Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Radeon 9500 PRO or Radeon 9600 PRO

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Performance
  • Radeon
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 25, 2005 8:31:38 PM

I was wondering what would be a better buy. I can get these 2 cards for pretty much the same price. I know that the 9500 pro was taken off currency but these people still sell it. I was reading and according to the performance charts the 9500 pro performed better than the 9600 pro and stayed close to the 9600 XT. I can also get the 9550 for a bit cheaper but not sure if that would be better than getting any of the cards mentioned above. Any help would be appreciated.

More about : radeon 9500 pro radeon 9600 pro

a b U Graphics card
March 25, 2005 8:47:31 PM

:/ 
<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam..." target="_new">Recent thread</A>
:/ 
At least search a little bit...

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Rugger on 03/25/05 05:47 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
March 25, 2005 9:00:44 PM

Yeah i saw it but this is like the 2nd upgrade to my pc and i just wanna make sure i get the best i can for my hard earned money. I do apologize though.

Anyways seems like if they choose the 9500 Pro over the 9600 XT then it must be better than the 9600 pro. The GeForce 6600 GT looks very nice but its a bit over my budget :/  If you know of any good places to shop for that card it would be appreciated
Related resources
March 25, 2005 9:06:19 PM

how much are you looking to spend on the card? Some people in here can suggest something if we know how much your going to spend. Also, what kind of settings are you looking to have for playing games?
March 25, 2005 10:06:03 PM

around 100 bucks. And for the settings, they dont have to be on very high or nothing, like maybe high or medium will do.
I have a 1.0 AMD Athlon with 640 mb of ram and a 40 HDD. My current video card is what came with the pc which is like some nvidia crap card with 16 mb on it. I havent really been playing newer games but I wanna start playing Americas Army and/or Farcry or Warhammer 4k. I know my pc is nowere near a performance pc but i just wanna try to get the most out of it. My pc does run pretty smooth considering its age and that i dont have crapware installed.

I was reading that article on recommended cards and i didnt see the 9500 pro there..
a b U Graphics card
March 25, 2005 10:41:43 PM

I've tried it(FARCRY) on a Tbird 1.2GHz/KT133/256MB PC133/R9500 pro system, and it was playable, but not great. Alot of studdering that was not the video cards fault, but most likely RAM. At least you have alot more memory, and if it's DDR, it would probably help too. I'd honesly not get my hopes up for farcry at med/high with a 1.0GHz Athlon. It does exceed minimum system requirements though of Athlon 1.0GHz, 64MB video card, and 256MB of ram.


<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=658042" target="_new">3DMark05</A> <A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3781954" target="_new">3DMark03</A>
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Pauldh on 03/26/05 07:30 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
a b U Graphics card
March 26, 2005 1:44:58 AM

Nice price and it's 256-bit even! Never owned a connect3d though.

But the issue remains, His Athlon 1.0GHz will still be crippling the performance.

Farcry is pretty cpu limited.
<A HREF="http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/x800_pro_athlon_xp/..." target="_new">http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/x800_pro_athlon_xp/...;/A>
<A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041221/cpu_charts-15...." target="_new">http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041221/cpu_charts-15....;/A>



<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=658042" target="_new">3DMark05</A> <A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3781954" target="_new">3DMark03</A>
March 26, 2005 3:09:57 AM

Not sure whatcha got but some of those 1.0 Ghz Athlons hit 1.5Ghz on air. You could overclock for some added performance.

<pre><font color=red>A64 3200+ Winchester
DFI Lan Party NF4 Ultra-D
1GB Corsair 4400C25PT
WD740GD, WD2000JB, WD1200JB
ATI X800XL
Dell 2405FPW</pre><p>
March 26, 2005 4:31:33 AM

Wha do you mean by a 1.0 hitting a 1.5 ?
a b U Graphics card
March 26, 2005 10:28:01 AM

I installed the new racing game Flatout on my kids TBird 1.0 GHz/ 256MB DDR/GeForce3 system last night expecting the worst,and it played fine. I was only at 640x480, but details were cranked up. That game states a minimum of a 1.5GHz cpu, but even racing 7 AI opponents the TBird handled it fine.

