Radeon 9600/pro roundup @ Digit-life

They make noise, too.

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

Post Reply
Fabool
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 12:00 pm
Location: Finland

Radeon 9600/pro roundup @ Digit-life

Post by Fabool » Sun Jul 20, 2003 12:36 pm

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/radeon/r9600-2.html

A small roundup of some new Radeon 9600/pro cards from Gigabyte, Hercules and Sapphire.

The most interesting card for us is of course the passively cooled Sapphire 9600pro ultimate edition.
Seems like it offers very nice performance for it's price and seems to overclock quite nicely too, plus it looks quite good with that black PCB :)

It should be in stores by the end of this month if it isn't already.
The noise is.. just a figment of my imagination.

al bundy
Posts: 667
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 5:38 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Post by al bundy » Mon Jul 21, 2003 2:55 pm

Thanks! Interesting read.

8)

Boomerang Rapido
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 11:03 am
Location: Denmark

Post by Boomerang Rapido » Tue Jul 22, 2003 12:09 am

Interresting. The passively cooled Sapphire card looks very good. And at less than 170$, it might just be the thing. It says that with this card, your case temperature must not exceed 60 degrees (celcius I assume). But come on... if the temperature inside your case is that high I'd say you have much bigger worries than what graphics card to get next!

So how would the 9600 perform compared to a GF4 ti4200? That's what I have now.

Wedge
Posts: 1356
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 10:59 pm
Location: NorthEast Arkansas, USA

Post by Wedge » Tue Jul 22, 2003 12:45 am

How does it compare to the 9500 pro?
The Quake III Machine
C2D e6750 @ Gigabyte GA-P45T-ES3G | 8GB GSkill | Venemous X | Asus 560Ti | Corsair 520HX | 750GB Seagate | Antec 300 | Thanks SPCR

Boomerang Rapido
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2003 11:03 am
Location: Denmark

Post by Boomerang Rapido » Tue Jul 22, 2003 1:34 am

Just a quick search and I found this test. It's in german though, and I didn't read into it. I just like looking at the colored charts ;)

But it seems the 9600pro is on par with the 9500pro (in some cases actually a little slower). But it apparently is a nice bit faster than the ti4200, which is what I'm interrested in.

So now I just gotta wait till it hits the shelves, and hope my brother will take my GF off my hands.

Anybody got a link to other similar round-up tests, please post them.

Wedge
Posts: 1356
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 10:59 pm
Location: NorthEast Arkansas, USA

Post by Wedge » Tue Jul 22, 2003 8:30 am

Wow, viewing the graphs, to me it looks as if the 9500 pro is the stronger card, compared to the 9600 pro.
The Quake III Machine
C2D e6750 @ Gigabyte GA-P45T-ES3G | 8GB GSkill | Venemous X | Asus 560Ti | Corsair 520HX | 750GB Seagate | Antec 300 | Thanks SPCR

karmasalad
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 11:18 am
Location: New York City, USA
Contact:

Post by karmasalad » Tue Jul 22, 2003 8:41 am

Wedge wrote:Wow, viewing the graphs, to me it looks as if the 9500 pro is the stronger card, compared to the 9600 pro.
Yeah, the 9500 is a more powerful card than the 9600. I'm not a video guru and I'm too lazy to go look up the exact info, but if memory serves, this is because the 9500 has 8 pixel pipelines while the 9600 has had that halved to just 4.

A true video junkie will come along and clarify any errors in my statement. :)

Keel
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2003 9:45 pm
Location: NJ, USA
Contact:

Post by Keel » Tue Jul 22, 2003 8:44 am

The 9600pro is bunches slower than the 9500pro b/c it's pipelines have been clipped in half. I believe at normal settings a ti-4200 will come out slightly ahead of the 9600pro but when you crank up the AA/AF, the 9600pro kills the ti-4200.

Riffer
Posts: 517
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 4:14 pm
Location: Toronto, Canada

Post by Riffer » Tue Jul 22, 2003 8:46 am

I would like to see an All in Wonder 9600.

AIW 9800 is too expensive for non-gamers, and the 9000 is crippled old-tech.

Rusty075
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 4000
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Contact:

Post by Rusty075 » Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:58 am

Ati just announced big discounts on the old 9000 AIW's. That probably means they're clearing the warehouses to make room for a new "value" AIW card. I'll bet we'll see 9600 all-in-wonders in 3 months.
[size=75][b]Senior Contributing Writer, SPCR[/b][/size]

Gandalf
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 9:04 am
Location: Belgium

Post by Gandalf » Fri Jul 25, 2003 8:26 am

Could anyone explain to me why the 9500pro is faster AND cheaper than the 9600pro? What on earth is the reason for the 9600's existance if it's predesessor(sp?) is faster? :?

sgtpokey
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 301
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 11:29 pm
Location: Dublin, CA / Liverpool UK

Post by sgtpokey » Fri Jul 25, 2003 8:37 am

Here's a review and pictures of both passives: 9600 and 9800 ultimates. Note the 9800 uses the ZM80C model, the one that can have a fan bolted on top and the heatsink support struts.

