Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Radeon 9700Pro für alle

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Font
  • Radeon
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 19, 2002 2:09:21 PM

Oh la la, that Radeon 9700Pro sure is sexy.

I´m gonna get me some of that, I usually don´t spend that much money
on a graphicscard but when I read the review it, I kind of changed my mind.
It´s a killer.

I am going to toss up $500 or whatever the wankers in Sweden will price it and
then I am going to lock myself up for a couple of months and "re-visit" all
my old games (MOHAA, Wolfenstein etc).

It better be worth it! :wink:

<font color=blue>*</font color=blue><font color=red>**</font color=red>
<font color=white>***</font color=white>
<font color=red>***</font color=red>

More about : radeon 9700pro fuer alle

August 19, 2002 2:22:15 PM

DAYMN.... Wish I could shell out $400USD...

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
August 19, 2002 3:01:08 PM

Just looked at the resellers website and discovered that they only sell the Radeon 9700, not the Pro.

They want $550 for it, jeeze.

Hmm, maybe I better reconsider...that´s just so freaking too much dolla´.
Man I can get a fresh telly for that amount of money.
Cheapass Sweden, taxes on everything...soon the government probably will introduce PPB (Pay Per Breath). BAH!

<font color=blue>*</font color=blue><font color=red>**</font color=red>
<font color=white>***</font color=white>
<font color=red>***</font color=red>
Related resources
August 19, 2002 3:52:04 PM

Can you order overseas and just pay extra in shipping? I order from the UK because the prices and taxation means I save around 30% on the Irish price. I just wish the UK used Euro, then it would be even easier. I've got my cash ready for the 9700 Pro too - can't wait!

:eek:  Wingding - The Forum's Official Bottom Feeder :eek: 
August 19, 2002 3:56:30 PM

Well, the thing is, most US on-line stores don't offer International shipping.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
August 20, 2002 3:05:15 AM

Here's a little rant:
I am disappointed in the 3d Mark 2001 Score. In fact, very!
2000 more points is measily for this card's performance in games. It proves that 3dMark continues to have inconsistencies in card scaling.
For example the Car Chase has the R9700 TIED with Ti4600, the Point Sprite has the R9700 LOSING to the Ti4600. I'd expect this to come from ATi's drivers.
My final rant is in regards to ATi's lazinyess in using only 1 texture units per pipe, I mean seriously I thought ATi was the king of multitexturing! Now they strip the 8 pipes down by half the T per P, therefore the R9700 has a disadvantage in multitexturing, which is a Doom III essential. I still wonder how Carmack got through that problem...

--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?
August 20, 2002 3:19:26 AM

I agree Eden. I'm very pleased to see it does in fact outperform the ti4600, otherwise that would have been very bad for ATI. But it beats it by only so little. All things considered it's a bad ass card, but I don't think it will be enough come x-mas when nvidia rolls out the next round of cards. We all know that nvidia wouldn't release their new "top of the line" card without it being able to beat the strongest competition, which in this case is the 9700 PRO. With christmas only months away is $400 or even $649 on ATI's site for bragging rights worth it?

"Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one"
August 20, 2002 6:38:04 AM

Quote:
Can you order overseas and just pay extra in shipping?

I suppose I could, problem is that I am kind of catious when it comes to ordering from other countries than Sweden, not that I don´t trust them, it´s just that it feels more secure to order within Sweden if something is wrong with the product.


<font color=blue>*</font color=blue><font color=red>**</font color=red>
<font color=white>***</font color=white>
<font color=red>***</font color=red>
August 20, 2002 6:41:31 AM

So?, isn´t that a problem with 3D Mark then?, not the Radeon.
I mean, the power is in the card but it´s up to the programmers to take advantage of
it?
But yes, I agree...add a zero to that 3D Mark score and it would have been so much better :wink:


<font color=blue>*</font color=blue><font color=red>**</font color=red>
<font color=white>***</font color=white>
<font color=red>***</font color=red>
August 20, 2002 12:03:57 PM

The thing is, wasn't this what happened (IIRC) between the GF2 Ultra and the GF3 on 3D MArk 2K? It's just probably cause 3D Mark 2K1 doesn't show the full potential. Once we get 3D Mark 2K2/2K3, I'm sure you'll see a much bigger difference between the 2.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
August 20, 2002 3:34:24 PM

I was waiting for this card for a while now, (just hate using Detonator drivers and loose my easy tv/monior switching with my current card) but now that Ge-Force 4 look pretty damn good. Can't believe the price of the 9700PRO, I was thinking it will be around (most likely a little under) 500$ Canadian since the 9000PRO is 200$ to 250$ (Canadian). But I would have to call myself crazy if I even touch the damn thing for over 600$ <font color=red>(with the taxes here it would cost over 700$, Ge-Force 4 TI4600 with taxes still under 600$)</font color=red>, hell with that, getting the Ge-Force 4 unless there is a nice price drop before xmas.

