Pro or Not Pro (ATI)

[pistov]

That is the questions...

What exactly are the diferences.. I have been reading all day and really cannot find anything but price being the difference...

 

[ufo_warviper]

Which Model are you talking about? As far as DX9, OpenGL support, & image quality, All Radeons 9500, 9600, 9700, 9800 are exactly the same. In those respects you won't find any differences whatsoever. What they all differ in though are basically configurations targed at different performance levels.

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!

 

[pistov]

the 9800 or 9700 I am in the market to get one.. and can't decide if the extra $$ is worht it for a pro.. so from what you say.. performance from pro or npro will be almost the same?

 

[ufo_warviper]

The non-pro cards offer a better bang for buck ration than the Pro cards for the 9700 & 9800 series.

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Here's two lists;


<A HREF="http://www.tech-report.com/etc/comparo/graphics/" target="_new">From the Tech Report (sorta the original)</A>

<A HREF="http://users.erols.com/chare/video.htm" target="_new">From someone who asked people here for advice (nice pretty complete page)</A>

That should give you a better idea. As to performance, read the reviews out there.



- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com" target="_new"><font color=green>RED</font color=green> <font color=red>GREEN</font color=red></A> GA to SK

 

[coolsquirtle]

good question

UFO can u post less cause ur gonna beat me >< pretty please? i'll give u candy?

Proud Owner the Block Heater
120% nVidia Fanboy
PROUD OWNER OF THE GEFORCE FX 5900ULTRA <-- I wish this was me
I'd get a nVidia GeForce FX 5900Ultra... if THEY WOULD CHANGE THAT #()#@ HSF

 

[ufo_warviper]

I know this is OT, but I was looking at that page of 3D chip specs, & I noticed that the TNT2 M64 had LESS MEMORY BANDWITH than the TNT2 but was clocked alot faster than the original TNT2. This leave me wondering, what the HECK were they thinking!?!?!?

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!

 

[phsstpok]

I believe all they were thinking about was money. They captilized on the TNT2's reputation and brought a cheap inferior product to the masses (mostly in the form of OEM systems).

As for the higher GPU speed of the M64, I think you will find that the M64 was announced around the same time as the Ultra, both at the end of the product cycle. By that time GPU yields were better and core speeds were up.

<b>[Addition]</b>
Forget the previous paragraph and my erroneous assumption.

The table has an error. The TNT2 M64 had a core speed of 125 Mhz as indicated in <A HREF="http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/print/creative-m64.html" target="_new">this 1999 review</A>. It's the memory speed that was 150 mhz and with a 64-bit data path you get the low bandwidth of 1.2 GB/sec

<b>56K, slow and steady does not win the race on internet!</b><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by phsstpok on 09/06/03 08:52 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[ufo_warviper]

I also forgot to add that the TNT2 M64 had less bandwith than the original TNT manufactured back in 1998.

My OS features preemptive multitasking, a fully interactive command line, & support for 640K of RAM!

 

[kinney]

Non pro. Thats what I bought.

Only diff is slightly lower clocked.

Its on ATIs website for clock comparisons.

Athlon 1700+, Epox 8RDA (NForce2), Maxtor Diamondmax Plus 9 80GB 8MB cache, 2x256mb Crucial PC2100 in Dual DDR, Geforce 3, Audigy, Z560s, MX500