THG Radeon 9700 and 9500 Pro review, discuss here

[Spitfire_x86]

My complain about this article, why THG didn't include Radeon 9500 benchmarks?

What Audio Compression Technology you use for storing music? <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=25137#25137" target="_new"> Tell Here</A>

 

[flamethrower205]

Is it me, or was it that the Ti4600 wasn't that far behind? Then you look also at the min frame rates on UT2k3, and damn, wtf, the ti4600 pulls about 3x the min frame rate of a 9700!........interesting.......

What if you had admin rights to life?

 

[ltj311]

I agree. That bugged me they didn't bench the 9500.

 

[miahallen]

Hello!!! Do you guys even bother to read the feakin artical...or do you eagerly just jump to the benchmarks pages to see who's on top???

"No conclusions can be made yet about the 9500 (non-PRO), because we estimate that the loss of 4 pixel pipelines will have very negative consequences on the performance. <b>Unfortunately, a test sample of the 9500 is not available at the moment</b>."

 

[flamethrower205]

What?! There's something other than the benchmarks?? No way!!

What if you had admin rights to life?

 

[Spitfire_x86]

Actually the whole UT2003 bench produced quirky results in minimum fps. The minimum fps difference between a GF4 Ti4200 and 4400 is beleiveable. But how can GF4 Ti4600 deliver more than 2x minimum framerate comapred to Ti4400? This happens in all resolutions.

In the Radeon side, R9500 Pro, 9700, 9700 Pro all delivered same minimum fps in 1024 x 768 res. and all cards were faster than GF4 Ti4600. But in higher res. like 1280 x 1024 and 1600 x 1200, Radeons peformed dramatically worse.

Is ATI driver "buggy" or the game is "buggy"

What Audio Compression Technology you use for storing music? <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=25137#25137" target="_new"> Tell Here</A>

 

[Spitfire_x86]

THG did the same thing with Radeon 9000 Pro and Radeon 9000 review. They only benched Radeon 9000 Pro. Why? IIRC, Radeon 9000 is only clocked lower and has slower memory than Radeon 9000 Pro

What Audio Compression Technology you use for storing music? <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=25137#25137" target="_new"> Tell Here</A>

 

[eden]

Dude, the R9500PRO is dramatically different than the R9500!
It has 64MB, AND 4 pipes less!
You need a redesign to pull this!
Obviously if it's not available, forging results will completly destroy the site's integrity!

--
I guess I just see the world from a fisheye. -Eden

 

[miahallen]

Yeah! So there...

 

[ltj311]

Didn't read the article. Forgive me for seeing 9500 in the headline and assuming I'd see benchmarks.

It makes an ass out of u and me, right? Or maybe in this case, just me.

 

[eden]

We're all asses.

--
I guess I just see the world from a fisheye. -Eden

 

[lhgpoobaa]

The one thing that struck my mind when i read that article was

"Is the 9700 non-PRO the next super overclockable ti4200?"

i hope so.
100 bucks cheaper. Thats a big difference for the same features but just a little less Mhz.

<b>Cogposto tomsa, ergo sum - <i>Descartes</i>
</b>Translation:<b> I post at Toms Hardware, Therefor I am. </b>

 

[Crashman]

It would be nice if they used some 2.5ns memory on the 9700 basic, wouldn't it?

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>

 

[eden]

I feel like it could've been cheaper. I guess it's because the R9500PRO most likely won't do this much damage, for its price. What I want is the R9700 base be at 199-250$. However as THG stated, the real street price will undoubtedly be less, so I might retract my complaint once we see them hit stores.

--
I guess I just see the world from a fisheye. -Eden

 

[eden]

BTW I am still eyeing the Trident XP4, which has 700MHZ of bandwidth with a 128-bit bus, AND DX9 for 99$. Should it be competing the Ti4600, expect ATi's competition to become even stronger.
What strikes me as odd, is despite all the bandwidth stories we hear here and how it is so needed, it makes you wonder how come the R9700PRO with 19GB, 9GB more than the Ti4600 only manages 40% more IPC, while the GF3s and their bandwidth were over twice better than cards with half their bandwidth. Perhaps ATI didn't optimize much the bandwidth, I guess nVidia is still the leader in that category.

--
I guess I just see the world from a fisheye. -Eden<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Eden on 10/26/02 10:53 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[chuck232]

Well, the GF3 came out with LMA, which was I guess pretty revolutionary stuff. Now all it is is improvements upon that, and not totally new, as you can tell by the LMA2, HyperZ 2/3. It improves on the origianl, but probably won't bring as much as the original did.

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...

 

[eden]

Yeah, the LMA was a unique optimization. X-bar memory controlling obviously made a huge difference, look at the Ti200's clock speeds in core and memory and look at the GF2 Ultra's, yet the Ti200 is about 10% better at BASE DETAIL gaming!
Go into heavier DX8, and it extends. 175/200 for a Ti200 is low, I forget the Ultra's, but they were insanely high!
I heard the R300 uses Xbar, though I don't know why did they call it HyperZ again. I don't see it as being as good as nVidia's, 8GB more bandwidth PLUS Xbar, yet it's only 40% better?
Nope, in this discipline, nVidia's clearly the better one at it. However technology-wise, it's ATi, until NV30. I hope NV30's LMA is even more revolutionary.


--
I guess I just see the world from a fisheye. -Eden

 

[chuck232]

Hmph... It's gonna be called LMA3 right? If so, it can't be all that revolutionary. I mean by the sounds of it, it's just an evolutionary step from LMAII.

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...

 

[chuck232]

No, no I'm saying to implied that. I think I read that LMAIII is what it's gonna be called.

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...

 

[eden]

I never said or even infered it will be called so. I heard it was a totally different design, so it might get a new nomenclature. Hmm, what is even more zippy than LIGHT SPEED-based naming?
Cosmic Thermonuclear Speed Memory Architecture? (CTSMA)

--
I guess I just see the world from a fisheye. -Eden

 

[eden]

Oh...well I was kidding you anyway with the naming convention thingy!

--
I guess I just see the world from a fisheye. -Eden

 

[Spitfire_x86]

BTW I am still eyeing the Trident XP4, which has 700MHZ of bandwidth with a 128-bit bus, AND DX9 for 99$.

I am also waiting for Tridient XP4 cards. The XP4 T2 may be affordable for me. But how long we have to wait and who is going to make XP4 based cards?

What Audio Compression Technology you use for storing music? <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=25137#25137" target="_new"> Tell Here</A>

 

[eden]

IIRC they will be launched next month, possibly at Comdex. I might be wrong though, however Trident's website might give us an idea!

--
I guess I just see the world from a fisheye. -Eden

 

[Spitfire_x86]

But who is going to make XP4 based cards?

What Audio Compression Technology you use for storing music? <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=25137#25137" target="_new"> Tell Here</A>

 

[chuck232]

I'd say either TSMC or UMC.

...And all the King's horses and all the King's men couldn't put my computer back together again...