Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

9600 openGL performance

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • OpenGL
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 4, 2003 11:38:04 PM

Within the last month the fan on my geforce3 ti500 ceased to spin. I shouldve just replaced it with the iceberq4 from vantec but i decided to get an ATI and see what all the hype has been about lately. Well after a few weeks of tweaking and testing I am convinced that the card just flat out sucks with games that use openGL. Is this an anomaly? Or is it true of all 9600's? I basically play tribes2 as my main game and have for years now, involved with ladders and organized competition, and the poor framerate that this card offers is such a hindrance I may have to replace it with my old geforce and shelve the new card. I really hate to do this but I know compUSA is not going to refund my money and I will be out 170 bucks. I could care less what kind of DX9 performance the new ati cards have in games like HL2 and others, my old card got me a good 30FPS higher on average with half the ram and a lower clock, in tribes2. I have cat3.8's the latest agp drivers for my mobo, everything is up to date. I dont get it, someone please tell me I am wrong and this can be fixed.

<A HREF="http://www.freewebs.com/triumph_mod" target="_new">The Game Club</A> <font color=red>is a hangout for gamers who play multiple titles and want a lenient community to discuss whatevers on their mind</font color=red>

More about : 9600 opengl performance

November 4, 2003 11:47:59 PM

Did you fully un-install all the Nvidia drivers? Nvidia has a habit of leaving little pieces of their drivers in the registry, and this has been know to cuase problems when installing an ATI card.

When I went from geforce to Radeon, I did a format. Of course, this is kind of drastic, and their are programs out there that will delete Nvidia's left over drivers. I forget the names of them, but I'm sure someone here can remember them.

Error: Keyboard not attached. Press F1 to continue
November 4, 2003 11:54:18 PM

I suppose there could be scraps of nvidia left behind, I just uninstalled them from the control panel before I put the ATI in the slot, but i guess your right I remember voodoo files wreaking havok when i switched to nvidia. I do doubt that i will see a 30 frame increase but I will google and see what i can find.

<A HREF="http://www.freewebs.com/triumph_mod" target="_new">The Game Club</A> <font color=red>is a hangout for gamers who play multiple titles and want a lenient community to discuss whatevers on their mind</font color=red>
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
November 5, 2003 12:11:22 AM

I wrote a review on the AIW 9600 Pro and found it's OGL performance to be quite good!

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
November 5, 2003 12:41:15 AM

The card is a good performer overall, but according to THG vga buyers guide article the 5600ultra beat every ati made card in the Q3 team arena benchmark including the 9800pro, and thats obviously an OpenGL game. The 5600 series hasnt been the best received chipset since released but it somehow manages to beat the ATI flagship, and it costs half as much if that. And in the same article the lowly 5200ultra tied the more expensive 9600pro. I dunno but that doesnt seem right to me. I guess the newer ati cards are a good bet to kick a$$ in the newer games but for guys like me that have a competitive interest in older openGL titles I have to think the nvidia chips are still the way to go.

I did just download and run a program called nfr that picked up 1 existing nvidia driver and used the same program to completely eradicate all my ATI drivers and components, so after a fresh install of the cat3.8 drivers we'll see if there is much difference.

<A HREF="http://www.freewebs.com/triumph_mod" target="_new">The Game Club</A> <font color=red>is a hangout for gamers who play multiple titles and want a lenient community to discuss whatevers on their mind</font color=red>
a b U Graphics card
November 5, 2003 1:00:59 AM

Hehe, no. If a 9600 Pro only got 400FPS and an FX5200 got 500, you still couldn't see the difference. So there is nothing wrong with using ATI's cards in OGL games.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
November 5, 2003 2:20:01 AM

I dont agree, the 5200ultra equals the 9600pro fps wise in quakeIII yet the 9600pros' marketed and priced as though its a higher class of hardware. The 5600ultra beats the 9800pro in the same game and its half as much money. I have to belive that atis' overall execution of openGL is lacking. In a fast paced online game, such as quake or tribes precision is essential and their cards do not perform as well as they should compared with nvidias products. 20 to 30 FPS loss is huge in games like this, I dont care if its a slightly more attractive picture, its not like comparing atari to an xbox. I want high framrates and i couldve gotten a ti4200 for the same amount of money and it crushes the 9600 I tested my friends on my comp and he put my radeon in his and the difference was drastic.

<A HREF="http://www.freewebs.com/triumph_mod" target="_new">The Game Club</A> <font color=red>is a hangout for gamers who play multiple titles and want a lenient community to discuss whatevers on their mind</font color=red>
November 5, 2003 3:37:10 AM

If you claim to be able see the difference between 300 and 400 FPS, you should go see your doctor about your abnormal eyes. :wink:

Anyway Nvidia card always has the upperhand in OpenGL games due their better driver "support". However to claim GF3 outperform a 9600pro is absurd!!! So something isnt right in your setup...

