Updated!: I am thinking about making the jump to ATI: Some questions inside!

[Antoneo]

Hey guys,

I have been a Nvidia user for a while now starting with the TNT2U when it first came out. That was a great video card and the drivers were great back then as well. 2D left something to be admired but when you had fast framerates you didn't really care .

I have just about given up "heavy" gaming and play occasional games of starcraft. My Gainward GF4 Ti4200 died on with a PSOD and was rma'ed, and I have funds to replace it. I need 2D quality as I read a lot of text (programming, long essays, ATOT ) and digital photo/video editing. I would also like to get the most of my monitor as it ate quite a bit of my last rig's budget.

I am considering ATI over Matrox because I *might* have the need to dip into an interesting game or two at times. Right. Just in case I need the extra power. My budget is about 80 to 120 dollars. I have no need of video in capabilities although TV out would be nice.

Here are a few questions that have prevented me from clicking the buy button on any ATI products:

1) Are there any serious problems with a specific line? possibly even driverwise? It's not a "unified" driver architecture correct?

2) Is the 2D quality from the 7500 up all the same good quality or are some better than others (same RAMDACs?)? How is the 2D quality on "powered by ATI" or Shaphire cards?

3) Are Shaphire cards clocked differently from those built by ATI? I know powercolor does but am not sure about Shaphire...

4) Is the 9000 or 9100 a better choice than an ATI radeon 8500?

5) Is it me or have the prices for all ATI radeon cards gone up a bit? I remember when the 8500LE 128 was $100, now I see the 64MB for about that price. Should I wait even longer?
_______________________________________________________________________________________

Update 03/03/03

Hey guys, I'm running a clean setup with the ATI Radeon 8500LE (Built by ATI) 64MB with the 3.1 Catalyst drivers on WindowsXP on my NEC FP955. The ram chips were 4ns made by Hynix with no ram sinks.
I've installed the drivers and they were pretty straightforward with my only quibble being the strange "Should not see me" message after installing the ATI driver and clicking "restart now". Wierd indeed but looks like everything is fine. Oh and it came with one TV-out and one VGA out.

Before I was using the ATI 8500, I had the integrated video of my 845G running in its place. That was horrible. I would see horizontal lines crawling/flickering up from the bottom right corner and heavy red fringing on white/black areas such as the cursor edge on a white background (this was observed at 1024x768@85Hz with 32bit). I vaguely remember my Gainward's 2d but it was pretty good, better than the integrated one for sure (then again anything is). However I am running the ATI 8500 at 1600x1200 @85 Hz with 32 bit and it is very clear. Not as crisp as I like but I am sure with a little tweaking on the monitor's part it will be better. The gainward was not able to do that resolution as well the ATI 8500. It does seem a bit brighter than both the Gainward and integrated. At lower resolutions the card does a fine job as well.

Seems good so far, since this was a fresh install I haven't been able to play any games yet but ehh I'll just enjoy the text for now .

 

[CurtCold]

1. Catalyst drivers are almost as good as Detonators, 3.1's are out, I'm still running the 2.5's with my 8500.
2. If you get a built by ATI card, your pretty safe on 2D. Better than the GF 2D, I've seen powercooler, and Sapphire cards that looked fine too.
3. Sapphire pretty much is "Built By ATI", check the sites for clock speeds, but afaik, they are same as built by ATI
4. 9000, slightly less powerful than the 8500, which is the same thing as the 9100, just renamed.
5. The price for the Radeons might go down some when rv350 is released in March? April? but there selling off the 8500 cores, so prices are still good right now.


That might not all be gospel, but it's close enough to get you in trouble.

 

[ironique]

About 8500 prices, you can get the 64MB version listed for for as low as $78 at pricegrabber.com.

 

[xSauronx]

Originally posted by: ironique
About 8500 prices, you can get the 64MB version listed for for as low as $78 at pricegrabber.com.

got a 8500le 64mb for 72 at newegg shipped a few weeks ago, good for some gaming, very good 2d, ocable in alot of cases with a ati/sapphire card

 

[kylebisme]

i agree with everyone elses comments above.


the 8500le sounds like your ticket Antoneo, its not going to be any beter at gameing speed than the 4200 was but that doesn't sound like it will be an issue for you. on the other hand the 2d should suit you beter and the price is prety hard to trun down.

 

[KingofFah]

The ti4200 is about 90% better than the 8500le in UT2003 benchmarks and gets about 30% higher scores in 3dmark. Since when did the 8500 or 9000 become a rival to the ti4200? Turn on AA or Ansio in JDk2 or Ut2k3 and it becomes a serious joke. If all you are looking for is 2d quality, then get the 8500. Since you do not game a lot anymore and only play starcraftf if so, I think this is fine. If you want to compare the 4200 and an ATI card, then compare it to 9500pro. In non-AA and non-Ansio the 4200 runs about 10 percent lower than the 9500 pro, but of course when you enable either of those the 9500 goes well above.