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=658042" target="_new">3DMark05</A> <A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3781954" target="_new">3DMark03</A>
a b U Graphics card
March 26, 2005 10:54:52 AM

He is talking about overclocking the Athlon. Instead of running it at the stock 1.0GHz, it may be possible to run it faster and as much as 1.5GHz. It isn't something to blindly jump into though, but when done properly it is a free way to squeeze more performance out of your system. Success will depend first on the motherboard and whether it even offers the bios and/or jumper settings needed to overclock, the potential of the CPU, and the memory.

I do caution you to read up on it and take it slow, but I won't steer you away from it altogether, as it can have great rewards considering it's free. But every overclocker was a beginer at some point in time.

What is the brand (Dell, Compaq, etc.)of your computer? If you could find out the make/model/revision of your motherboard (usually printed on the motherboard PCB itself), we would be able to help more as far as overclocking or potential upgrades. For instance, if it is a Via KT133 motherboard, you are about at it's maximum CPU of 1.2GHz already and you are running SDR. If it's a KT266a though, it's got DDR memory and could use a faster Athlon XP which could really bump up it's gaming performance.

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=658042" target="_new">3DMark05</A> <A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3781954" target="_new">3DMark03</A>
March 26, 2005 3:04:39 PM

Damn dude i recently heard about graphics card overclocking cause of all the research I did on them but I had never heard of processor overclocking. As far as the graphics card some1 earlier wrote that 9500 pro are good for overcloking and i think i will be interested in that, if im correct im supposed to use the ATI tool right?

By the way I own a Micron PC, here are some specs from Belarc if it helps. Oh and i run XP Home with SP2.

- Processor:
1000 megahertz AMD Athlon
32 kilobyte primary memory cache
256 kilobyte secondary memory cache

- Main Circuit Board:
Board: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. 761-686B
Bus Clock: 100 megahertz
BIOS: Award Software International, Inc. 6.00 PG 10/27/2000

Dude im really greatful for the help you given me so far. I purchased the card yesterday and it should get here in a few days.(9500 Pro)
a b U Graphics card
March 26, 2005 4:33:20 PM

What did you pay for the card? Got a link?

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>
March 26, 2005 4:41:38 PM

Actually i was gonna buy it from my friend at first but he didnt wanna sell it afterwards so I just bought it from ebay.
a b U Graphics card
March 26, 2005 8:21:36 PM

Take a look at this <A HREF="http://www.giga-byte.com/MotherBoard/Products/Products_..." target="_new">Gigabyte GA-7DX</A> and compare it to your motherboard. Right near the chipset fan is printed the Model GA-7DX. Check and see if your's says that model #. If so, there is good news and bad news, but honestly i think the good is actually great news.


OK, I hesitate to continue before you confirm the model number printed on the motherboard, but I'll give more info in case I don't get back to these forums today and tomorrow.

The bad news is it's not a great overclocking motherboard, but that doesn't mean you can't OC. It just means there are limitations. One limitation would be if Micron put DDR200 on your system, or DDR266. Reason being that motherboard can't run the memory and processor at different speeds meaning overclcoking the CPU will overclcok the ram. Anyway, too much info too soon. The Great news is it's a DDR motherboard that looks to support 266 bus Athlon XP's all the way up to XP2400+ and the near extinct XP2600+ 266 bus. Athlon XP's have gone up in price, but still what an upgrade that would be to pop a XP2000+ or higher in that system to pair with your 9500 pro!! I am sure you will need to upgrade that old 2000 bios version, but that's not a huge deal. Anyway, check your motherboard for a model #. Edit: also check for the revision number, because only rev 3.0 and higher support 266 bus cpu's.



<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=658042" target="_new">3DMark05</A> <A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3781954" target="_new">3DMark03</A>
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Pauldh on 03/27/05 11:47 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
March 29, 2005 2:49:36 AM

Hey sorry about not replying, i was out of town for a few days.