Did I read right, Win98 not supported with the 9700PRO?!?!? That would be a pretty dumb move since most people still use 98SE instead of WinXP/2K/ME (I'm going back to 98se again, XP just too much of a little biatch and had enough of it for the 3-4th time).

The worst thing is that in the US the ATI cards always cheaper than up here in Canada. That's a nice kick in the face for us Canadians.

<font color=red>Got a silent setup, now I can hear myself thinking.... great silence</font color=red>
August 20, 2002 3:49:23 PM

Quote:
The worst thing is that in the US the ATI cards always cheaper than up here in Canada. That's a nice kick in the face for us Canadians.

As a fellow Canadian, I know how you feel. Especially since ATi <b><i>IS</i></b> a Canadian company. :mad: 

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
August 20, 2002 6:31:23 PM

Yup, 2000 point difference in the standard benchmark doesn't sound like much. However, if you head over to <A HREF="http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MzQw" target="_new">HardOCP.com's 9700 Pro review</A> with it's slightly more comprehensive testing results you'll see something really interesting. In 3DMark2001 SE at 1280x1024, 9700 with 4XAA + 4XAF and Ti4600 with 4XAA + <b>NO AF</b>, the 9700 Pro scores <b>8160</b> while the Ti4600 scores only <b>3475</b>. Same conditions at 1600x1200, <b>6182</b> for the 9700 Pro while only <b>2201</b> for the Ti4600. Remember, the Ti4600 has the advantage of <b>no AF</b>. (Don't ask me why the comparison was done this way).

If you ask me, 8160 at 1280x1024, 4XAA, and 4XAF is pretty impressive!

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by phsstpok on 08/20/02 02:44 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
August 20, 2002 6:49:07 PM

Yeah, at this time, the CPU has a lot to do with limiting performance in 3D mark. If you use higher settings, as phssptok showed, the Ti4600 gets totally destroyed by the R9700.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
August 20, 2002 7:35:49 PM

That's another thing I wanted to talk about. For some odd reason I wasn't also thrilled with the full AA and Aniso results. I still expected its AA and AF algorithms to be so minimal in performance drop, that you lose only 10% total, which would result in still a powerful score. Again sorry for sounding somewhat Anti-R300, but the 8160 score is not impressing me again. Granted the score difference between it and GF4 is spectacular, but I still wanted more. Again I think this is a 3Dmark deficiency and I hope ATI tries to optimize drivers. They are known not to be able to fully unleash their cards' powers so early on with their drivers.

Of course the results in some tests, such as the Nature one, were impressive, and the Parhelia Quad Vertex test was something I was bluntly impressed, those show a lot of potential in this card.
It just saddens me to see ATi destroy the multitexturing lead their cards had.

Also, I guess another reason why I am not as impressed, is because we are only seeing the clock per clock comparison. Yes on that level, it's impressive. Feels like an AthlonXP over a P4 at the same clock. However I am very disappointed in the following:
ATi selfishly omitted going for 0.13m production, therefore their card not only requires more power supplying, but it runs hot as hell, and most likely will not OC.
This also means that chances of seeing the true meaining of the R300, which is to use HIGHER speeds than just the same Ti4600 ones. It may use 19GB of bandwidth per second, but its GPU clock is only 10MHZ above Ti4600. On average it had 30-40% better per-clock performance, so now that we know this (I always like to know the per clock advantage a new card offers), why not use higher speeds! Imagine it running at 400MHZ GPU and 400MHZ memory, that would make the card nearly twice faster by NORMAL operation, and even more in AA and Aniso!

