ATI v ATI?

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by John, Aug 24, 2003.

  1. John

    John Guest

    I just wondered which of these cards you'd chose? Would you go for
    the older one with more Memory or the newer one with less? I couldn't
    seem to find any information about the speed of these cards on the ATI
    site. Usually they have something in Mhz that says how fast they are
    don't they? I'd just presume that the 9600 was faster than the 9200
    but had less memory?

    Sapphire ATI Radeon 9200 256MB DDR TV-Out - Retail

    or

    Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600 128MB DDR TV-Out/DVI - Retail

    I may even just go for the 9600 with 256MB, but it is a bit more
    expensive again.

    If you can tell me which you'd prefer between those anyway I'd be
    interested to know your opinion. The 9600 is just a bit more than the
    9200 with 256MB.

    Thanks

    John
     
    John, Aug 24, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. John

    Thor Guest

    9600. At 128Mb it will do more for you than the slower one at 256. 128Mb of
    dedicated graphics memory is more than enough.



    ...
    "John" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I just wondered which of these cards you'd chose? Would you go for
    > the older one with more Memory or the newer one with less? I couldn't
    > seem to find any information about the speed of these cards on the ATI
    > site. Usually they have something in Mhz that says how fast they are
    > don't they? I'd just presume that the 9600 was faster than the 9200
    > but had less memory?
    >
    > Sapphire ATI Radeon 9200 256MB DDR TV-Out - Retail
    >
    > or
    >
    > Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600 128MB DDR TV-Out/DVI - Retail
    >
    > I may even just go for the 9600 with 256MB, but it is a bit more
    > expensive again.
    >
    > If you can tell me which you'd prefer between those anyway I'd be
    > interested to know your opinion. The 9600 is just a bit more than the
    > 9200 with 256MB.
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    > John
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
    Thor, Aug 24, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. John

    mike Guest

    On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 23:48:44 +0100, John <> wrote:

    >I just wondered which of these cards you'd chose? Would you go for
    >the older one with more Memory or the newer one with less? I couldn't
    >seem to find any information about the speed of these cards on the ATI
    >site. Usually they have something in Mhz that says how fast they are
    >don't they? I'd just presume that the 9600 was faster than the 9200
    >but had less memory?
    >
    >Sapphire ATI Radeon 9200 256MB DDR TV-Out - Retail
    >
    >or
    >
    >Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600 128MB DDR TV-Out/DVI - Retail
    >
    >I may even just go for the 9600 with 256MB, but it is a bit more
    >expensive again.
    >
    >If you can tell me which you'd prefer between those anyway I'd be
    >interested to know your opinion. The 9600 is just a bit more than the
    >9200 with 256MB.
    >
    >Thanks
    >
    >John
    >


    I'd opt for a 9600 Pro 128Mb. Not sure what the price difference would
    be but, if you are dead set on one of the two you named then get the
    9600 with 128Mb. Aside from the fact that it's unlikely you will ever
    need 256Mb (within the cards useful life anyway) of video ram the 9200
    lacks the power to run a program that would use anywhere near that
    kind of graphics power.
    >
    >
    >
     
    mike, Aug 25, 2003
    #3
  4. John

    Vince Slevin Guest

    Id go with the 9600 cuz it has dvi for lcd flat screens. the extra 128mb is
    just a not very noticeable luxury.
    "John" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I just wondered which of these cards you'd chose? Would you go for
    > the older one with more Memory or the newer one with less? I couldn't
    > seem to find any information about the speed of these cards on the ATI
    > site. Usually they have something in Mhz that says how fast they are
    > don't they? I'd just presume that the 9600 was faster than the 9200
    > but had less memory?
    >
    > Sapphire ATI Radeon 9200 256MB DDR TV-Out - Retail
    >
    > or
    >
    > Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600 128MB DDR TV-Out/DVI - Retail
    >
    > I may even just go for the 9600 with 256MB, but it is a bit more
    > expensive again.
    >
    > If you can tell me which you'd prefer between those anyway I'd be
    > interested to know your opinion. The 9600 is just a bit more than the
    > 9200 with 256MB.
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    > John
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
     
    Vince Slevin, Aug 25, 2003
    #4
  5. John

    Adrian Kwa Guest

    When buying a 9600Pro do look out for the memory speed. There are some cheap
    9600Pro out ther with slower memory chips (200mhz rather than 333).

