Radeon 9700 pro - best graphics card ever?

[Ravens Nest]

Hey shepps, wher'd you get your 9700 from then mate? spill the beans..

[Aaron]

I wonder if you'll be able to link up two graphics cards with this new fangled PCI express thing? Imagine dual Radeon 9800 Pros... or even dual Radeon 9600 Pros for £240

[amoeba]

Surely the softmoddable 9500np is the best card?

Its as fast as a 9700, and cheaper. And can reach 9700pro speeds with a decent overclock.

Mine cost me £140 about 9 months ago, and will do 375/600 over the stock 275/550 without too much effort.

[Prodigy]

Yeh the 9500np was fantastic if you were lucky.

I got a card for about £120 that went to 390/615 with stock cooling - an amazing card. However you had to be lucky for it not to artifact and then overclocking it was a bit hit and miss.

Still think the 9700pro has offered "top of the range" performance for longer than any other card has really.

[Austin]

Yeah the 9500nonPRO was great ... IF you could get one on the 9700PCB otherwise they were awful even when o/c'ed ... just look how much 4 pipes kills the 9600 series and the 9600PRO is 400/600 stock (still behind 9500PRO) and o/c to around 500/700. Even if you got a 9500nonPRO on a 9700PCB (very unlikely) you needed 128MB in order to get 256bitDDR (20% boost) and then the most critical thing was enabling the 4 dormant pipes ... and pray that they weren't defective. Chances of enabling all 8 pipes was well below 50% even if you were lucky enough in the first place to get a 9500nonPRO based on the 9700PCB with 128MB. Rather than gamble it made much more sense to get a 9500PRO (£150) and be certain of all 8pipes and almost certain of 9700nonPRO perf by o/c'ing.

It would seem the 9800SE are within as much of a shout as the 9500nonPRO, most should be on 9800PCB so chances of modding is much higher ... but still poor IMHO.

[Jesus]

Bout that 9700np performance, could only work if you have 3.0 or 3.3 memchips, and not by Infineon!
I have 3.6 by Infineon and after a while I get artifacts at 600 ( 300x2)!Still even whitout the OC the card rules, miles ahead the 9600pro even the one with 256RAM, not to speak bout the FX!

[Austin]

Originally posted by Jesus
Bout that 9700np performance, could only work if you have 3.0 or 3.3 memchips, and not by Infineon!

Not sure what oyu mean by 'could only work'. At stock the 9700nonPRO was about 20% faster than the 9500PRO (which is a good 10%+ faster than the 9600PRO) and many got from 275/270 (275/540) to around 350/310 (350/620), faster than both the 9700PRO and 9800nonPRO. Definitely excellent cards and it is very disappointing that ATI decided to increase profit per card (eg 9600PRO, 9800SE) rather than give us something equal to the 9700nonPRO which is now pretty old. Heck if ATI had given people 9500PRO perf in the mid-range they'd have significantly increased their market share meaning profit per card would become a bigger factor. Shame about their nasty 9000-9200 though too. That's something they should learn from nVidia.

[Jesus]

What I wanted to say is if you did some OC to your 9500pro, Setting the core to 9700pro is no problem but the memory is I know it from my own experience, teh Infineon memory chips don't like OC especially the 3.6 version, I get artifacts at a relative low setting of 303-305 ( 606-610), some people hwo have Hynix memochips have achieved 312 and more whitout any trouble!
I agree taht it's a shame that Ati decided to rasie profit but its understandable isn't it? Who would buy a 9700pro card if you could simply OC your 9500pro and get a 9700pro and pay 150€ less, thats why they itroduced the 128 bit memory controler, the manufacturers equiped the late 9500pro mostly with 3.6 infineoenos. The 9500pro was unike and it will stay as such!
9800Se isn't taht a 9500pro card but with a much higher price??

[Austin]

I get it now. Of course any 3.6ns RAM is only designed to run at 278mhz (555mhz with DDR) so getting near 300/600mhz is still a nice feat.

The problem I have with ATI other than the awful naming scheme they've implimented is the fact that they could have significantly increased their market share and then any increase per unit would have counted a LOT more. You're unlikely to get too many clear chances in this industry and in many ways ATI blew it. They had clearly the best solutions for a very good while and finally got their global prices sorted. GF4TI couldn't even compete with Rad9500PRO let alone the much speedier 9700 series. nVidia delay the GF-FX and the FX5800 when it does come out is pretty dire and obviously way overclocked in order to feign the ability to compete. nVidia quickly correct their mistake releasing FX5200, FX5600 and FX5900 but ATI take a step back with the 9600PRO, it can compete with the nVidia FX5600 but not the flipchip model nVidia then bring straight out. People buy Rad9600 series and even worse the 9000-9200 and get very disappointed with ATI ... this is the time ATI should have spent impressing people not pi$$ing them off. Rad9600, Rad9000, Rad9100 and Rad9200 are slower than Rad8500 in most things ... not good for loyal ATI fans 'upgrading' from an 8500. Then ATI add 9800SE to the mix, offering perf roughly equal to the 9600PRO and still inferior to the 9500PRO let alone the now age old 9700 series. People with 9500, 9600 and 9700 series cards are unlikely to be impressed with how old ATI are trying to make their kit sound ... esp as there's no perf basis for it.