Well this ends my pessimistic look on this card. I personally love the per-clock advantage it has, I have no problems with that, I am impressed as all of you. But I think the potential in it is so much hampered by Ati. As outlined:
-Lack of better driver performance
-Using 0.15m process means that:
-High power req
-High temps means overall hotter case airflow, and might have noisy HSFs
-Expected low overclocking potential, may not even go higher than 20MHZ more in GPU/Mem
-Cannot clock much higher, and the possibility of unleashing fury with 400MHZ GPU and Mem will be wishful thinking until a process switch.
-Finally this also means the card COSTS a lot because of that. A smaller process would mean less costs
-Using 8 Pipelines each with 1 texture per clock means it's almost the same as the GF4 Ti4600 using 4 Pipes with 2 textures per clock. It is apparent in multitexturing of course, but not in single texturing. Unfortunatly if THG is right, current games have become very multitexturing dependant.

There ends my ranting, and as you can see, ATi is to blame for making this marvel, lack.

--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 08/20/02 03:40 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
August 20, 2002 7:48:15 PM

At least it wasn't another Parhelia. We should give ATI a big round of apple-sause (err ... I mean applause) just for not following in the footsteps of Malox (err ... I mean Matrox).

Bill looked down, frightened.
"I said <b>VENUS</b> fly trap."
Bill's relief was evident.
August 20, 2002 8:17:58 PM

I guess my expectations weren't as high as yours.

I don't pay much attention to the details caring more what the card might do for me. Getting all the power out of a 9700 or a Geforce4 for that matter means a large investment for me. I'm still using a Tbird at 1.33-1.5 ghz (depending on my tolerance for fan noise) on an SDRAM platform. Add to that my monitor is only practical at 1024x768. To reap significant benefits from these cards I would need a new motherboard, new CPU, new memory, new monitor, and shell out $400 for the video card. Just not worth it for someone who spends only 2%-5% of computer time playing games.

So I guess what I am saying is that I too would like to have seen the 9700 Pro perform something like 25,000 3DMarks at 1024x768. If it did maybe I'd see some benefit on my own system. For now 8300 3DMarks (default resolution) with an overclocked Radeon 8500 will have to do.

I think most people actually purchasing a 9700 Pro won't have the system limitations I have. For about the same price as a Ti4600 and being up to 3-4 times [<b>EDIT</b> make that 2-3 times not 3-4] faster at high resolution with a fair number of bells and whistles I believe ATI will be more than successful. The timing of NV30 will be a key factor of course.

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by phsstpok on 08/20/02 04:20 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
August 20, 2002 8:55:56 PM

Quote:

It just saddens me to see ATi destroy the multitexturing lead their cards had.

Actually, ATI has been moving backward for the third time in TMU units. Before ATI was just following nVidia's lead but now, the new 8 pipeline 1 TMU per pipe architecture may be Carmack's suggestion to both ATI and nVidia since both seem to be following that path.


Quote:

-Lack of better driver performance

There has been no evidence of poor driver quality or performance. The R9700 uses the same drivers as the R8500.

Quote:

-Using 0.15m process means that:
-High power req
-High temps means overall hotter case airflow, and might have noisy HSFs
-Expected low overclocking potential, may not even go higher than 20MHZ more in GPU/Mem
-Cannot clock much higher, and the possibility of unleashing fury with 400MHZ GPU and Mem will be wishful thinking until a process switch.
-Finally this also means the card COSTS a lot because of that. A smaller process would mean less costs

True, but sticking with a .15 micron process for a while longer is a competitive move. ATI's next gen card is at least 4-5 months ahead of the NV30. ATI is already working on an updated version of DDRII, but it is unclear whether it will be a .13micron process or not.

Quote:

-Using 8 Pipelines each with 1 texture per clock means it's almost the same as the GF4 Ti4600 using 4 Pipes with 2 textures per clock. It is apparent in multitexturing of course, but not in single texturing. Unfortunatly if THG is right, current games have become very multitexturing dependant.

8 pipelines with 1 TMU each will always be as fast or faster than 4 pipelines and 2 TMUs. Rumoured specs of the NV30 suggest that it will also have just 1 TMU. The future of gaming will be enhanced for this configuration assuming both nVidia and ATI are moving to that path. Remember, with the exception of John Carmack, game developers developers make games based on what's available. With Carmack, he seems to be closely tied in with the ATI/nVidia development teams.



Intelligence is not merely the wealth of knowledge but the sum of perception, wisdom, and knowledge.
August 20, 2002 10:21:53 PM

You're buying them for the rest of us to, right? ;) 

BTW, I appologize for my absence, but this is the first time I've been able to actualy get onto this site since I got back from vacation. Shame it takes a T1 to access the site.