    Adrian
    "Vince Slevin" <> wrote in message
    news:Nlf2b.250716$YN5.171644@sccrnsc01...
    > Id go with the 9600 cuz it has dvi for lcd flat screens. the extra 128mb

    is
    > just a not very noticeable luxury.
    > "John" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > I just wondered which of these cards you'd chose? Would you go for
    > > the older one with more Memory or the newer one with less? I couldn't
    > > seem to find any information about the speed of these cards on the ATI
    > > site. Usually they have something in Mhz that says how fast they are
    > > don't they? I'd just presume that the 9600 was faster than the 9200
    > > but had less memory?
    > >
    > > Sapphire ATI Radeon 9200 256MB DDR TV-Out - Retail
    > >
    > > or
    > >
    > > Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600 128MB DDR TV-Out/DVI - Retail
    > >
    > > I may even just go for the 9600 with 256MB, but it is a bit more
    > > expensive again.
    > >
    > > If you can tell me which you'd prefer between those anyway I'd be
    > > interested to know your opinion. The 9600 is just a bit more than the
    > > 9200 with 256MB.
    > >
    > > Thanks
    > >
    > > John
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Adrian Kwa, Aug 25, 2003
    #5
  6. John

    mike Guest

    Those are the 9600 Pro EZ video cards. I think ATI is getting a little
    too damn happy with all these different cards.... 9600, 9600 Pro, 9600
    Pro EZ, 9600 Pro Ultra.....

    On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 04:31:40 +0100, "Adrian Kwa"
    <> wrote:

    >When buying a 9600Pro do look out for the memory speed. There are some cheap
    >9600Pro out ther with slower memory chips (200mhz rather than 333).
    >
    >Adrian
    >"Vince Slevin" <> wrote in message
    >news:Nlf2b.250716$YN5.171644@sccrnsc01...
    >> Id go with the 9600 cuz it has dvi for lcd flat screens. the extra 128mb

    >is
    >> just a not very noticeable luxury.
    >> "John" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > I just wondered which of these cards you'd chose? Would you go for
    >> > the older one with more Memory or the newer one with less? I couldn't
    >> > seem to find any information about the speed of these cards on the ATI
    >> > site. Usually they have something in Mhz that says how fast they are
    >> > don't they? I'd just presume that the 9600 was faster than the 9200
    >> > but had less memory?
    >> >
    >> > Sapphire ATI Radeon 9200 256MB DDR TV-Out - Retail
    >> >
    >> > or
    >> >
    >> > Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600 128MB DDR TV-Out/DVI - Retail
    >> >
    >> > I may even just go for the 9600 with 256MB, but it is a bit more
    >> > expensive again.
    >> >
    >> > If you can tell me which you'd prefer between those anyway I'd be
    >> > interested to know your opinion. The 9600 is just a bit more than the
    >> > 9200 with 256MB.
    >> >
    >> > Thanks
    >> >
    >> > John
    >> >
    >> >
    >> >
    >> >
    >> >

    >>
    >>

    >
     
    mike, Aug 25, 2003
    #6
  7. John

    Tim Guest

    "John Hall" <> wrote in message
    news:iFe2b.256104$...
    > Neither one. I would go for the 9800 non pro. It has the same hardware

    as
    > the pro version with all of the latest features. The only difference is a
    > slower clock speed. And it's priced about $200 less than the pro, at

    least
    > here in Canada.
    >


    I have my eye on an OEM Sapphire 9800. Just waiting for Newegg.com to drop
    the price below 200 US clams.
     