I just checked and yes I do have a GA-7DX.
You said that upgrading to an Athlon XP would be a good idea. Im not sure if I can readily upgrade my pc right now, I already spent some $ on the graphics card and i need to get a new power supply for my pc because the video card needs at least 300 watts to operate safely and my pc currently only has 250 watts. But if you know of any good deals on that plz let me know. Also about the mother board, your saying its not a very good mobo to OC? or its ok but I just can't go over its limits. Where can I check if Micron put a DDR200 or DDR266 on my system? Thanx for the help again.
a b U Graphics card
March 29, 2005 11:11:23 PM

Ok, so you know your motherboard is a GA-7DX. Now you should check and see what revision it is. That should also be printed on the motherboard PCB. Anyway, with your motherboard, knowing the revision is very important before thinking about upgrading the CPU as each revision seems to support a different maximum cpu. If it's 3.0 or above you are all set. Below 3.0, it get trickier.

You surely can hold off on a CPU upgrade, but I would still figure out the revision just so you know. Only bad thing about waiting is they stopped making the lower clocked Athlon XP's you's be looking for and they are getting harder to find new and more expensive. In waiting, you may find you'll have to buy a used cpu instead of new.

As far as your power supply goes, I would give the R9500 pro a try with your current power supply. Unless you are running loads of hard drives and optical drives, you may be fine. It may be a high quality 250W and be equal to a 300W generic. If your system isn't stable, then upgrade it. For a cheap replacement, I would look for a 300-350 watt <A HREF="http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?Submit=BROWSE..." target="_new">FSB Group (Fortron Source)</A> or Sparkle power supply, which will run you $23-$35. Keep in mind, neither would probably be enough to carry over to your next system, yet the ones that would will cost way too much for you now. You could buy a basic Fortron 300W and a XP2000+ cpu for about the price of a Fortron Blue Storm 500W power supply.

Do some research on overclocking so you know what it's all about. <A HREF="http://www.thetechzone.com/articles/overclocking/tbird1..." target="_new">Here is a link</A> to get you started. You could also try googling GA-7DX overclocking or AMD761 overclocking.

Some real basic info for you. Your current chip is a 1.0GHz (1000MHz) Athlon Thunderbird. The two things that effect the cpu operating speed are the fsb(front side bus) speed and the multiplier. In your case it is a 100MHz fsb * a 10 multiplier = 1000MHz. The two ways to overclock your cpu is to change the multiplier and/or fsb.

Now your motherboard does not have any settings to change the multiplier. So you can't unlock you cpu's multiplier with the pencil trick, and lower or raise the multiplier. Instead it is stuck at 10. So the extent of overclocking your system is raising the fsb thus increasing the cpu speed. I think your board supports fsb settings in jumps of 100, 103, 105, 110, 115, 133, and is changed via jumpers on the motherboard and not in the bios. This can make it hard to change if you are all thumbs or lack good eyesight :smile: , but at least it makes it easy to change back again if you OC too high and the system can't boot.

Another downfall here is, you can't lower the multiplier and raise the fsb to 133. So you will have to raise the fsb with a 10 multiplier. Well, a few things tie in here. First, your board can only run the memory and cpu at the same speed (in sync), so one limiting factor could be how high your memory can go. If it's PC2100 (DDR266), then this is not a problem. DDR200, it could be. Next issue with raising the fsb is that the PCI bus speed and AGP bus speed are also effected as there is no lock on your board. So for instance, at a 100 fsb and 133 fsb, the pci and agp bus are running approximately 33MHz and 66MHz as they should be. As you set the fsb to an inbetween speed, the pci bus and AGP bus get overclocked too. So lets say your cpu can do 10*115=1150MHz. Well, your pci bus speed will be 38MHz , and your AGP bus will be 77 MHz. There is a chance that a PCI card, your AGP, card, IDE controllers, etc.... that something might not like this extra boost and you won't have system stability even if your memory and cpu can handle it. If that happens, then 110 might be the highest fsb you could run.

OK, not sure how much of this makes sense, that's why it's good for you to do some research and know what you are getting into. If/when you do overclcok, you would be raising that fsb jumper one notch at a time, from 100 to 103, then 105, then 110, then 115, then 133, and testing each step inbetween to make sure the system 1)boots up, 2)can load windows, 3) can pass some stress tests like 3dmark2001se or prime95.