The Boogie Knights: Saving beautiful monsters from ravoning princesses since 1983.
August 20, 2002 10:22:13 PM

You're buying them for the rest of us to, right? ;) 

BTW, I appologize for my absence, but this is the first time I've been able to actualy get onto this site since I got back from vacation. Shame it takes a T1 to access the site.

The Boogie Knights: Saving beautiful monsters from ravoning princesses since 1983.
August 20, 2002 11:26:22 PM

Hey Bront! Good to see you back. So have you checked out the R9700 reviews yet?

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
August 21, 2002 2:53:26 AM

Actually Fredi finally optimized the servers, which proves that yes you can program and make them faster, and it isn't a programming language limitation.
They are so much faster now, and rarely slow down.

--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?
August 21, 2002 3:01:07 AM

AMD_Man, just how is having 8 pipes with 1 TMU beneficial contrary to having 2? I would assume having 2 would in fact almost triple the performance in multitexturing.

Lack of better driver, I apologize for making that rather subtle. I was more inclined by the results 3dMark tests showed, and considered that these might show how ATi could improve the drivers, and therefore not only is 3dMark affected but the overall games' FPS.

I don't think 0.15m is competitive, in fact it makes people pay more, forces them to have very good power supplying accessories. It's a hassle that NV30 may not have. I think ATi is only limiting their card. Like making Superman walk instead of flying.

I know that 8 pipes still is better, given the multitexturing test results yeilded a bit more than the Ti4600, but again why stripping. And also Carmack said he wanted multitexturing, so why is he still hyped? I mean both cards can spit out 8 textures per pass, no? So where is the R300 making itself a king in Doom III? Please provide explanation man!

To phsstpok, I didn't have high expectations really. However I was sure that the speccs would yeild high performance, even if expecting from Parhelia's was in fact a full 180º that left us completly disappointed. I knew this time these speccs on white paper MEANT something. My expectations did not go insanely high, but the thing is, seeing 2000 points more, IS disappointing. I was not expecting 20000, but 16000 is a nice target.

--
Is the opportunity to earn money by working, free?
August 21, 2002 6:49:15 AM

<b>Eden:</b> Yeah, I've been waiting for 3d Mark 2002 and hoping they've come up with some nice looking games this time.

Not sure about multitexturing but I guess Carmack is a god so if he endorses something people listen no matter what the technical specs.

I'd agree with you on the .15 micron thing if it wasn't for the fact that .13 micron is hard to get to work and if ATi did it I wouldn't be able to get my greedy hands on their card so early. And also the prospect of new hardware is just so exciting! I mean, not to hype it too much but I see this card as a great next step. Each new card that's released ups the ante in terms of what the average gamer is expected to get. With this card, the GF4 Ti series will drop in price allowing it to be more accessible and as a result more people will get pixel shader capability in their systems and fast performance.

<b>AndrewT:</b> Actually I heard that the Win98 drivers were more stable than the WinXP drivers at the time of the reviews.
August 21, 2002 12:14:08 PM

Quote:
I know that 8 pipes still is better, given the multitexturing test results yeilded a bit more than the Ti4600, but again why stripping. And also Carmack said he wanted multitexturing, so why is he still hyped? I mean both cards can spit out 8 textures per pass, no? So where is the R300 making itself a king in Doom III? Please provide explanation man!

I think one of the reasons it got better results in texturing was cause it's running at 325MHz, and the Ti4600 is only at 300MHz. That could easily be the difference.

Also, I've heard about "loop-back" and such, supposedly it will be on NV30. What it is, is 8 pipes, 1 TMU, and loopback, therefore, giving you 16 textures per pass. This may have been implemented on R300, therefore giving it more filling power. I have no clue why this wouldn't have shown up in tests, but I mean if Carmack is kissing R9700's feet, I'm sure he has a reason to.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
August 21, 2002 4:13:24 PM

No sweat, I always play 1024x768-32 and it's good enough for me. Can go higher but then everything look too small, like other players during on-line gaming (like them big and easy to aim at :smile: ).

<font color=red>Got a silent setup, now I can hear myself thinking.... great silence</font color=red>
August 21, 2002 6:13:02 PM

Well, it did get over 14,000 3DMarks at the default resolution. Perhaps with the next set of drivers you'll see 16,000.

With all the enhancements the R300 is still only clocked 50 mhz faster than the R200 so I wasn't expecting an order of magnitude increase. I'll have to go along 16,000. I was probably expecting that.