Gandalf, yes the 9500pro IS cheaper and slightly faster but it is being phased out. The 9500 series was a cut down 9700 board, which meant a) the 9700 board was pricey to manufacturer for ATI and thus the 9500's profit margins were smallish and b) overclockers were eating into 9700 sales by buying 9500's and attempting to overclock/tweak them to 9700 levels. On the heat/noise side though, the 9600's are definite improvements over the 9500's.

http://www.gotapex.com/reviews.php?rev= ... index.html

Gandalf
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 9:04 am
Location: Belgium

Post by Gandalf » Fri Jul 25, 2003 8:47 am

I see.
I think I'll buy a 9500pro then. I'll get rid of the noise and heat without too much effort I think.
Unless of course the 9600 consumes a lot less power .. but I doubt it.

Fabool
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 12:00 pm
Location: Finland

Post by Fabool » Fri Jul 25, 2003 9:18 am

Actually a 9600pro does produce less heat and consume less power. It's built on 0.13 microns while the 9500/9700/9800 are built on 0.15 microns. 9600-series also doesn't require external power like the other cards do.

http://www.hothardware.com/hh_files/S&V ... _eds.shtml

You can see a comparison of the 9800pro and 9600pro (0.15 vs. 0.13) there, although comparing temperatures of two different level cards isn't exactly accurate, but anyway..
The noise is.. just a figment of my imagination.

Wedge
Posts: 1356
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 10:59 pm
Location: NorthEast Arkansas, USA

Post by Wedge » Fri Jul 25, 2003 9:32 am

sgtpokey wrote: Gandalf, yes the 9500pro IS cheaper and slightly faster but it is being phased out.
I don't think it's slightly faster...I think it is quite a bit faster just judging the graphs. If you notice, it's pretty much on par with the GF4 Ti4600 in all benchmarks and it absolutely beats the crap out of it when you turn on AA and AF. Matter of fact, the 9500 stays just behind the 9700 in most of those benchmarks. When the higher quality settings are turned on, the 9500 is better than all other cards except the 9700, 9800 and the most high end FX cards by nvidia.

For the price, it's a hell of a card (~$200 in US). The only reason I wouldn't jump on it is a) I find an unbeleivable deal on a 9700 pro or b) the 9600 appeals more to me because of it's performance to quietness ratio (which kind of sucks because you really don't know what that ratio is until you've bought the card and tested it out yourself).
The Quake III Machine
C2D e6750 @ Gigabyte GA-P45T-ES3G | 8GB GSkill | Venemous X | Asus 560Ti | Corsair 520HX | 750GB Seagate | Antec 300 | Thanks SPCR

Jan Kivar
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 4:37 am
Location: Finland

Post by Jan Kivar » Fri Jul 25, 2003 9:34 am

I'd go for 9700 non-Pro, if they are still available.

Jan
[size=75]E6600 (2GHz@1,163V, 3GHz@1,237V), Ninja rev. B, AB9 Pro, 4x1 GB Corsair (CM2X1024-6400), MSI 7600GS, Samsung HD501LJ/HD401LJ/SP2504C, Plextor PX760SA, Seasonic S12-430, Nexus Fans, Antec Solo, ViewSonic VP201b[/size]

sgtpokey
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 301
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 11:29 pm
Location: Dublin, CA / Liverpool UK

Post by sgtpokey » Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:27 am


I don't think it's slightly faster...I think it is quite a bit faster just judging the graphs
True. Pretend I didn't say slightly :)

Gandalf
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 9:04 am
Location: Belgium

Post by Gandalf » Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:37 am

I've spent a few hours looking for the 9500pro power consumption now but I've been unable to find anything.
I'm not sure whether it has an extra power connector though .. I don't think it does. If it does it's so small I can't see it on the pictures :?.

lenny
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 1642
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 10:50 am
Location: Somewhere out there

Post by lenny » Fri Jul 25, 2003 11:54 am

Gandalf wrote:I've spent a few hours looking for the 9500pro power consumption now but I've been unable to find anything.
I'm not sure whether it has an extra power connector though .. I don't think it does. If it does it's so small I can't see it on the pictures :?.
Picture from Viper's Lair (first hit I got from google)

Image

The power connector is the 4 pin connector at the top of the card, slightly to the left of center. Looks like the same power connector for floppy drives.

Image

Picture from Tech Report, showing close-up of the memory and power connector.

I'm not able to find power consumption for 9500Pro vs. 9600Pro either.