    Tim, Aug 25, 2003
    #7
  8. John

    J.Clarke Guest

    On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 23:03:14 -0700
    mike <> wrote:

    > Those are the 9600 Pro EZ video cards. I think ATI is getting a little
    > too damn happy with all these different cards.... 9600, 9600 Pro, 9600
    > Pro EZ, 9600 Pro Ultra.....


    Nope. ATI makes the 9600, 9600 Pro, and 9600 All-In-Wonder. The 9600
    Pro EZ is a PowerColor model not made by ATI, and the 9600 Pro Ultra is
    a Sapphire model, possibly made on the same line as that boards that ATI
    sells under their own brand but not an ATI brand board.

    ATI has little control over what third parties do with their chips.

    > On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 04:31:40 +0100, "Adrian Kwa"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >When buying a 9600Pro do look out for the memory speed. There are
    > >some cheap 9600Pro out ther with slower memory chips (200mhz rather
    > >than 333).
    > >
    > >Adrian
    > >"Vince Slevin" <> wrote in message
    > >news:Nlf2b.250716$YN5.171644@sccrnsc01...
    > >> Id go with the 9600 cuz it has dvi for lcd flat screens. the extra

    > >128mb is
    > >> just a not very noticeable luxury.
    > >> "John" <> wrote in message
    > >> news:...
    > >> > I just wondered which of these cards you'd chose? Would you go

    > >for> > the older one with more Memory or the newer one with less? I
    > >couldn't> > seem to find any information about the speed of these
    > >cards on the ATI> > site. Usually they have something in Mhz that
    > >says how fast they are> > don't they? I'd just presume that the 9600
    > >was faster than the 9200> > but had less memory?
    > >> >
    > >> > Sapphire ATI Radeon 9200 256MB DDR TV-Out - Retail
    > >> >
    > >> > or
    > >> >
    > >> > Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600 128MB DDR TV-Out/DVI - Retail
    > >> >
    > >> > I may even just go for the 9600 with 256MB, but it is a bit more
    > >> > expensive again.
    > >> >
    > >> > If you can tell me which you'd prefer between those anyway I'd be
    > >> > interested to know your opinion. The 9600 is just a bit more

    > >than the> > 9200 with 256MB.
    > >> >
    > >> > Thanks
    > >> >
    > >> > John
    > >> >
    > >> >
    > >> >
    > >> >
    > >> >
    > >>
    > >>

    > >

    >



    --
    --
    --John
    Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
     
    J.Clarke, Aug 25, 2003
    #8
  9. John

    John Hall Guest

    Yeah, I have one and am very happy. The nice thing is that you can turn on
    the eye candy and 4x aa and 8 x anistropic filtering, and still get decent
    frame rates.

    JK

    "Tim" <> wrote in message
    news:biced1$7p5t2$-berlin.de...
    >
    > "John Hall" <> wrote in message
    > news:iFe2b.256104$...
    > > Neither one. I would go for the 9800 non pro. It has the same hardware

    > as
    > > the pro version with all of the latest features. The only difference is

    a
    > > slower clock speed. And it's priced about $200 less than the pro, at

    > least
    > > here in Canada.
    > >

    >
    > I have my eye on an OEM Sapphire 9800. Just waiting for Newegg.com to

    drop
    > the price below 200 US clams.
    >
    >
    >
     
    John Hall, Aug 25, 2003
    #9
  10. John

    mike Guest

    On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 08:26:20 +0000, "J.Clarke" <>
    wrote:

    >On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 23:03:14 -0700
    >mike <> wrote:
    >
    >> Those are the 9600 Pro EZ video cards. I think ATI is getting a little
    >> too damn happy with all these different cards.... 9600, 9600 Pro, 9600
    >> Pro EZ, 9600 Pro Ultra.....

