ATI 9800 Pro 256 MB

[MediaMan]

Video cards continue to turn up the frame rates and pack on the onboard memory but how is this "bigger, better, faster" benefiting you and how much? ATI's 9800 PRO 256 MB edition will be stacked up against it's little brother, the 9700 PRO 128 MB edition, to reveal a few answers.

Read it here (http://www.short-media.com/review.php?r=142)

[TheLostSwede]

Great article Mediaman. However, i feel that the product is rather "old" somehow. Haven't ATI sent you a XT yet? Good comparison stuff.

[Geeky1]

MediaMan, my 9700 Pro/128 does 2048x1536 @ over 60Hz... it does at least 80 or 85, whichever is the maximum for my monitor at that resolution (I'm not in front of my desktop, so I can't check ATM).

[MediaMan]

Mackanz had this to say
However, i feel that the product is rather "old" somehow. Haven't ATI sent you a XT yet?

LOL...isn't that interesting that we all consider a product that is just making it firmly onto store shelves..."old". Product cycles are vicious aren't they?

The XT isn't in my hands but from what I read it is, like most other new products, following the golden rule of upgrades: 10%-15% faster.

The big thing is that it is no longer about flat out frame rates...it about flat out frame rates with the details cranked to the ceiling.


Geeky1 had this to say
MediaMan, my 9700 Pro/128 does 2048x1536 @ over 60Hz... it does at least 80 or 85, whichever is the maximum for my monitor at that resolution (I'm not in front of my desktop, so I can't check ATM).

Man o' man....the icons on your desktop must be really teeny weeny. :)




I'm revising the way I do benchmarks for future reviews. Normally I always benched at stock settings just the way the plug and play user would do it. Only the enthusiasts really fiddle with settings. The rest of the planet just plugs it in and begins playing games. I always felt it was a fair representation at default to what a regular user may find. I remember 3 years ago when I first started benching seeing other sites and wondering how they got those huge numbers. 99.9% of the planet doesn't set up their computer for benchmarking...they set it up, typically, at default with a few minor tweaks but most really don't fiddle to much with video card settings and such. Enthusiasts, which represent a small but powerful force, are the only ones who really fiddle between performance and looks.

Anyway...IC7-Max3 review will have new benchmarking procedures and explanations. Thanks for reading. :)

[WuGgaRoO]

this is a good article..but im a biut more cursious to see wha tthe dif would be between a 128meg 9800pro and a 256meg 9800 pro and a 5900 u

[Geeky1]

9800 Pro/128 vs. 9800 Pro/256:

VERY little difference

GFFX5900 Ultra:
See "TNT2"

:D

[SimGuy]

It's a kick-ass board! :D
Can't wait to see your take on it :)

MediaMan had this to say
Anyway...IC7-Max3 review will have new benchmarking procedures and explanations. Thanks for reading. :)

[MediaMan]

I've been benching till my eyes are crosseyed. Is it fast or not? Won't know until I stack it up against the Gigabyte 7NNXP with the AMD 3200+.

A 3.06 C HT Intel processor sits on the IC7-MAX3. I'm building it for work as the new Softimage workstation. Eventually it will have the NVIDIA Quadro 750 on it as that is what Softimiage approves. Though the the IC7-MAX3 with the 256 MB ATI 9800 PRO cut my AEFX rendering time in half. wow!

[SimGuy]

I'm surprised you aren't using an 800 MHz FSB Intel P4 HT processor...

[TheLostSwede]

MediaMan had this to say




I'm revising the way I do benchmarks for future reviews. Normally I always benched at stock settings just the way the plug and play user would do it. Only the enthusiasts really fiddle with settings. The rest of the planet just plugs it in and begins playing games. I always felt it was a fair representation at default to what a regular user may find. I remember 3 years ago when I first started benching seeing other sites and wondering how they got those huge numbers. 99.9% of the planet doesn't set up their computer for benchmarking...they set it up, typically, at default with a few minor tweaks but most really don't fiddle to much with video card settings and such. Enthusiasts, which represent a small but powerful force, are the only ones who really fiddle between performance and looks.

Anyway...IC7-Max3 review will have new benchmarking procedures and explanations. Thanks for reading. :) [/B]

Does that mean that Mediaman is starting to overclock in a serious fashion finally? Can't wait for that! :D

I didn't mean that the 9800 pro was old, hence my quotes, but as there are 200 other sites with reviews with the XT, that's why i said old. There are several members here that owns an XT. I would if i had the dough. For overclockers, XT is in another league compared to any 9800. I have already seen 610 mhz core and 500 mhz memory on those monsters.

[MediaMan]

I takes whats they give me. ATI finally reopened the doors to me.


Simguy,

It is an 800 MHz FSB HT chip.

[Nosferatu]

WuGgaRoO had this to say
this is a good article..but im a biut more cursious to see wha tthe dif would be between a 128meg 9800pro and a 256meg 9800 pro and a 5900 u

exactly my thoughts. that article, while a good read, doesn't really show you the difference that an extra 128MB on the card makes. Rather, it shows the difference between a 9700 Pro and a 9800 Pro. Like I said though, still an interesting read.

[MediaMan]

I have to be honest with you. The extra 128 MB of memory really doesn't make a difference ATI card to card except when you load it up on the extra stoopid high detail settings. While the 9800 series may have a little more horsepower (by the higher clock speed and memory speed) the extra memory doesn't have much of an influence.

I wish I had a top end NVIDIA card to put them side by side too.

[Nosferatu]

Yeah, that's what I figured. I think the only way i'd get a 256MB Radeon is if it was a 9800XT.

[SimGuy]

MediaMan had this to say
I takes whats they give me. ATI finally reopened the doors to me.


Simguy,

It is an 800 MHz FSB HT chip.

The 3.06 GHz P4 is a 533 MHz FSB chip, unless you have one of those magic Engineering Sample CPU's that let you change the multiplier :)

133 x 23 = 3060. ;)

[TheLostSwede]

SimGuy had this to say
MediaMan had this to say
I takes whats they give me. ATI finally reopened the doors to me.


Simguy,

It is an 800 MHz FSB HT chip.

The 3.06 GHz P4 is a 533 MHz FSB chip, unless you have one of those magic Engineering Sample CPU's that let you change the multiplier :)

133 x 23 = 3060. ;)

That caught my eye too and i had to doublecheck the specs @ Intel.

[MediaMan]

I've got to post in the daytime more often. That way I'm awake when I try to argue. :banghead:


3 GHz/512/800
SL6SU MALAY
L323A758
M325C316
1123

Which translates to a D1 core stepping, 3GHz speed core/ 800 MHz BUS. 512-KB L2 Cache.

Way to be MM...I was going one direction...you guys another. :)

BTW...thread's way off topic now.

[SimGuy]

Mmm..... Malaysia Week 23. :)
You got a nice OC'er there my friend. :)