Radeon 9000 Pro image quality?

[Magicthyse]

I'm interested to know how a Radeon 9000 Pro compares with a Kyro II in terms of 2D (desktop) image quality. I'm not hugely interested in the 3D performance but the dual-header facility interests me tremendously. What I'm looking for is a dual-header Kyro II in terms of image quality... Would the 9000 Pro measure up?

 

[Peter]

ATi usually has very strict quality control, on their own cards just as well as on what their 3rd party chip customers build. Part of this is very good 2D image quality.

With the dual head cards, you'll find that practically all of them have one VGA and one DVI-I output. You'll need a DVI-to-VGA dongle, so if your card of choice doesn't include one, make sure you get a good one that doesn't mess the signal up.

regards, Peter

 

[AnAndAustin]

I'd say the Radeon is the better card in all accounts. If 3D perf doesn't really bother you it would be wise to consider the Rad9000 or GF4MX cards if not the lesser Radeon cards. All Rad9000 cards have udal display and dual RAMDACs built in so it is virtually impossible/impractical for non-ATI manus to skimp. A nice addition to the Rad9000 cards is the ability to use the DX8 hw to enhance the MPEG playback (DVD etc) which should help tremendously esp with lower quality files.

 

[Rankor]

I've seen the Radeon 9000 Pro at Frys. It's from PowerColor and not directly from ATI; selling for $149.

 

[smartsam]

http://www.buyaib.com/atirad9012dd.html

 

[smartsam]

Above is a 128MB Built by ATI card

 

[AnAndAustin]

That's nice, esp in the 3D dept. A true ATI Rade9000PRO at 275/550 with 128MB for under $100, nice. However I would expect a Rad8500 128MB to come in under that price but even for the same price it would be worth it as the Rad8500LE tends to be a fair deal faster than the Rad9000PRO, just have to double check the Rad8500 cards do actually have dual-monitor ability rather than just sporting the ports but not allowing simultaneous usage. Still that Rad9000PRO is hugely faster and more capable than any GF2, GF4MX or Rad7500 card and should be about 20% faster than a Rad9000 ... although they should o/c to about Rad9000PRO levels ...

 

[T2T III]

http://www.buyaib.com/atirad9012dd.html

How can we tell if this is the Pro version of the card?

[Edit]: Duh, I think I found my answer:

Powered by ATI's RADEON 9000 PRO graphics technology

However, can one truly tell that this is the "Pro" card?

 

[AnAndAustin]

With Radeon cards it is always a very good idea to check the clock speeds as these vary quite a bit between the manus and oem vs retail versions. You're only talking about 10% either way and the saving may still be worth it. Another thing to watch out for is dual display, some Rad8500 cards don't have this ability even if they have the ports but all Rad9000 type cards should.

Based on the true BUILT by ATI cards clocks should be Rad9000-retail=250/400 Rad9000pro-retail=275/550.

The diff between Rad9000 and 9000PRO should simply be the clocks and as such if that card is a true PRO the clocks should be very close to 275/550. How well they o/c depends upon whether they have a fan and what type of RAM they use. In any case you should get a good o/c esp on the std 9000 cards. Your link lacks a lot of important info, it isn't totally clear whether it is a true ATI or a 3rd party manu but more crucially it doesn't state the clocks anywhere, should be a PRO but buy at your own risk.

 

[BFG10K]

The Radeon will spank the Kyro in 2D and 3D image quality. In fact, IIRC the Kyro2 only has a 270 MHz RAMDAC which is pretty limited compared to a Radeon.

 

[T2T III]

I was reading where the TV-Out on the Radeon 9700 can run at a resolution of 1024 x 768. Is the same true for the Radeon 9000 / Radeon Pro 9000?

 

[AnAndAustin]

I'm pretty sure Rad9000 cards like the Rad8500 cards are limited to a maximum of 800x600 for TVout. This isn't really a limitation as even 640x480 is much more than TVs can display accurately (PS2 anyone?) plus movies don't exceed 800x600.

I've used 1024x768 on my GF4TI and the only advantage it offers is not having to switch my desktop from 1024x768 in order to clone the display to view a movie on my TV. Just to make it clear I'm not saying GF4TI TVout is better because they are not by a long shot and many GF4TI are still limited to 800x600 anyway, just trying to point out that 1024x768 is pretty pointless when it comes to TVout.

 

[rbV5]

Rad8500 cards are limited to a maximum of 800x600 for TVout

7000, 7500, 8500, 9000 and 9700 radeon's support 1024X768 via TV-out (initially the 8500's did not, but drivers fixed that ages ago) It doesn't matter for video files, but for gaming via TV-out it certainly makes a difference and I game at 1024 X 768 @ 60Hz.

 

[Spicedaddy]

Get the Radeon 9000.

The 9000 and 9700 both have dual 400MHz ramdacs integrated into the chip (in addition to 1024x768 TV-out). This means 2D quality isn't dependent on the products used by the different manufacturers...

Also, I've never used a Kyro with 2 monitors, but I'm pretty sure ATI's Hydravision software is superior.

 

[Goi]

The Radeon 9000 Pro will almost certainly provide better image quality. It has 10bit RGB color, dual 400MHz RAMDACs, and 3 independent switching power supplies on the card. The older 7200, 7500 and 8500 have 2, while the 9700 Pro has 5. The power supplies contribute to the low noise floor of the video signal.

 

[AnAndAustin]

I was going to say Rad8500 has excellent image quality but Rad9000 cards should have it even better, maybe not noticablely better but slightly better none-the-less. I wasn't aware the Rad9000 had 10bit RGB capability. Anyway, as said the RAMDACs (and TVout) are integrated directly in to the single chip which not only makes manu'ing cheaper but also tends to help quality and most crucialy promotes consistency between the diff manus esp for things like dual display which was a little hit and miss with some of the Rad8500 cards. It still p's me off that clocks between manus and oem vs retail differ on the Rad cards, but then the diffs don't tend to be huge, at least the drivers are no longer 'cheating' LOL! Another advantage the Rad9000 cards have over Rad8500 is better DVD playback, if not MPEG playback, DX8 hw is meant to enhance this further on the Rad9000 cards but I don't know to what degree. Anyway, for 3D the Rad9000PRO is nearly always going to be a fair bit slower than both the Rad8500 and the Rad8500LE, not only that but the 128MB Rad8500 cards tend to be a fair bit cheaper than the Rad9000 ones too. Rad9000 are still way better than all GF4MX and the quirky Xabre cards (too little too late ... and too pricey) but while the Rad8500 cards are still out there they'll be a wiser choice for most.

To the question at hand the KyroII is a bit of a puzzle and never gained widespread popularity or acceptibility. A fine card at the time but I would be VERY surprised if Rad9000 doesn't own it in image quality, dual display and every other area that there is ... well worth the asking price IMHO.