    >
    >Nope. ATI makes the 9600, 9600 Pro, and 9600 All-In-Wonder. The 9600
    >Pro EZ is a PowerColor model not made by ATI, and the 9600 Pro Ultra is
    >a Sapphire model, possibly made on the same line as that boards that ATI
    >sells under their own brand but not an ATI brand board.
    >
    >ATI has little control over what third parties do with their chips.
    >


    ATI does it too, they have the 9200, 9200 Pro, 9200 SE. Enough
    already. It's marketing hype and it clouds an already unclear issue.
     
    mike, Aug 26, 2003
    #10
  11. John

    Chimera Guest

    <snip>

    buyer beware
     
    Chimera, Aug 26, 2003
    #11
  12. John

    Tim Guest

    Only 49 clams to go ;-)


    "John Hall" <> wrote in message
    news:Qvv2b.267636$...
    > Yeah, I have one and am very happy. The nice thing is that you can turn

    on
    > the eye candy and 4x aa and 8 x anistropic filtering, and still get decent
    > frame rates.
    >
    > JK
    >
    > "Tim" <> wrote in message
    > news:biced1$7p5t2$-berlin.de...
    > >
    > >
    > > I have my eye on an OEM Sapphire 9800. Just waiting for Newegg.com to

    > drop
    > > the price below 200 US clams.
    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Tim, Aug 26, 2003
    #12
  13. Can someone explain ... is there a difference between frame rate and refresh
    rate?

    I know that I generally run at 75 Hz refresh rate.

    But I've seen people claiming more than 100 frame rate. I know of no
    consumer grade monitor that goes at 100 or more refresh rate. That's what
    leads me to think that frame rate is different from refresh rate.

    What say, Holmes?

    "Tim" <> wrote in message
    news:bigm9p$97qst$-berlin.de...
    > Only 49 clams to go ;-)
    >
    >
    > "John Hall" <> wrote in message
    > news:Qvv2b.267636$...
    > > Yeah, I have one and am very happy. The nice thing is that you can turn

    > on
    > > the eye candy and 4x aa and 8 x anistropic filtering, and still get

    decent
    > > frame rates.
    > >
    > > JK
    > >
    > > "Tim" <> wrote in message
    > > news:biced1$7p5t2$-berlin.de...
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > I have my eye on an OEM Sapphire 9800. Just waiting for Newegg.com to

    > > drop
    > > > the price below 200 US clams.
     
    Lester Horwinkle, Aug 27, 2003
    #13
  14. John

    Randy Guest

    I could be wrong but I think frame rate is the number of frames (clips)
    like a movie can show pre second and refresh rate is how many times your
    monitor will refresh per second or is that milliseconds. I did not do a good
    job explaining but I hope you get the idea.

    Randy

    "Lester Horwinkle" <> wrote in message
    news:A7S2b.2447$...
    > Can someone explain ... is there a difference between frame rate and

    refresh
    > rate?
    >
    > I know that I generally run at 75 Hz refresh rate.
    >
    > But I've seen people claiming more than 100 frame rate. I know of no
    > consumer grade monitor that goes at 100 or more refresh rate. That's what
    > leads me to think that frame rate is different from refresh rate.
    >
    > What say, Holmes?
    >
    > "Tim" <> wrote in message
    > news:bigm9p$97qst$-berlin.de...
    > > Only 49 clams to go ;-)
    > >
    > >
    > > "John Hall" <> wrote in message
    > > news:Qvv2b.267636$...
    > > > Yeah, I have one and am very happy. The nice thing is that you can

    turn
    > > on
    > > > the eye candy and 4x aa and 8 x anistropic filtering, and still get

    > decent
    > > > frame rates.
    > > >
    > > > JK
    > > >
    > > > "Tim" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:biced1$7p5t2$-berlin.de...
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > I have my eye on an OEM Sapphire 9800. Just waiting for Newegg.com

    to
    > > > drop
    > > > > the price below 200 US clams.

    >
    >
     
    Randy, Aug 27, 2003
    #14
  15. John

    derek / nul Guest

    refresh rate is the scan rate that can be done by the monitor

    Frame rate is the scan rate that can be done by a program (game) running on the
    computer.

