• 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.

OEM ATI Radeon 8500 LE 128mb - 149$

do you have the specs for this card?

the 8500LE 128meg version are usually clocked at 250/250Mhz (core/memory) with 3.6ns memory but the one on newegg ($158), its actually just 250/200Mhz and its using 5ns memory. pretty crappy imo. don't buy the 128meg Radeon8500LE from newegg!!!!
 
The 8500 64MB Retail is cheaper and faster with it's higher core/mem clock speeds (275/550). The extra 64MB of RAM on the LE does virtually nothing for performance.
 
this may be getting OT.. but anyway.. depending on the ram on the 128meg LE, as long as its less than 4.0ns, you can successfully flash the bios to a retail 128meg and run it 275/275ddr without extra cooling or doing the voltage mod. the extra 64meg will come in handy on games such as unreal2, unreal tournament 2, duke nukem (muahahhaha.. if it ever gets released..) 😀

 
ATI's OEM cards suck. They're all crippled. Don't get it.

Personally, I've been soured on ATI cards ever since I switched from an "inferior" GF3 TI200 to a Radeon 8500 retail. I was MUCH happier with the GF. It had better performance, and great overclockability. Not to mention the Radeon is buggy as hell. The only reason I'd go with ATI is if I really need multimedia capability. For performance and gaming, it's GeForce all the way for me.
 


<< ATI's OEM cards suck. They're all crippled. Don't get it.

Personally, I've been soured on ATI cards ever since I switched from an "inferior" GF3 TI200 to a Radeon 8500 retail. I was MUCH happier with the GF. It had better performance, and great overclockability. Not to mention the Radeon is buggy as hell. The only reason I'd go with ATI is if I really need multimedia capability. For performance and gaming, it's GeForce all the way for me. >>

I don't understand why a GF3 Ti 200 would perform better for you. A Radeon 8500 Retail is comparable to a GF3 Ti 500 and cheaper.
 


<< ATI's OEM cards suck. They're all crippled. Don't get it.

Personally, I've been soured on ATI cards ever since I switched from an "inferior" GF3 TI200 to a Radeon 8500 retail. I was MUCH happier with the GF. It had better performance, and great overclockability. Not to mention the Radeon is buggy as hell. The only reason I'd go with ATI is if I really need multimedia capability. For performance and gaming, it's GeForce all the way for me. >>


I must concur. I bought an 8500 (on the infamous much-delayed Dell deal) to replace my GF 2 Pro, but the damn thing's drivers never worked right, so I stuck it in a secondary machine and went back to the GF2 for my main gaming rig. Every now and then I download that latest drivers to try with the secondary machine and try the games the 8500 didn't work with before, and lo and behold, they still don't work. Bah. ATI drivers suck.
 
My ATI Radeon 8500 64MB (retail) seems to perform fine for me. It replaced my MSI GF3 ti200 and scored over 1000 more in 3dMark2001 (8217). After I updated the drivers with Redsoftware Plutonium 6.5 (beta XP 6043-6052) this card kicks arse in OpenGL.

Edit: Looks like ATI is stepping up their driver support. Just read the new Plutonium 7.0 (beta XP 6058) will be released very soon. Info here.
 
Keep in mind the Plutonium drivers are independently tweaked... they aren't made by ATI, and ATI doesn't support beta drivers if you have problems.

I personally use tweaked drivers and love 'em though 🙂
 
Some of your guys are idiots... ATI has their drivers tuned really well... Every game i've tried works great. and a score of 9518 in 3dmark2k1 is far from slow... Helps if you know how to install drivers the proper way...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top