Radeon 9700 at last!

rogue1979

Diamond Member
Mar 14, 2001
3,062
0
0
Well, not being one to give up easily, I have tried three Radeon 9500's on 9700 pcb to get a real 9700 Radeon. While I hard modded one and soft modded the other two easily, all showed 3D artifacts. I also tried a Radeon 9500 Pro and wasn't real impressed. I bought a used 9700 non pro for $170. I was gonna play with it for a little while, seeing how high it overclocked and just how fast it really was. I knew I could get easily over $200 on ebay for it. My current video card is still the GF4 Ti4200 @300/662, running the Omega 1.1.82 drivers it looks good and is fast.
Imagine my suprise when I loaded an overclocking utility to check the clock speeds, and to verify the need to flash an unlocked bios to change the clock speeds. 325/310? Hmmmm.......... I immediately jacked the memory to 340 and the core to 350. Holy crap, the overclock set and stayed, and the memory wanted to go higher! I knew what this meant, this was no 9700 non pro, this was a real 9700 Pro. It is happily running 365/350, a good overclock for the pro. I knew I was bound to get some good luck soon. With the other 9500's I had a glitch in Porsche Unleased, but turning off anisotropic (just in that game) fixed it. My 3Dmark ran in the mid 13K's, maybe I'm getting a little cpu limited (1700+ "B" on the way). But what really amazed me was running UT at 1600 x 1200, my usual resolution. I put FSAA on 4X and still hammered out 180 fps average! Jeez, that is some serious graphic power. I turned FSAA down to 2X and really couldn't see a difference, so I left it there. Unreal 2003 ran the flyby at 70fps, and the botmatch at 42fps at 1600 x 1200. The same as my Geforce4 at the same resolution, with one small difference. I left FSAA at 4X and got the same results as the GF4 with FSAA off, I am impressed.
 

giocopiano

Member
Feb 7, 2002
120
0
0
Rouge, didn't you have a V5500? How does the 9700 AA look to you? Is it nearer to V5500, or normal supersampling, or GF3 multisampling quality?
 

rogue1979

Diamond Member
Mar 14, 2001
3,062
0
0
I have been through quite a few Geforce 2, 3, 4, Radeon 8500 and 9500's, but yes I fondly remember my good ole V5. I actually found that the 4X FSAA setting for the Geforce was close to V5 2X FSAA, I don't think anyone could actually use the V5 4X FSAA, it just wasn't fast enough to play games smoothly. However, the Radeon 9700 Pro with a fast cpu will let you use 6X FSAA with no visible slow downs, which has to match V5 FSAA quality. But to tell the truth, I play almost all my games at 1600 x 1200, I can't really see a difference past 2X at that resolution.
 

giocopiano

Member
Feb 7, 2002
120
0
0
Well you could use the V5 easily at 4x, but this was generally in games pre-2000 where color was limited to 16 bit. I still play these games! Damn good card for compatibility.
I am surprised that this 9700 comes closer to 3dfx image ideals than anything recent of nvidia's!
So- you think if I turn on 4x AA and some anisotropic at 1024x768 I can avoid more than a 30% slowdown with this card?
 

rogue1979

Diamond Member
Mar 14, 2001
3,062
0
0
Let me put it this way. When I scored 13,500 on 3DMark I was disappointed. On the same rig I have a Geforce4 that scores 12,000. The GF4 at 300/662 hammers out all modern games at 1600 x 1200 no FSAA with no slowdowns whatsoever. Averaging 150+fps in UT, I thought it was fast. The 9700 Pro ran 210fps at the same settings, I didn't really need the extra 60fps, not impressed again. But when I tested UT at 1600 x 1200 at 4X FSAA anisotropic 16X, my jaw dropped to the floor. It still ran 185fps average! Jeez, Unreal 2003 runs smooth at the same settings.

By the way, that 1700+ runs 2100MHz at 1.78v.