ATI got it right by getting their pricing sorted, who was going to buy a Rad8500 for more than the far better GF4TI4200 ... plus although GF3 had their downsides they were as fast (or faster) than 8500 and priced far lower? Anyway getting price sorted was top priority and they did that. Next there was a serious matter to address about clock speeds (and hence card's speed). Many manu's were straying from the specs and offering cards classed as 8500 or 8500LE which were quietly clocked far lower than they should be. ATI also (largely) addressed this with the 9000-9200 but unfortunately even a low clocked 8500LE was still faster and a better buy too. Anyway price was sorted and clock speeds disparity addressed. Then came the genious, they had by far the best technology (9500 & 9700) and for quite a while too. It's from here where they went wrong. Key sectors are the value and mid-range and their decapitated 8500 cards (9000-9200) not only offered only DX8 but poor AA and slower speed compared to nVidia's FX5200. The 9600 should have been closer to 9700 but instead fell short of 9500 and allowed nVidia to slip the flipchip FX5600 in to again take the mid-range perf too ... only the high pricing saved ATI. Then ATI release the 9800SE which are a total joke, 0.15mu with 4 pipes ... 9600SE would have been more apt!

[Austin]

The cards ATI released should have offered 9500PRO and 9700nonPRO perf and would have slipped in nicely crowned the 9600 and 9600PRO ... then the 9800 could be a 9700PRO clocked closer to where it could be (this is what they call the 9800PRO). This would have been easy for them to do as the 9600PRO as we know it could have easily come at 450/600 stock enough to keep pace with the 9500PRO and yet be more profitable at the same time, this should have been the 9600. The 9600PRO should have offered 9700nonPRO perf (but again ideally cheaper to make) and could have either been a 9600PRO (as we know it now) clocked to around 500/700 or simply using 256bitDDR and 450/600 or using 8 pipes with slower clocks. This would have made their whole range desirable, trustworthy etc etc instead of the mess we have now.

Bottom line ATI should have kept some logical perf diffs between their product coding and thought it through a little better from the off ... none of it is actually hard to do and not just when blessed with hindsight either. They could have significantly increased their market share and at the same time pleased consumers. With a bigger market share they would stand to make much more profit esp as they introduce ways of increasing per unit profit.

OO00oops, sorry about all that!

[Austin]

Originally posted by Jesus
Who would buy a 9700pro card if you could simply OC your 9500pro and get a 9700pro and pay 150€ less, thats why they itroduced the 128 bit memory controler, the manufacturers equiped the late 9500pro mostly with 3.6 infineoenos. The 9500pro was unike and it will stay as such!
9800Se isn't taht a 9500pro card but with a much higher price??

You couldn't o/c your 9500PRO to a 9700PRO, even when you unlocked the BIOS 9700nonPRO was the most you could get and the 9700nonPRO needn't worry as that could exceed 9700PRO almost all the time. Only the 9500nonPRO could become a 9700PRO but that involved a seriously HUGE amount of luck. You needed a 9500nonPRO built on 9700PCB (only done for a VERY brief time), 128MB on it (for 256bitDDR) and 4 dormant pipes which could be awoken and work perfectly (less than a 50% chance if you even found a 9500nonPRO on a 9700PCB with 128MB). So o/c'ability wan't really a huge issue for ATI in ridding itself of the 9500 series ... of course it had hoped locking the BIOS would have prevented o/c'ing in the first place esp for the 9700nonPRO (thanks Warp11). The hardest part for ATI was that the much demanded 9500PRO was hard to turn out with 8 pipes, not really profitable even though it was reduced to 128bitDDR from its inception. The only way they could use up the cards with 1+ failed pipes was in a 9500nonPRO and they were in low demand (esp after people realised they weren't as moddable as made out to be). In any case unfortunately the 9500, 9500PRO and 9700 were designed as a quick interim solution in fear of the hugely hyped GF-FX which turned out to be a delayed turkey certainly in its first incarnation.

The 9800SE comes in two flavours, type-I with 128bitDDR and type-II with 256bitDDR but both used the old 0.15mu (lower clocks with more heat) and critically just 4 pipes. Early info indicates the perf of type-I is just below 9600PRO while the type-II is just above it. The 9800SE by their very nature are not going ot be o/c'able much at all ... unless you can enable 256bitDDR in type-I or awaken 4 dormant (but working) pipes in either 9800SE. Anyway take a look at the specs...