So your possibilities will be:
10*100=1000MHz stock
10*103=1030MHz
10*105=1050MHz
10*110=1100MHz
10*115=1150MHz (possible)
10*133=1333MHz (highly unlikely)

The limitations will be your cpu itself, your memory, and the AGP/PCI speed. Most likely we aren't talking a big overclcok for you. You could always try itand see if 1050MHz or 1100MHz is stable. But it sure is nothing compared to the performance of popping in a XP2000+ or 2400+ cpu. With a R9500 pro and 512MB+ of ram, a nice Athlon XP would give you a decent gamer capable of at least playing any game out right now.



<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=658042" target="_new">3DMark05</A> <A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3781954" target="_new">3DMark03</A>
March 31, 2005 12:49:08 AM

Ok I checked the revision and its a 2.2 If im able to find an affordable processor then I think I will do it since i've already gone this far. You mentioned a 2000 XP would be a good buy or something around 2.4 You said that they stopped making lower clocked processors, I was lucky and able to find some on ebay that their selling. The price did look strangely cheap and im thinking its either that yeah they are a bit older processors compared to the new stuff thats out OR, they are crappy processors because of the specs or something like that so please let me know what you think. I know to look for when looking at processors but they mention some stuff that i have no idea what it is or does.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=...

As you see they get a bit better and I know the price is not final but with a day left it doesn't seem to be topping out too far away from what I can spend. But you said.. anythigng below a 3.0 revision might get tricker. Lol please elaborate on that.Also plz let me know what you think of those products and if it doesn't look right then I guess i'll proceed with the overclocking of my current processor

From what you wrote I think I understand the basics. If the multiplier is stuck on 10 then all i can do is move the FSB. Actually if its jumpers it might be easier for me since, I play alot of PS2 games(got those steady gands :D ) Also you mentioned that if I do move the the FSB i might affect the PCI or AGP cards? by affect you mean it won't run or that it may damage the cards, or maybe act funky? If it could act weird, well then do you think its worth overclocking it, cause yeah its not a big overclock and if you don't think its worth it cause i could screw something up then i'll just stop now. It would be sweet though if i could get it up to a 1.3

Thanx again for all the info you given me so far.
a b U Graphics card
March 31, 2005 1:44:38 AM

The reason I say trickier for revisions under 3.0 is, because that Gigabyte isn't as clear what it supports. I see some contradictory statements in the FAQs. In one faq it states revision 2.x supprts 200/266 Athlon Thunderbirds or Duron Morgans. And in another spot is says the rev 2.3 can't support an XP1900+, but only 200MHz cpus. Now the last one may have been older and updated with a bios.


Anyway, with a revision 2.2, I can't tell you for sure what you can support. One possibility is you can use the Athlon Thunderbird 1.4GHz (266 bus) cpu, which is about like an XP1500+. Another possibility is you are limited to the 200 bus chips and a Athlon Thunderbird 1.2 GHz (200 bus) is you max. Sorry to say, but revision 2.2 was a bad thing to see as revsion 3.0 or above and you could have chosen from any 266 bus Athlon XP processor. I would email gigabyte for a definate answer as to what the highest cpu a Rev 2.2 can use. Tbird 1.2B (200 bus), TBird 1.4C(266 bus).

Honestly, the return on investment for a cpu upgrade isn't looking good once Athlon XP's are take out. A TBird 1.33 or 1.4 266 bus cpu would be good if found very cheap, but you would still have to make sure your memory is PC2100 since it must run in sync with your cpu bus on that motherboard.

I think you should game away with your new Radeon 9500 pro. If you need more cpu performance and feel comforatable overclocking, read up on it and go for it. If you find that your rev 2.2 can support a 266 bus Thunderbird 1.4Ghz and you somehow find one cheap, tha't fine. But I wouldn't put much money into this system now, but instead save for a bigger upgrade. If that memory is PC2100, a cheap mobo & athlon XP cpu upgrade would be the best performance/$$ upgrade. But alot more work involved too. It's just a shame yours wasn't a revision 3.0 mobo. :frown:

Farcry, Doom3, MOHPA, HL2, etc, you will struggle with a 1.0GHz cpu. But the Radeon 9500 pro will surely help big time in most slightly older games. I mentioned the new FLATOUT racing game because I found although it states a 1.5GHz cpu minimum, it ran just fine on a TBird 1.0GHz. get gaming and let us know how the video upgrade works out.