PS. you got a monitor that support 200hz refresh rate???
November 5, 2003 3:43:56 AM

Quote:

something isnt right in your setup...

defintely, since my firend used to play tribes 2 with a geforce 2 mx with adequate fps....
a b U Graphics card
November 5, 2003 3:54:10 AM

You're retarded if you think 20 or 30 FPS loss will matter at 400FPS. You know your screen doesn't even flicker that fast.

Of course the 9600 Pro is more expensive, it's a far better card in things where you NEED performance gains, like DirectX. Any modern card can play Q3 faster than your screen can display it.

All your arguments are useless and pointless, it's like saying a ferrari is better than a porche on a heavily patrolled, speed restricted highway, because it has a higher speed. But worse because the card is only faster on city streets (Q3 engine), it can't even run at highway speeds (DX9).

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>
a b U Graphics card
November 5, 2003 6:27:43 AM

If you are basing any of your statement on the buyer's guide then you're simply way off base. Current reality is much different than that questionable 'guide'.

Take a look at a more recent review like this one from digit life (with DETAILED Q3 and SS-SE benchmarks);

<A HREF="http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/radeon/connect3d-2...." target="_new">http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/radeon/connect3d-2....;/A>


The R9600PRO performs much better than the FXs below the FX5800.

Also if you are looking for raw framerates, then go with the GF4, it even beats the FX5600U in old games like Q3.

You can try to paint ATI's OpenGL with whatever brush you want, but so far I haven't seen any real support for it.

nV's Quadros have GREAT support, but their gaming cards are hardly the top of the pack all the time.

And wait for future OGL games like D ]|[ , I'm sure you'll see a big change in nV's performance there.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com" target="_new"><font color=green>RED</font color=green> <font color=red>GREEN</font color=red></A> GA to SK :evil: 
November 5, 2003 12:49:43 PM

Let me clarifiy, I never said anything about 300 to 400 FPS my current rig would never reach those insane heights, and secondly who said I have a pro, its 9600non pro built by ATI 128 meg card. In my setup athlon 1.oghz 512 pc133ram asus a7v and 9600 non pro, I am getting framerates as low as 11 FPS in 28 man servers, my geforce 3ti500 never dipped below 30 and my friends ti4200 that i used in my last match was good for 40 and up the entire match. 20 FPS obviously doesnt make any difference when your running games well over 100FPS but the difference between 30 and 11 is drastic. 11 fps is damn near unplayable at a competitive level. I have no aa of af on 1024*768*32 and some of the graphic details on medium most on high. those settings are exactly what i have been using all along and my radeon doesnt handle it well at all. The card is pretty nice at times but for certain games its a drawback.

<A HREF="http://www.freewebs.com/triumph_mod" target="_new">The Game Club</A> <font color=red>is a hangout for gamers who play multiple titles and want a lenient community to discuss whatevers on their mind</font color=red>
a b U Graphics card
November 5, 2003 3:48:38 PM

Well the non-pro is hampered, but it has less to do with the OGL on ATI cards than it does with the lower clocks of the R9600. However if you look at the Benchies, it's still hanging in there with the FX5600 non-u, but not stellar losing most times, (but still beating the FX5200), unlike was suggested, and the clocks on the memory in THAT case favour the FX5600 by 75mhz.

Like I said the older architecture GF4ti rocks the DX7/8 level games (even if they are OGL), and the GF3ti wasn't a mid-range card like the R9600np/p it was pretty much near the top of the line. The R9600np is at the bottom of the midrange line, and does bridge the FX5200/5600 gap.

The main thing is that the R9600non-pro is not a killer card, even the R9600P has it's limitations, and really one of the major ones is older games. The pinnacle of the old title is the GF4ti, and it can be had for very cheap which is good for everyone who just plays those games as a GXFX5900 would show no appreciable diff. For people focusing on the latest and future titles the newer cards from both nV and ATI are the wiser choice.

I would've said there WAS an issue with OGL and ATI cards before, but now it just doesn't seem to be the gap everyone said it was, and even then it was one of those 350fps vs 325fps things. Nowadays there's really no substntial gap in current titles, and the future titles may show a shift in that position.

Once again, that's just my view of the situation.


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com" target="_new"><font color=green>RED</font color=green> <font color=red>GREEN</font color=red></A> GA to SK :evil: 
November 5, 2003 5:06:28 PM

I shouldve researched it further, but at the time i needed a card and didnt feel like waiting to have one shipped to me, so i got it at comp usa and they of course didnt even have any 4ti's at all. I also assumed that a newer card with twice as much ram would perform as well as my ti500. but i was wrong and hasty and now i need to either buy another card or get a whole new mobo/ram/cpu setup.

<A HREF="http://www.freewebs.com/triumph_mod" target="_new">The Game Club</A> <font color=red>is a hangout for gamers who play multiple titles and want a lenient community to discuss whatevers on their mind</font color=red>
!