on pricewatch, a 9700 non pro is generally about $40 more expensive than a 9500 Pro. according to the Firingsquad.com's 9500pro overclocking article, the 9700 non-pro is about the same speed as the 9500 Pro (when overclocked) at 1024x768 in all current games at all settings. 1024x768 is the only resolution i run at, due to my fairly crappy monitor. does anyone think that the memory bandwidth difference between the 2 cards will make a difference with doom III and Unreal 2? the new card will be added to the system in my sig. i'd like to keep whatever card i get for at least a year. my system will be getting a 512 MB stick of PC 3200 soon, and i'll probably upgrade the CPU with in 4 months. i'm kinda leaning towards the 9700, simply due to the fact that i will have a faster CPU fairly soon, and it might be able to push the card harder than what i currently have...
is it worth it to get a 9700 over a 9500 Pro?
- Thread starter EdipisReks
- Start date
Every forum except FS/FT and OT are usually slow......
If i knew I would help you....... If its only $40 difference though I saw go for it if you got it so you can have the best of the best......
Also it would help for a future trade or sale.
Josh
If i knew I would help you....... If its only $40 difference though I saw go for it if you got it so you can have the best of the best......
Also it would help for a future trade or sale.
Josh
I recently had to decide between a 9500Pro and a 9700 non-pro as well. I got the 9700 non-pro from newegg.com and currently run it beyond 9700 pro speed, so I am more than happy with my decision.
Sapphiretech.
ATI OEM RADEON 9700 ATLANTIS 128MB DDR 8X AGP BULK
I had to flash the bios to an unlocked version though and use the Rage 3D Tweaker to overlcock the card.
ATI OEM RADEON 9700 ATLANTIS 128MB DDR 8X AGP BULK
I had to flash the bios to an unlocked version though and use the Rage 3D Tweaker to overlcock the card.
Do you know if the card you got has 2.8ns ram, some people are getting that instead of 3.6ns ram on their sapphire 9700np.
TimeKeeper
Diamond Member
- Nov 3, 1999
- 4,927
- 0
- 0
Ive heard of people being able to do this without any problems, and others have seen alot of artifacts on their screen after doing it.
Im not a chancy person so I wouldnt do it, but thats just me....
THere is a softmod out there, Ive used it on my Connect3d 9500np and the results are Suuuuuhhhwweeaat!!
Check the different threads out and go visit rage3d.com forum and educate yourself on the matter. I can heartily recommend it!
Check the different threads out and go visit rage3d.com forum and educate yourself on the matter. I can heartily recommend it!
i have about 30 posts in the original 9500 mod thread on this board, so i know all about it (you might remember me as the guy who got really irritated every 20 minutes because people would ask "will this work on a 9500 pro?" about 37 times a second). the success rate is way too low for me to want to try it.
I'd go with the 9700, simply b/c its a clock step-down from the Pro rather than a memory architecture difference. As someone noted above, that $235 Sapphire Atlantis is rumored to have 2.8ns BGA RAM, and there should be no difference in the core. If it doesn't have the 2.8ns RAM, you'll still end up with a considerably faster part over a 9500pro. The 9500pro is comparable to the Ti4600, the 9700 and 9700pro are way out in front of the pack (at the moment).
Chiz
Ahh, I have a memory-lapse error in my mind you see! I thought "what the heck" and I didnt have more money to spend anyways...
I can only say thx ATI as I would never be able to motivate my wife to buy such an expensive card.
I can only say thx ATI as I would never be able to motivate my wife to buy such an expensive card.
I would definately go for the 9700, without question. Modding the 9500 is a very attractive proposition, but has way too low a sucess rate. Why mess with a good thing, the 9700 is basically guaranteed 9700 Pro speed (especially with 2.8ns RAM).
can we get away from the 9500 mod? that isn't what this thread was about (i never even mentioned the non-pro 9500). my question was this: at 1024x768, does the 9700 non-pro have a big enough advantage over the 9500 Pro to make it worth the $40 extra? from the reviews that i have read, a nicely overclocked 9500 Pro is only about 10% slower than a 9700 (running at pro speeds) at 1024x768, even in Unreal Tournament 2003 with 8x Anisotropic and 4x FSAA. however, if a faster processor for my computer and the more demanding games like Doom III and Unreal2 are really going to push the cards at 1024x768, i will be willing to spend the extra $40. does anyone thing that this is the case? please, answer only that question.
thank you
. anyone else agree? it is really the direction i'm leaning. $40 isn't that much more.I'm in a similar situation as you in that I'm planning on upgrading my system to play Doom 3. If I had to upgrade now though I'd pick up the 9700 np. You can see here that the non pro scores about 85-90% as fast as the 9700 pro and is alot faster than the 9500 pro. Also, in regards to Doom 3, John Carmack said that a Geforce 3 would get full graphics fidelity (or some lingo like that) and the 9700 np is alot faster than a g3 so you should be ok.
well, the Firingsquad 9500 Overclocking article shows very difference deltas between the cards, and frankly i trust firingsquad a lot more than tomshardware. however, the 9700 does seem to scale better with clockspeed than the 9500 pro does, and there are a couple 19" monitors that i'm eyeing, so higher resolution might come into play....
Jeez, did you even read the first line in my reply? I'll quote it again:
Let me reiterate: The 9700 is worth it, the price difference is worth it over the 9500 Pro.
edipis,
the 9500 pro is gonna be more than enough for you at 1024x768....on that same note I would highly suggest snagging the 9700np so you don't handcuff yourself at a later date. If your monitor's highest(or optimal even) resolution is 1024x768, IMHO you should forego your processor upgrade and get a new monitor....either of these cards is not going to be served justice on (what I assume is) a ghetto 17 inch monitor. just my 2 cents
the 9500 pro is gonna be more than enough for you at 1024x768....on that same note I would highly suggest snagging the 9700np so you don't handcuff yourself at a later date. If your monitor's highest(or optimal even) resolution is 1024x768, IMHO you should forego your processor upgrade and get a new monitor....either of these cards is not going to be served justice on (what I assume is) a ghetto 17 inch monitor. just my 2 cents
Benchmarks can be decieving, these 10% can be very noticable if they are the result of a short but steep drop in the framerate.
Also, in extreme cases, the 9700 can theoretically be twice as fast. think about it.
the R300 core was engineered with a 256 bit wide bus in mind.
cutting that in half to lower the price is a decision made by the marketing department.
I'd buy the product that's designed by the engineer.
Also, in extreme cases, the 9700 can theoretically be twice as fast. think about it.
the R300 core was engineered with a 256 bit wide bus in mind.
cutting that in half to lower the price is a decision made by the marketing department.
I'd buy the product that's designed by the engineer.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter