Radeon 9200? Whats the differance in a SE model?

TexTex Dallas/Ft. Worth
edited November 2003 in Hardware
Was looking to scarf one on ebay and the SE's with 128mb are really cheap on ebay to buy and not even bid.

I really don't game or anything. I mean my old radeon 7000 works fine for everything I do ok but there isnt that much differance on ebay between a 7000 and 9200 so I figured why not go for the big boy.

Was wondering if there is any major differance in the se model of the 9200 as they are cheaper.

tex

Comments

  • LadypcerLadypcer usa
    edited November 2003
    From ATI-

    http://mirror.ati.com/products/radeon9200/radeon9200/compare.html
  • TexTex Dallas/Ft. Worth
    edited November 2003
    Thanks ladypcer. It may be worth the extra 10 bucks for the non se model.

    I can't believe how cheap they are now on ebay

    Tex
  • mmonninmmonnin Centreville, VA
    edited November 2003
    I was benching with someone that had a 9200 SE and my 8500 LE killed it. OCs higher and has higher clocks at default. IT was like at 200 core and 175 stock. He put in mine and like doubled his 3dmark2001 score.

    Its a cheap 9200. Its like an MX of the GeForce 2 and GeForce 4 cards. I wouldnt get it if you wanted to game at all. For an average user that browses and checks their email it would be fine.
  • MissilemanMissileman Orlando, Florida Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    Hey Tex,

    The 9200 non SE is a better card, but don't you think it's time you moved up with us big boys and went with a 9800Pro.

    Even your 2D desktop will be much faster :)

    I can't even see my windows open and close anymore. They just exist as if they were always there.

    Come on - you're rollin in the green (unless it's 20's)
  • karatekidkaratekid Ogdensburg, NY
    edited November 2003
    Actually, your video card will not have much to do with the speed of your desktop. Your card can effect the resolutions, refresh rates, and image quality of the desktop. The actual speed of the desktop (i.e. windows opening) should depend more on your CPU and RAM, as well as software (drivers).
  • MissilemanMissileman Orlando, Florida Icrontian
    edited November 2003
    First off, this post was all in fun. A little ribbing between Tex and I.

    What I'm about to say is not meant to criticize, but one of my pet peeves is people who put out bad information. I realize you are just repeating what you heard over and over on the internet. Your statements have become the accepted answer and are subjectively correct, but technically incorrect.

    The speed of the card DOES have an effect on the desktop. Why you may ask ? Faster more powerful cards have faster more powerful RAMDACs. These little fellas convert the signal coming from image memory to analog screen output. RAM, GPU, and CPU power went past screen capability a long time ago. Having all that graphics power does you no good if you can't get the image to the screen in a timely manner thus the faster more powerful RAMDACs. Everything going to the analog monitor goes through these guys. 2D and 3D. It is also why most high end cards list their RAMDAC speed in their technical specs. The RAMDAC output also affects the color and saturation level of the image. Cleaner signal equals crisper more pure color on the screen. Compare an ATI to Nvidia side by side sometime. ATI is far and above Nvidia in this department.

    In the old days (10 years or so ago) the benchmarks used to measure the speed at which windows used to open and close as part of the video system analysis. A good system could open a window in a quarter of a second then :). RAMDACs were running in kilohertz then and not the megahertz of today. The human eye doesn't even update fast enough to see the windows open and close on an ATI 9800 Pro with a 400Mhz RAMDAC, but you can see a window open on a 40Mhz RAMDAC and it would be painfully slow on the old 500Khz ones.
  • TexTex Dallas/Ft. Worth
    edited November 2003
    I have a real nice hitachi 20 inch monitor on a kvm and tell a very slight differance in the crispness and color when swicthing from one machine that has a 5 dollor pci video card I got at the fleemarket and a geforce4 but really almost nothing in speed really as to far as how fast my normal destop displays or moved window to window etc. I run at 1024x76 and the color quailty is 32bit. The refrsh rate is just stock for the cards to so I may not be tweaking it all out etc.... But for just normal desktop stuff I really am not seeing or feeling a speed differance. I don't game or do any cool image stuff in photoshop or anything but for me there is no way in hell I can justify a expensive video card like you gamer boys use. As I say as far as speed in my systems and I have three dual cpu box's in the rack right now... I see almost no life spped differance between the old pci cards even either. But The image is crisper with the newer g4. But really no differant then the radeon agp 7000 with 64mb I got for 20 bucks at the flea market brand new either. Thats why its hard for me to cough up big bucks for a video card based on what I do here, I cfan't believe a normal user that does not game or do some type of serious imaging work with movies or photoshop etc can see or feel a differance in a $25 64mb radeon 7000 and a $400 Radeon 9800 with 256mb ram for example. Not in how fast you move around the desktop. A faster disk or cpu or more ram I think would help more then a $400 video card but.... thats based on me and my usage not yours.

    I just figured for an extra 20 bucks I would try a 9000 ro 3200 series with more ram just for resale value really. For 45 to 50 bucks its OK. If it was $100 I would walk away.

    Tex
  • mmonninmmonnin Centreville, VA
    edited November 2003
    Yeah I still got an 8500LE in my main machine that I build over a year ago. By Christmas I should have almost a whole new computer except the case and video card.

    Next card I will get will have 32-bit floating point from ATI. NV has them in the newer cards but ATI is still at 24-bit.
Sign In or Register to comment.