As far as I know, the Catalyst drivers are pretty good, and the very evident problems of the past are rare now.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: KingofFah
The ti4200 is about 90% better than the 8500le in UT2003 benchmarks

can i see some of these benchmarks?

 

[KingofFah]

THG VGA Charts UT2K3
THG VGA Charts 3DMark2001SE

Edit: Closer to 75%, sorry.

 

[RobsTV]

Originally posted by: xSauronx

Originally posted by: ironique
About 8500 prices, you can get the 64MB version listed for for as low as $78 at pricegrabber.com.

got a 8500le 64mb for 72 at newegg shipped a few weeks ago, good for some gaming, very good 2d, ocable in alot of cases with a ati/sapphire card

I got the same card and crossed over to ATI.
While this card overclocks and performs almost as well as my Ti500, there still are driver issues, and some problems.
Did a new fresh install, and ATI still is not in the same league for compatability and drivers. (flame suit now on).
Tried different drivers and settings, and slight problems still exist.
The latest is with AOE II Age of Kings. After finishing multiplayer, screen text and fonts are distorted.
Also in same game, it is so dark it is unplayable.
Using the drivers Gamma settings does nothing in that game.
Have to load Powerstrip to get enough brightness, so that is semi-solveable, but text issue is still there.
I actually swapped a GF2 GTS for the price of the 8500LE, so no real loss. More performance, but less display quality than GTS.

 

[Antoneo]

Hey guys, thanks for the feedback and since it was mostly positive, I guess I will make the jump to an ATI card.. probably an 8500.
Does the radeon 9000 or 9100 hold any advantages over the 8500 ie. better driver support since it is newer or directx 9 compatiable?

RobsTV, Can you give me the name of your system motherboard (or perhaps the system setup)? I just want to see if it is a compatability problem. Also, since you have also made the switch to ATI, the 2D has noticeably improved yes?

EDIT: Hrmm... The number of ATI problems posted around msgboards is alarming to say the least. Uhhhh, has anyone owned a Leadtek GF4 board? I would like to know how the 2D quality on that compares to ATI.

 

[Skibby9]

Meh-- people only post when they have problems. Among people I work with, me and a buddy each have 9700 Pros, another has a 9000 non-pro, sold my 8500 64mb 275/275 to a guy who loves it, and 2 with 7500s and one guy with a 7000 PCI.

None of us are having any problems. In fact, if you look at my system, you can probably tell I don't upgrade all that often. I bought the 8500 knowing I would end up getting it for <$150 (thanks AMEX Blue). It looked a lot better than my GeForce 2MX in both 2 and 3D, and was a great card when I sold it. Now, I am not exactly swimming in cash, but there is no doubt in my mind that the 9700pro was well worth the $$$ i laid out for it.

Really, I would say you are just as likely to have problems with an ATI card as with any other. The only caveat is that ATI puts their name on the box as manufacturer, and they have good quality control. And that is why their 2D is so good.

 

[KingofFah]

I have a Leadtek Ti4600 VIVO, but I would not be able to tell you how the 2d quality is, since it is all for gaming. The question about DX9 seems irrelevant, since you are not going to be doing gaming a lot of gaming? Are you thinking about the future?

Plain and simple:
ATI 8500le for cheap if you want better 2d quality (I would recommend searching for 2d quality comparisons and judging for yourself whether it is worth the lower 3d performance)
4200 for a little under 120 for good 3d quality (argumentative: ATI picture quality is only better than nV in 2d)

RobsTV is right on. The 8500/9000 is comparable to the ti500, not the ti4200. (The ti500 was always a better performer than the 8500, but apparently the new Cat's have made it pretty close)

 

[Antoneo]

The question about DX9 seems irrelevant, since you are not going to be doing gaming a lot of gaming? Are you thinking about the future?

Yeah, I was thinking about future games if any come out that rekindles an interest in gaming. But I guess you are right, I will probably have to upgrade my setup/video card again if that time comes around.

Looks like I'll spring for a 8500 .

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: KingofFah
THG VGA Charts UT2K3
THG VGA Charts 3DMark2001SE

Edit: Closer to 75%, sorry.

wow ya 75% is close enough realy, i don't read toms much so i overlooked that. oddly anands benchmarks show a lot less of a difference; could be the cpu maybe, i don't quite know.

