has there been a really comprehensive benchmarking

[easty]

of geforce 2 upto the ati 9700? just wondering how much faster things of got (if possible on a modest machine NOT a p4 2.6hz 512mb rdram more like a athlon 1.2ghz 128mb) thanks

 

[Deeko]

Why not look at the reviews on the site you happen to be posting at?

 

[88637]

There is no one specific review to my knowledge which ties everything in together although you could look at a review for the 1.2 ghz tbird, look at the 640x480 speeds. Thats about as fast as youre going to get, regardless of video card and resolution since that will stress the cpu. Then you can go ahead and look at video cards. If one runs at 100 fps at 1600x1200 on a top of the line cpu and at 640x480 on the same game on your cpu it runs at 60 fps, guess where youre going to end up if you put the two together.

 

[xarar]

www.tomshardware.com has a pretty good review found here.

it does not include the 9000+ ati components. It does however use a pretty modest system, a 2000+ on a 266a mobo with 256 megs 2100 ddr ram. This is about the best you could find anywhere. The 9500 should = a 4400 according to this review and the 9700 non-pro should beat the 4600 in most cases and the 9700 pro should be 25+ - 100+ % better in most high bandwidth AA/ansio benchmarks then the 4600.

 

[warrenpeace]

Who would run a card like that on a machine with only 128mb of system ram ?

 

[AnAndAustin]

That Toms VGA Chart is a very good link, do bear in mind that for low end cards anything over 800mhz is overkill, and most mid-range cards gain nothing either once the CPU is over 1.4ghz so don't worry too much if a review is using a super fast CPU as only the higher end cards will take advantage of the faster CPU. Anyway here's some links for you:

AnAnd CPU Scaling article 1 - many games and gfx cards

AnAnd CPU Scaling 2 article 2 - many gfx cards but focusing on UT2003

Tech Report Rad9000PRO review (to see how it fairs against the other cards)

Digit Life Rad9000 (non-PRO) (p)review (Rad7500, 8500LE-64, Rad8500LE-128, GF4MX440 and GF4MX460)

AnAnd Rad9500 (p)review

 

[ctk1981]

I can give you some limited experience I had with a slower machine.

1.6Ghz Athlon XP, 768MB DDR Cas 2-2-2, stock 9700 speeds. 11,890 for a 3dmark2001 SE score. Flyby on UT2003 was 60 FPS, 35 FPS on botmatch (Im really digging in my brain for the exact numbers). Not even sure on the resolution I used for the UT2003 test. Believe that was demo version also?

I upgraded recently. 1.8A @ 2.61 Ghz, 387Mhz DDR 2-2-2-5T stock speed. 3dmark 2001 15,080. Never have bothered to redo the benchmark on UT. On capture the flag citadel, 1280x1024x32 4X AA, 8X AF, high details loaded for everything I can average 45 FPS using fraps. I really should just redo the bench to see what I really gained for sure.

As others have said, Anand did a pretty good testing of CPU scaling. Check those out also.

 

[AnAndAustin]

Ctkelly can you just clarify whether you're refering to the AthlonXP1600+ (1.4ghz) or the AthlonXP1900+ (1.6ghz). Also what are the standard clocks of the Rad9700 you have ... saying 'standard clocks' around Radeon hw is like saying 'standard mobo socket' around Intel hw LOL!

 

[ctk1981]

AnAndAustin: Uh, hey buddy.....I think 1.6Ghz means 1.6Ghz which would be the 1900+ (not trying to be smart btw, just giving ya a bad time)

Stock speed/standard speed: What the ATI 9700 is clocked as by default 325/620. Hey, maybe thats a better way to term it. Default. Sorry my bad guys, just used to car terms....stock motor...stock exhuast...ya know. Now when I go over to the car forum and say Default motor they will look at me puzzled also! Haha


And in case anyone is really wondering, I am very poor at tweaking cards/bios etc. I always seem to have a lower score, mb/sec, O/C, etc whatever you name it I never generally do as good as the norm or what other people do. The current intel setup Im on is probably my best attempt at tweaking things. My cooling kit for the 9700 should be here this week, then its time to overclock it a bit.

 

[merlocka]

Originally posted by: easty
of geforce 2 upto the ati 9700? just wondering how much faster things of got (if possible on a modest machine NOT a p4 2.6hz 512mb rdram more like a athlon 1.2ghz 128mb) thanks

Digit-Life's 3Digest has been doing just that for some time now. They stick to mainly current stuff, so the Geforce2 GTS is now in the archives, but the Geforce2 Ti200 is still in there.

 

[Rand]

Originally posted by: AnAndAustin
CtkellyAlso what are the standard clocks of the Rad9700 you have ... saying 'standard clocks' around Radeon hw is like saying 'standard mobo socket' around Intel hw LOL!

At least with the R9X00 series that's no longer true. ATi's started strictly mandating clockspeeds.... and it's about damn time given all the confusion and hassle that surrounded the R8500 with it's many varied clocks.
All R9700Pro's regardless of vendor and Retail/OEM status come clocked at 325/620.

 

[AnAndAustin]

Yeah I think the discrete/stealthy manner in which ATI handled standard clocks on the previous Radeons hurt them more than helped them, nice to know the 9700 cards won't suffer the same prob, now if only they can get their Radeons realisticly priced outside the US and Canada. I thought I'd read there was still a diff between the retail and oem/bulk versions of the Rad9700pro though, IIRC oem=300/600 and retail=325/620. The standard Rad9700 comes in at 275/540 but of course that is the idea of having a PRO version.

 

[Rand]

Originally posted by: AnAndAustin
Yeah I think the discrete/stealthy manner in which ATI handled standard clocks on the previous Radeons hurt them more than helped them, nice to know the 9700 cards won't suffer the same prob, now if only they can get their Radeons realisticly priced outside the US and Canada. I thought I'd read there was still a diff between the retail and oem/bulk versions of the Rad9700pro though, IIRC oem=300/600 and retail=325/620. The standard Rad9700 comes in at 275/540 but of course that is the idea of having a PRO version.

The OEM R9700Pro is clocked at 325/620.... the 300/600 was rumoured prior to alunch but has since been shown to be false.