CURRENT CARDS:
9800PRO (0.15) 380/340 256bitDDR 8pipes 21.8GB/s 3.2Gp/s
9800 . . . (0.15) 325/310 256bitDDR 8pipes 19.8GB/s 2.6Gp/s
9600PRO (0.13) 400/300 128bitDDR 4pipes 9.6GB/s 1.6Gp/s
9600 . . . (0.13) 325/200 128bitDDR 4pipes 6.4GB/s 1.3Gp/s

PREVIOUS CARDS:
9700PRO (0.15) 325/310 256bitDDR 8pipes 19.8GB/s 2.6Gp/s
9700 . . . (0.15) 275/270 256bitDDR 8pipes 17.6GB/s 2.2Gp/s
9500PRO (0.15) 275/270 128bitDDR 8pipes 8.6GB/s 2.2Gp/s
9500 . . . (0.15) 275/270 128bitDDR 4pipes 8.6GB/s 1.1Gp/s

NEW 09-2003:
9800SE_1 (0.15) 325/250 128bitDDR 4pipes 8.0GB/s 1.3Gp/s
9800SE_2 (0.15) 380/340 256bitDDR 4pipes 21.8GB/s 1.6Gp/s

[Ravens Nest]

Thank you again, you must research this stuff for hour's??
very useful information austin
So do you think the 9600 pro is the best buy for budget then?
or
Because the 9800_SE2 is 256bit will this sway the perform enough for that to be the best buy?
or one more question..
Is it best to stick with the 9600 pro as it is on 0.13 and because this helps reduce heat will this allow a nice overclock??

Looking forward to your answers..

[Austin]

Cool. I'll try to be a little breifer this time. Simple answer YES! Rad9600PRO is easily the best mid-range gfx card at the mo. 9500PRO was a little better but 9600PRO is still preferable to the FX5600ultra esp when you factor in price. As for the 9800SE_256bitDDR the 256bitDDR is what it takes these 0.15mu cards to achieve perf on par with a 9600PRO, the 9600PRO is the better card because it has a good 25% or so gains from o/c'ing whereas that 9800SE is hardly going to go anywhere. The only way you'd fancy the 9800SE is if you wanted to gamble on being able to enable all 8 pipes (they use the 9800PCB and 256bitDDR also has 9800PRO's clocks) ... you could get 9800PRO perf from it. Chances are tiny though as most 9800SE will simply be 9800PRO cards which had 1 or more faulty pipes (9800SE use 4 pipes to 9800's 8).

[Ravens Nest]

Thanks for the reply, just dont like my chances with the 9800 SE_2..

Was tempted with the 9500np but held back and bought a 9700np which i overclocked to 300 mem 300(600) core.

Well if my brother or someone else i know need's a cheap DX9 (proper) videocard i'll use your suggestions as they seem to make the most sense.

Thanks again austin

P.S. perhaps you should start reviewing for hexus, unless you already do (You seem to have the smarts for it)

[Austin]

Thank you. I'm not commited to any particular forum, I'm nothing more than anyone else browsing any of the forums I use and I think that helps people to relate to me better and perhaps trust what I say all the more, afterall I'm left in the dark to guess about future developments just like general users are. I have a very hectic family life (wife & daughter have quite severe and seperate medical needs) and do enjoy the freedom to take or leave forums as time or needs permit, it would certainly be hard to commit full time to them voluntarily as finances are hard enough as is.

The 9500nonPRO was quite a poor gamble, stock perf was pretty dire, we can see just how important 8 pipes are (vs 4 pipes) by seeing the 9500PRO (8 pipes) faster at 275/540 than the 9600PRO (4 pipes) at 400/600 ... 8 pipes is far more important to a card than 256bitDDR or 0.13mu (and the higher clocks that allows). The 9500PRO or 9700nonPRO were really the cards to get, stock perf was great but o/c'ed those things really flew, most 9700nonPRO could yield perf close to what the 9800PRO achieves now (over a year on). I suppose the lack of real progress is what I find so dis-heartening with the current range of DX9 cards (9500 and 9700 series have been axed) ... anyway 9600PRO is still a very good card and top choice. FWIW anyone looking for perf on a budget or wanting a card to tide them over should not hesitate in getting a GF4TI4200 as they're half the price of 9600PRO and FX5600ultra yet offer comparable perf outside of DX9 and AA+AF. Anyone wanting top perf would do well to wait a month or two as ATI should be releasing an 8 piped 0.13mu card very soon and that will destroy the current high end cards.

[Nick2k]

Would have to say the 9700pro did swoop everyone