• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

9600 256 ddr

C

crispy2010

Platinum Member
1.Why does my 9500 128m card have the extra power conector when the 9600 256m does not?


2.I just bought the 9600 256 was said to artifact (bought for rma), I put thermal goop between hsf and gpu and all is well (dont know why it didnt have none). Anyways card is fine on two different machines, but will not boot my lcd. With crt it works flawlesly, but no go on lcd (using analog jack). Anyone know why?



 
Did you have a 9500 Pro? If you you actually downgraded. Even if it was a 9500 you didn't get much of an upgrade if at all.
 
Na I own both cards, I am just curious. Actually the 9500 128m beets the 9600 256m by a couple hundred points in 3dmark 01!
 
it is no wonder that any 9500pro beats 9600XT , and 9600 256 mb original non Pro is only light 9600 and has extra slow memory running at 400 or 444mhz only, it is so poor card, waste of money, and Shine point(dark point) of what can this f...g numbers on cards do to non advanced users, total mishmash, grrr

256bit 9500 non pro beats your 9600 non pro 256mb(256mb is slowest version), in all Game tests by a big margin. Biggest crap from this outstanding 9600 class, is 9600SE, biggest crap that could be beaten even with Radeon 8500LE, or Radeon 9000, 9200, this is one disaster in video card marketing, and everybody knows about it, except of non big PC enthusiast 🙂

Many users thinks that 9600 radeon is better then 9500 but they are totally wrong
 
Originally posted by: Mk1980
it is no wonder any 9500pro beats 9600XT , and 9600 256 mb original non Pro, only ligt 9600, has extra slowed memory only 400 or 444mhz, it is so poor card, waste of money, and Shine point(dark point) of what can this f...g numbers on cards do to non advanced users, total mishmash, grrr

Also 256bit 9500 non pro beats your 9600 non pro 256mb(256mb is slowest version), in all tests in big style. Biggest crap from this outstanding 9600 class, is 9600SE, biggest crap that could be beaten even with Radeon 8500LE, or Radeon 9000, 9200, this is one disaster in marking of video cards, and everybody knows about it, except of non big PC enthusiast 🙂
Click to expand...

i did not understand anything in this whole paragraph.
 
I have the card (9600 256), and I like the card. It gets the job done for a very low price. If I can run hl2 on high for under $85, then it's a deal.
 
the 9600 draws less power than the 9500 because
1. its a more efficient core
2. its built on a .13 low K process opposed to the 9500 which is on a .15
 
Originally posted by: zakee00
Originally posted by: Mk1980
it is no wonder any 9500pro beats 9600XT , and 9600 256 mb original non Pro, only ligt 9600, has extra slowed memory only 400 or 444mhz, it is so poor card, waste of money, and Shine point(dark point) of what can this f...g numbers on cards do to non advanced users, total mishmash, grrr

Also 256bit 9500 non pro beats your 9600 non pro 256mb(256mb is slowest version), in all tests in big style. Biggest crap from this outstanding 9600 class, is 9600SE, biggest crap that could be beaten even with Radeon 8500LE, or Radeon 9000, 9200, this is one disaster in marking of video cards, and everybody knows about it, except of non big PC enthusiast 🙂
Click to expand...

i did not understand anything in this whole paragraph.
Click to expand...

sorry for my english, I have edited my message, I hope it`s better now 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top