    On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 19:34:06 -0400, "Lester Horwinkle"
    <> wrote:

    >Can someone explain ... is there a difference between frame rate and refresh
    >rate?
    >
    >I know that I generally run at 75 Hz refresh rate.
    >
    >But I've seen people claiming more than 100 frame rate. I know of no
    >consumer grade monitor that goes at 100 or more refresh rate. That's what
    >leads me to think that frame rate is different from refresh rate.
     
    derek / nul, Aug 27, 2003
    #15
  16. John

    Ben Pope Guest

    Lester Horwinkle wrote:
    > Can someone explain ... is there a difference between frame rate and
    > refresh rate?


    Yep.

    Refresh rate is the number of frames the display draws per second and is
    fixed (for any given video mode).

    Frame rate is the number of times the screen is rendered per second. So if
    the frame rate is half the refresh rate, every other time the display is
    drawn, it can change.

    > I know that I generally run at 75 Hz refresh rate.


    And I, 85Hz at 1600x1200, but drop the resolution to say, 800x600 and my
    refresh rate will be 120Hz.

    > But I've seen people claiming more than 100 frame rate. I know of no
    > consumer grade monitor that goes at 100 or more refresh rate. That's
    > what leads me to think that frame rate is different from refresh rate.


    Indeed.

    The screen can only change when both the display is refreshed, and the frame
    is redrawn.

    You can redraw the image as fast as you like, but there is little point in
    doing it faster than the refresh rate as the monitor has no way of
    displaying it. In fact, if you do do it faster than the refresh rate, then
    you can get a thing called tearing, where the top half of one frame is
    drawn, and the lower half of another frame is drawn within one display
    refresh - this locks horrible and is the reason I turn on "wait for verticel
    refresh" or "vertical synch". If you turn off vertical synch you can render
    as fast as you like, useful for benchmarking.

    There is plenty of point in refreshing the screen faster than the redraw, as
    the brightness of the phosphor on the monitor (if you have a CRT) decays
    over time and this is why you can see flicker. I like to stay above 80Hz
    refresh.

    Ben
    --
    I'm not just a number. To many, I'm known as a String...
     
    Ben Pope, Aug 27, 2003
    #16
  17. John

    Thor Guest

    "Lester Horwinkle" <> wrote in message
    news:A7S2b.2447$...
    > Can someone explain ... is there a difference between frame rate and

    refresh
    > rate?
    >
    > I know that I generally run at 75 Hz refresh rate.


    That is the refresh rate of the monitor. It redraws the screen 75 times per
    second, and must be synced with the video output of the card. Therefore, the
    card controls the refresh rate of it's video output stages.

    >
    > But I've seen people claiming more than 100 frame rate. I know of no
    > consumer grade monitor that goes at 100 or more refresh rate. That's what
    > leads me to think that frame rate is different from refresh rate.


    It IS different, but not totally unrelated.
    the frame rate is how many times per second that a new scene can be rendered
    by the card's graphic processor. While it may be possible for the card to
    render a new frame of data 100 times per second, the monitor can only
    display as fast as the refresh rate. They usually have to be "synced" to a
    certain degree to prevent tearing. The tearing is caused by the card
    redrawing the scene out of sync with the refresh interval of the monitor. As
    I undertstand it, when you turn on Vsync, it forces the card to wait until
    the refresh interval to render a new frame. Lastly, there are lots of
    monitors that will do 100Hz or better refresh rate.
     
    Thor, Aug 27, 2003
    #17
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Silverstrand

    HEXUS.article - ATI Catalyst Report

    Silverstrand, Jun 20, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,156
    Silverstrand
    Jun 20, 2005
  2. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    816
    unholy
    Jun 27, 2005
  3. Silverstrand

    ATI Radeon X800 XL Videocard Review

    Silverstrand, Jun 24, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    964
    Silverstrand
    Jun 24, 2005
  4. unholy

    ATi or nVidia what do you think?

    unholy, Jun 26, 2005, in forum: Hardware
    Replies:
    120
    Views:
    6,845
    bigal
    Aug 27, 2007
  5. Ben Markson

    ATI card with ATI Motherboard = Smarter?

    Ben Markson, Mar 10, 2006, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    661
    Michael-NC
    Mar 13, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page