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
August 22, 2002 5:19:22 AM

And didn´t the R8500 get a pretty nice performance-boost with some new set of drivers?

<font color=red>I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass, and I´m all out of bubblegum...</font color=red>
August 22, 2002 3:04:13 PM

Quote:
And didn´t the R8500 get a pretty nice performance-boost with some new set of drivers?

That's what I keep hearing but I lost performance (about 150 3DMarks) switching to the new Catalyst drivers, both 2.1 and 2.2 versions. In my case, it's the Win 9X/ME version with Windows 98SE.

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
August 22, 2002 3:40:15 PM

I don't want to dash anyone's hopes, but people talk about maturation of the drivers producing even bigger gains in the card... but I don't see that much of an improvement being made. Why? The catalyst group would have been working on this for quite some time now. The lack of glitches in programs and the time spent on this thing already suggests to me that the results we are seeing now are probably representative of about 90, maybe 95% of the maximum potential of this card. Unlike the 8500, which had rather bodgy drivers to begin with and only made a hude improvement because you were going from shoddy drivers to good drivers.

Just a little something to think about... this card has a pretty huge silver lining, but there is bound to be a little bit of cloud ;) 

-

I plugged my ram into my motherboard, but unplugged it when I smelled cooked mutton.
August 22, 2002 3:51:46 PM

I'm not so sure about mature drivers. The first Catalyst drivers 2.1 didn't even work on the 9000/Pro, so much for unified drivers.

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
August 22, 2002 4:24:09 PM

Not really, the Catalyst 2.1s are missing key libraries needed for the R300 and RV250 but the Radeon 9000 and 9700 share a large amount of code with the R8500.

Intelligence is not merely the wealth of knowledge but the sum of perception, wisdom, and knowledge.
August 22, 2002 5:31:19 PM

What I meant is that I think there is still room for maturity of drivers, especially for the new cores. Some performance gains are still possible with newer drivers.

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
August 22, 2002 5:33:48 PM

Of course.

Intelligence is not merely the wealth of knowledge but the sum of perception, wisdom, and knowledge.
August 22, 2002 7:13:20 PM

Don't forget that the increase/drop has to do with optimizing for certain applications. Some applications get hurt in the process. Also, the Catalyst 2.1's were a minor increase in graphical quality over the 1.0's, but the 2.2's decreased graphical quality again.

Don't worry though, you can't tell the difference in quality unless you take individual screenshots of each and analyze them under a microscope.

1° of separation between my monopoly and yours. That's business with .NET
August 22, 2002 7:20:34 PM

The only difference I noticed is 2.2 is a lot darker. I now have play games with my monitor at max brightness.

<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
August 22, 2002 7:33:43 PM

Go first to Anandtech, check the new R300 OCing review. THEN at the conclusion below:
<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1686&p=11" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=1686&p=11...;/A>
It proves my claim is right, ATi is limiting it. And in fact I was more than right, 0.15m is so hindering it, that only moving to 0.13m can they add back the second texture unit that was SUPPOSED to be there. Just like the Wilamette, released so early, full of potential.

--
And now, an advice from your friendly Nike shoes slogan: JUST DO HER!
August 22, 2002 7:57:02 PM

Well, I hardly think speculation by an individual, professional or not, is exactly proof but what you say is possible. It also brings up some interesting questions.

Was the 9700/Pro really supposed to be what we were expecting as the 9500?

Does there exist .13 micron GPU that has been delayed?

What are the possibilities of a near-term Dual R300 (or successor)? It seems to me that a good reason for a switch to 1 texture per pass per TMU might be because dual GPUs are in the works.

Or how about a dual RV250 to fill the 9500 gap?



<b>I have so many cookies I now have a FAT problem!</b>
August 23, 2002 3:04:04 AM

What I am afraid though, is the R9500. If usually they strip of pipelines, that means it will go to 4 Pipes and most likely stay at 1 TMU. That effectively makes it suckier than a Ti4600 and likely to be beaten in many benchs. So it doesn't look too happy towards that core.