BTW many sites reported good overclocking results with the 9600Pro. Might be something to consider.

jsturnham
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:08 pm
Location: Victoria, BC

Post by jsturnham » Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:11 pm

Here's a link to 9600 pro overclocking results:
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NDY0LDE=

It approaches 9700 pro levels! However, keep in mind that ATi probably sent a sweet-ass card to hardocp to review, knowing what they'd do to it (ie OC) but impressive none the less.

Rusty075
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 4000
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Contact:

Post by Rusty075 » Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:15 pm

Yes, it is a floppy power connector. (I've got a 9500 in my system right now) As far as I know Ati has never released power consumption figures for its cards. (Neither does Nvidia for that matter)

I suppose someone with a clamp-on anmeter could figure it out though, just combine the measurements from the power connector with the max voltage possible though the AGP.

Also realise that the lower power consumption (and thus heat production) of the .13 process is counteracted by the increase in clock speeds. I consider the fact that Ati mounts what looks like the same HSF combo on each as a sign that the heat output is pretty close to identical
[size=75][b]Senior Contributing Writer, SPCR[/b][/size]

Rusty075
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 4000
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Contact:

Post by Rusty075 » Fri Jul 25, 2003 1:42 pm

As an interesting side note, my mildly overclocked, HP-80A cooled, 9500 non-Pro (with cracked drivers) outscores the 9500Pro and the 9600Pro in every 3DMark test that [H]OCP posted.

Here's a breakdown of the [H]OCP 9500Pro, 9600Pro, 9600Pro OC'd to 567/358, and my 9500 non-Pro (OC'd to 300/290)

The percents in ( ) are the difference between my card and the [H] card's test results.

3Dmark03 Tests:

Game Test 2:
9500Pro (277/270): 21.0 ( 40 %)
9600Pro (400/300): 20.1 ( 47 %)
9600Pro (567/358): 26.7 ( 10 %)

My 9500 (300/290, cracked drivers): 29.5



Game Test 4:
9500Pro (277/270): 22.9 ( 13 %)
9600Pro (400/300): 19.4 ( 34%)
9600Pro (567/358): 26.8 ( -3%)

My 9500 (300/290, cracked drivers): 25.9



Vertex Shader:
9500Pro (277/270): 13.1 ( 6%)
9600Pro (400/300): 10.4 ( 34%)
9600Pro (567/358): 14.7 ( -6%)

My 9500 (300/290, cracked drivers): 13.9



Pixel Shader 2.0:
9500Pro (277/270): 32.6 ( 29%)
9600Pro (400/300): 28.1 ( 49%)
9600Pro (567/358): 36.3 ( 16 %)

My 9500 (300/290, cracked drivers): 42.0



Fill Rate, Single Texture:
9500Pro (277/270): 802.3 ( 77%)
9600Pro (400/300): 901.6 ( 57%)
9600Pro (567/358): 1106 ( 28%)

My 9500 (300/290, cracked drivers): 1416.5



Fill Rate, Multi Texture:
9500Pro (277/270): 1781.4 ( 19%)
9600Pro (400/300): 1541.8 ( 38%)
9600Pro (567/358): 2127.3 ( -1%)

My 9500 (300/290, cracked drivers): 2123.7


Not bad for a 6 month old silent card that I paid less than $150 for. :lol:
[size=75][b]Senior Contributing Writer, SPCR[/b][/size]

Gandalf
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2002 9:04 am
Location: Belgium

Post by Gandalf » Fri Jul 25, 2003 1:47 pm

I wonder whether the 9500pro can reach that performance with those drivers ..

Rusty075
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 4000
Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:26 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Contact:

Post by Rusty075 » Fri Jul 25, 2003 3:13 pm

Nope. One of the secrets is that a 9500 has the same chip as a 9700. (or a 9800 for that matter). They both have 8 pipelines and a 256bit memory interface.

On a 9500 4 of the pipelines are disabled via the PCI Device ID. But a 9500pro or a 9600's chip is fundamentally different, it only has the 4 pipelines, physically.

The crack to the drivers basically tricks the card into ignoring the fact that it's not a 9800Pro. According to Windows, my card "is" a 9800Pro. Although 9500's won't overclock to 9800Pro speeds (thanks to lower grade chips and cheaper RAM) if you correct the benchmarks mathmatically for the difference in speeds it scores exactly the same.

And all the "features" of the 9800Pro work too. Like the pixel shaders used for 3DMark03 Game 4. A 9500 shouldn't be able to run that game at all, but mine does just fine.

I don't want to take over this whole thread, there's lots of information out there on this, and there are some catches to it too. Do a google for "9500 softmod" if you want to know more. Or if you have a 9500 you can just PM me and I'll talk you through the process of unlocking it.
[size=75][b]Senior Contributing Writer, SPCR[/b][/size]

Post Reply