<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm05=658042" target="_new">3DMark05</A> <A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=3781954" target="_new">3DMark03</A>
April 1, 2005 4:25:08 AM

Hey this may be a stupid question but I'll ask it anyways. I received my video card today and it since it was from ebay it didnt come in its original ATI box, it came in a anti-static plastic and was well packaged. Outside in the UPS box it says ATI Radeon 9500 Pro 128mb AGP and thats fine cause thats what I wanted, but when i took it out and installed it( got drivers from ATI website) I wanted to make sure its a 9500 PRO, so i right clicked on desktop and went to properties and then settings. In settings under display it says "1. Default Monitor on Radeon 9500. Ok but i thought they might mean the whole 9500 series so i clicked on Advanced in the settings tab and got a whole bunch of ATI tabs. I clicked on Adapter and next to chip type it says Radeon 9500 AGP (0*4144).

Ok so that had me a bit worried. So I ran a Belarc and under display it says Radeon 9500.

Now I think they sent me the wrong video card but im thinking the "PRO" maybe doesn't show up just like that when running diagnostics tests. Maybe theres another sure way to know.
a b U Graphics card
April 1, 2005 4:53:45 AM

check the core and memory clocks

__________________________________________________
<font color=red>You're a boil on the arse of progress - don't make me squeeze you!</font color=red>
April 1, 2005 4:04:14 PM

The only stupid question is one that isn't asked. If you really did ask a stupid question then you'd either get a stupid answer or you'd get flamed by one of the forum members.

The RADEON 9500/9700 Series cards are rareties nowadays. The 9500 Series runs on 128 Bit. The 9500 Pro has the 8 pixel pipelines open. The non-Pro has 4. All 3 versions have the R300 Chipset @ 275/540, DX9 capable.

The 9700 non-Pro is similar to the 9500 Pro with one exception; it runs at 256Bit. There are versions out there of the 9700 that run 128Bit.

One way to tell is if you look at the card, the RAM layout on the Pro is L-shaped. On the non-Pro the layout is straight.

If you run say SANDRA or 3DMark05 it'll show what card you got. If you really have the Pro version, it'll show it as "Radeon 9500 Pro/9700". I know 'cause I have the 9700 non-Pro.

If you're not getting a hard-on playing HL2 or DOOM 3 or any of the new games then you didn't get the Pro. Smooth as silk.


<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/myanandtech.aspx?member=120067" target="_new">My System</A>
April 2, 2005 4:37:22 AM

Lol thanx, yeah i ran a 3DMark03 and it said it was just a 9500 so i called the people up and they said they would change it for me and they epologized for inconvenience, they were cool about it so its no big deal. Hey when i get the card im probably gonna try to overclock it, all i need for this is ATI tool and thats it right? Do I need a better fan or something like that?
April 2, 2005 5:01:58 AM

If you want to tune the card make sure you have adequate cooling. Otherwise you'll eventually burn it out.

Similar to engine tuning in cars. Take BMW for example 'cause I own one. Chip-tuning is nothing more than tweaking the engine via the control module. Other words, you shut off the rev limiter. The valve timing and fuel flow is optimized, etc. It even has a chip that tells it what octane fuel I'm pumping into it. If I use normal unleaded it'll advance or retard the cams so the engine won't detonate under acceleration. You just have to worry about adequate cooling.

Similar to <A HREF="http://content.guru3d.com/index.php?page=rivatuner&menu..." target="_new">this</A> for GPUs. I've got the Arctic Cooling VGA Silencer Rev 3.0 in mounted mine. My GPU is not tweaked at the moment.


If you're curious as to which tweaker I use, it's called Radlinker. One thing I like about it is you can tune the GPU to the specified application you're currently using. In other words, if you're using Word at the moment the GPU will revert to default or whatever you set it at for Word. If you're on say Counter-Strike and you got it all wired for speed then it'll load that setting. Here's a <A HREF="http://www28.brinkster.com/chrisww1942/" target="_new">link</A> in case you're interested. It even has screenshots of the utility.

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/myanandtech.aspx?member=120067" target="_new">My System</A>
!