8500LE/9100 cards are comming with 5ns memory which only supports the stock 200MHz.

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>
 

marneus

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
1,327
0
19,280
ah... but what on this earth is a 9100LE, a halfway of a halfway house between a 8500LE & a 9100 ???

Trust me I know what I'm doing... ooops, grab the cat... (Click me name to see me spec)