How does the "eye candy" of the ATI 9800Pro compare to that of an ATI 9600XT?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jingram
  • Start date Start date
J

jingram

Hello,

How does the "eye candy" of the ATI 9800Pro compare to that of a 9600XT? I
currently have an Sapphire 9600XT and I'm actually considering the
All-in-Wonder versions of each, but wanted to get an idea of what I should
expect in terms of visual improvements from the 9800Pro.. The games I play
the most are Unreal Tournament 2004, Need for Speed Underground 2, and Doom
3 I
also expect to play Need for Speed Most Wanted when it comes out next
month.. I'd imagine that my frame rates would go up given the faster clock
speeds, but how much of a visual improvemnet if any should I expect?

Also, anyone have any major problems with the 9800Pro? I've had my 9600XT
for over a year now and I've been satisfied with it thus far. I've not
even had problems with video drivers, a major concern when I switched to an
ATI card.

Thanks for any and all input,

Jeff
 
jingram wrote:
/cut/

First of al, the 9800Pro is an old card and even if you find one for
sale it's not advisable to buy it.The best thing you could get for that
money is a nVidia 6600GT or a ATI X700Pro.
However the best bang for the buck today is the X800 or X800GT.
In any case 9800Pro would be an upgrade toy our 9600XT but I wouldn't
advise you to buy it.
 
Glitch said:
jingram wrote:
/cut/

First of al, the 9800Pro is an old card and even if you find one for sale
it's not advisable to buy it.The best thing you could get for that money
is a nVidia 6600GT or a ATI X700Pro.
However the best bang for the buck today is the X800 or X800GT.
In any case 9800Pro would be an upgrade toy our 9600XT but I wouldn't
advise you to buy it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that really answers his question. The "old" 9800 Pro's visuals look
identical to a 9600XT. They're both decent DX9 cards, but the 9600XT lags
behind in framerates and throughput. By about 30-40%. The "old" 9800 Pro is
just fine for most any new game, so long as you don't require resolutions
greater than 1024x768 with options on, it'll do fine. There's no real
performance difference to speak of between a 6600GT or X700 Pro until you go
above 1024x768 and turning on FSAA and AF. All are modern DX9 cards. None
support Pixel Shader 3.0. So getting an X700Pro thinking the visuals or eye
candy will be any different is just wrong.
 
Augustus said:
Yeah, that really answers his question. The "old" 9800 Pro's visuals look
identical to a 9600XT. They're both decent DX9 cards, but the 9600XT lags
behind in framerates and throughput. By about 30-40%. The "old" 9800 Pro
is just fine for most any new game, so long as you don't require
resolutions greater than 1024x768 with options on, it'll do fine. There's
no real performance difference to speak of between a 6600GT or X700 Pro
until you go above 1024x768 and turning on FSAA and AF. All are modern DX9
cards. None support Pixel Shader 3.0. So getting an X700Pro thinking the
visuals or eye candy will be any different is just wrong.
Click to expand...
Well put but the 6600GT does suppoer ps 3.0.

Dan
 
Thanks for actually answering my question.

Jeff

Augustus said:
Yeah, that really answers his question. The "old" 9800 Pro's visuals look
identical to a 9600XT. They're both decent DX9 cards, but the 9600XT lags
behind in framerates and throughput. By about 30-40%. The "old" 9800 Pro is
just fine for most any new game, so long as you don't require resolutions
greater than 1024x768 with options on, it'll do fine. There's no real
performance difference to speak of between a 6600GT or X700 Pro until you go
above 1024x768 and turning on FSAA and AF. All are modern DX9 cards. None
support Pixel Shader 3.0. So getting an X700Pro thinking the visuals or eye
candy will be any different is just wrong.
Click to expand...
 
Hell, I just bought an x800xl made by ATI, and have decided to return it for
a Leadtek 6800gt which has a slower core clock speed. Too many games
don't function right with it, crash or shut the computer flat_off. That's too
much money for those results. Everything ran perfectly with the old Ti4600
tho... just lower graphics.
 
I only know a bit about cards but as I've contemplated upgrading my
3-year old ti4600 (still doing pretty good w/ ut04, d3, and hl2), one
additional consideration may be power. I have a 4x/8x agp slot in my
Dell but my power supply is meager - I doubt I could adequately power
some of the newer cards. That might be a consideration for this guy
regarding his upgrade from the 9600, perhaps? Of course, that's the rub
w/ all of the Dell stuff - proprietary psu's, mobo's and such.
 
I have upgraded the power supply in my Dell. Just let the vendor know
that your purchase will be used in a Dell. Some power supplies are
wired specifially for use in a Dell computer. Otherwise an adapter
cable can be used.
 
you are joking right, the 9800 came out less than two years ago.
old, gimme a break. Old is a Stealth 2000, but not a card that is not
even made it to it's second birthday. Plenty capable.

they are both Direct X 9 cards, the 9800 is faster.
 
jingram said:
Also, anyone have any major problems with the 9800Pro?
Click to expand...

That's what I've got in a off-the-shelf Dell Dimension 8300 with a gig of memeory.

It's been aboslutely fine, with one exception. When I did the internet update from from Doom 1.0 to 1.3, everything
that should have been transparent in the game turned opaque green.

Re-installing drivers did no good. For some reason uninstalling Doom, reinstalling and reupdating fixed the problem.
 
Back
Top