ATI 9600 Radeon Pro, is it a decent card whats different to the 9800 ??

  • Thread starter Thread starter We Live For The One We Die For The One
  • Start date Start date
W

We Live For The One We Die For The One

Just like to know, i just want a DX9 card, but dont want to speed 900
bucks for it.

I'am upgrading from a Geforce 3 ti 200, how much faster and better
would the 9600 pro be ?? worth it >??

Thanks.
 
We said:
Just like to know, i just want a DX9 card, but dont want to speed 900
bucks for it.

I'am upgrading from a Geforce 3 ti 200, how much faster and better
would the 9600 pro be ?? worth it >??
Click to expand...

Considerably faster.

Considerably better.

If you want a card that is capable of doing Pixel Shader 2.0 (part of DX9
and OpenGL 1.4) well, in games such as HL2 or Doom3, then the 9600 Pro is by
far the best bang for the buck
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTE5LDI=

I expect that the non-pro might be even better bang for buck.

Ben
 
I went from a Ti-200 to a 9500 PRO and I have no regrets. I now run pretty
much all of my games at 1280x1024/1280x960 with 2xAA/8xAS and I just love
the image quality.

Once you get that AA/AS thing going, you don't want to go back to
unfiltered - it just doesn't look the same.

Terence
 
you know i have always been tempted to buy a POWERED BY, ever since my first 128 rage AIW....what is the down side? I have seen,
even within the BuiltBy, different memory times, cheaper ram than the next card, etc., Not many here talk about which exact card
they have (other than the numbers), what makes you have that opinion?
 
RamFan said:
Excellent card, look for "Built by ATI" as opposed to 2nd party cards.
Click to expand...

Why?

Almost all boards are built to the reference design. It is said that
Sapphire make ATI's cards for them, although this may not be true.

I don't have any reason to expect that my Crucial 9800 Pro falls foul of
ATIs quality.

Ben
 
Check out some of the posts over the last few weeks about lower core and
memory speeds. Also cards being identified as a "RADEON series" rather than
pro. I can't speak from personal experience, however; I'm just going from
what I've read. It does make sense that some manufacturers team the ATI
core with slower memory to save money (although I wouldn't expect Crucial to
do that).
 
We Live For The One We Die For The One said:
Just like to know, i just want a DX9 card, but dont want to speed 900
bucks for it.

I'am upgrading from a Geforce 3 ti 200, how much faster and better
would the 9600 pro be ?? worth it >??

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Check this out. Hopefully it is helpful. It is very recent.
http://tinylink.com/?xo4M5B3kI7
 
RamFan said:
Check out some of the posts over the last few weeks about lower core
and memory speeds. Also cards being identified as a "RADEON series"
rather than pro. I can't speak from personal experience, however; I'm
just going from what I've read. It does make sense that some
manufacturers team the ATI core with slower memory to save money
(although I wouldn't expect Crucial to do that).
Click to expand...

Would you expect Crucial to use Micron RAM chips?

They don't. They use Samsung :-)

Ben
 
Considerably faster.

Considerably better.

If you want a card that is capable of doing Pixel Shader 2.0 (part of DX9
and OpenGL 1.4) well, in games such as HL2 or Doom3, then the 9600 Pro is by
far the best bang for the buck
Click to expand...



No it is NOT, read my post regarding this..

No F Buffer.
 
Check out the latest on Tom's Hardware about HL2. Valve recently made a
presentation comparing the performance of Nvidia cards and ATI cards with
HL2. Having read it, I'm really glad I bought at 9800.

JK
 
Which is still irrelevant. If I could afford a 9800 I'd own one. The
original post details the fact that the individual doesn't have that
kind of money and the 9800 is still the only card in the known
universe with an F-buffer so it's a non-issue.
 
Back
Top