--
And now, an advice from your friendly Nike shoes slogan: JUST DO HER!
August 23, 2002 1:51:51 PM

Yeah, I never thought about that much, but also it'd have only a 128bit DDR RAM interface, therefore cutting down its lead in the memory hungry apps, like aniso/antialiasing. Doesn't look too good for the R9500, especially since they'll probably use a lower core/RAM speed, therefore further castrating it. It may not be any better than a Ti4200, except it has DX9 support.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
August 23, 2002 8:22:53 PM

You are talking about getting faster speeds through a pure clock speed/throughput/bandwidth increase (i.e. from .15 micron to .13 micron and increase TMU's/pipelines). But instead, the R9700's speed gains are almost purely through the memory bus, Z-clear optimizations, and FSAA/anisotropic filtering optimizations. What you said about the R9500 would make perfect sense if no one used anisotropic filtering, FSAA, and resolutions higher than 1024x768. But those features are meant to be used. And I bet that when they are used with the R9500, it will perform at the same speed as the Ti4600 or perhaps if we're lucky, faster.

I would also prefer that they increase the memory speed and core speed, but that's a long ways off. Maybe it's a cheap shot by ATi, but being a person who never runs anything without anisotropic filtering and 4X FSAA, I'm symapthetic to these features.

I would worry that ATi doesn't take into account that most people who use their cards don't know how to turn on anisotropic filtering and FSAA (let alone trilinear and mip map level). But still, for people who know what those features are and how to turn them on, I see no reason not to take advantage of them and the R9500 will give us that advantage.

1° of separation between my monopoly and yours. That's business with .NET
August 24, 2002 3:16:39 AM

I am not getting what you mean, how will the R9500 give us that, if it will be seriously castrated? (remember it having most likely 4 pipes and a TMU per pipe)

--
And now, an advice from your friendly Nike shoes slogan: JUST DO HER!
August 24, 2002 1:32:41 PM

NoNoNoNo phsstpok.... Please, no more confusion. (Although speculation might be interesting).

<font color=red>I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass, and I´m all out of bubblegum...</font color=red>
August 24, 2002 7:56:36 PM

The depth optimizations will still be there and so will the high speed anisotropic filtering/FSAA. My guess is that when the Ti4600 and the R9500 are both benched using 1280x1024 with 4X FSAA and full anisotropic filtering, the R9500 will come out on top because of these optimizations.

1° of separation between my monopoly and yours. That's business with .NET
August 24, 2002 9:44:43 PM

It seems to me, that people are missing the point about the 9700 pro. ATI could probably easily do better, but why would they?....They know that they will hold off Nvidia for 3 months or so, and then hit them again. They have no need to show all their cards now. I am sure that they are about keeping on top, not necessarily about giving us the best we can get when we want it. After all it's business.
But anyway, I'll buy it }:-)
August 24, 2002 9:51:58 PM

Yeah, as *Victor*(hehe) said, the R9500 will be severely limited in the texture filling category. Only if they increase the TMU to 2, they're gonna be always castrated by that. Even with the more efficient memory controllers, I don't think it'll really make up for the lack of TMUs/pipes. If it's clocked at 250/250, I think it'll be as good as the Ti4400 at best, and as low as the Ti4200.

Well, maybe depending on the game. Say the game requires more of the memory than the fill rate, then the R9500 may be a better performer than the Ti4400, but overall I think it won't be much better than a Ti4200, except for the DX9.

<i>Past mistakes may make you look stupid, but avoiding future ones will make you look smart!</i>
August 24, 2002 9:58:33 PM

The R9500 will probably cost $200 to $250 so my guess is ATI will have it outmatch whatever card is currently in that price range, which is the Ti4400 currently. ATI hasn't discontinued the R8500 yet so it's still facing up against the Ti4200. The R9000(Pro) faces the GF4MX series. The R9700 faces against the Ti4600. Logically speaking, one would imagine ATI would put the R9500 in a position just above the Ti4400.

Intelligence is not merely the wealth of knowledge but the sum of perception, wisdom, and knowledge.
August 24, 2002 10:20:32 PM

The R9500 would seriously not be that nice if pitted at 200-250$ US, against Ti4400 IMO.
Ti4200 pricing, perhaps. I just want it to have an extra TMU, since they will strip off some transistors for its process.

--
And now, an advice from your friendly Nike shoes slogan: JUST DO HER!
August 24, 2002 10:43:07 PM

Perhaps, I really don't think ATI would strip down the R9500 as much as the rumours suggest. The R9500 would be eerily similar to the R9000Pro in specs if they did.

Intelligence is not merely the wealth of knowledge but the sum of perception, wisdom, and knowledge.
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!