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: Antoneo
Does the radeon 9000 or 9100 hold any advantages over the 8500 ie. better driver support since it is newer or directx 9 compatiable?

they are not dx9 cards, as missleading as the name may be, the 9100 is just a renamed 8500 and the 9000 is similar in many ways but not quite as powerful in some.

 

[novice]

Hey Antoneo, how about posting back after you get your 8500 and let us know how it went. I am also considering an ATI card for the first time and am curious to see how your upgrade goes and what kind of performance you get from that 8500LE. Being a cheapskate at heart, improved 2D and adequate 3D for only $72 delivered is kind of tempting. And based on Tom's benchmarks, it would appear that the 8500LE would perform in 3D at least as well as my Geforce 3 Ti200. But I am still a little leery of ATI's old reputation for driver issues and compatibility problems, which I have never experienced with my Nvidia cards. Do us a favor and let us know.
Thanks,
Chuck

 

[KingofFah]

Well, I have yet to see the 8500 even beat a ti500. People have said it can with the new drivers, but I have not seen any benches proving this. Some people just don't like Tom You could try making a post here saying that the 8500 is comparable to the 4200. I am betting that quite a few people will disagree with you. In my mind, comparisons go as follows:

8500/9000/9100 v Ti500
9500 Pro v 4200/4400/4600
9700 Pro v FX

Edit: Tom did have two VGA charts, the second with CPU scaling; the percentages of the differences are pretty much the same.

 

[Antoneo]

Originally posted by: novice
Hey Antoneo, how about posting back after you get your 8500 and let us know how it went. I am also considering an ATI card for the first time and am curious to see how your upgrade goes and what kind of performance you get from that 8500LE. Being a cheapskate at heart, improved 2D and adequate 3D for only $72 delivered is kind of tempting. And based on Tom's benchmarks, it would appear that the 8500LE would perform in 3D at least as well as my Geforce 3 Ti200. But I am still a little leery of ATI's old reputation for driver issues and compatibility problems, which I have never experienced with my Nvidia cards. Do us a favor and let us know.
Thanks,
Chuck

Yup, not a problem Chuck . I think I will purchase ATI RADEON 8500LE 64MB AGP (Retail) .

 

[kylebisme]

Originally posted by: KingofFah
Well, I have yet to see the 8500 even beat a ti500. People have said it can with the new drivers, but I have not seen any benches proving this. Some people just don't like Tom You could try making a post here saying that the 8500 is comparable to the ti500. Edit: Tom did have two VGA charts, the second with CPU scaling; the percentages of the differences are pretty much the same.

8500 beating the ti500

granted, it is just by barly at high detail and not even for the le but at medium detail the 8500 is nipping at the heals of the 4200 wich is were i would want to set that card for online play anyway. granted i would want to trun on some anisotropic filtering which would put the 8500 even better off in comparison yet. also note that the article is from nearly 7months ago and ati has put a lot of effort into drivers sence then although i can't say how much effect that has on the situation at hand as i don't have an 8500 or recent benchmarks to back it up.


however, i just figured that i should point out how myself, and most likely many other people, come to the conclusion that 8500 ~ 4200.

 

[RobsTV]

Originally posted by: Antoneo
Hey guys, thanks for the feedback and since it was mostly positive, I guess I will make the jump to an ATI card.. probably an 8500.
Does the radeon 9000 or 9100 hold any advantages over the 8500 ie. better driver support since it is newer or directx 9 compatiable?

RobsTV, Can you give me the name of your system motherboard (or perhaps the system setup)? I just want to see if it is a compatability problem. Also, since you have also made the switch to ATI, the 2D has noticeably improved yes?

EDIT: Hrmm... The number of ATI problems posted around msgboards is alarming to say the least. Uhhhh, has anyone owned a Leadtek GF4 board? I would like to know how the 2D quality on that compares to ATI.

Tested first in Epox 8rda+, and now it's in the wifes 8k5a2 machine.
Contrary to what others have said, 2d was never an issue for me with nVidia, and it still is not with ATI.
No gain in 2d quality with the 8500LE, but none was needed.
Display used is Hitachi 21" SuperScan 811 normal desktop settings 1280x1024x32 85hz.
To be fair when comparing performance, overclock both as high as they will go, then compare.
Never does the overclocked 8500 reach the same performance numbers of the overclocked Ti500.
Sure, when both are overclocked, both can reach speed near the "stock clocked Ti4200", but Ti500 exceeds 8500 scores.

For the money, the 8500 is a good deal.
But, I would pay $20 more for a Ti500 if available, since it doesn't have the minor driver or display
woes that the ATI has in some games, and the Ti500 performs a little better. Now if you could get
a Ti4200 for under $100, that would be the way to go. But if you are cash strapped, the 8500LE
will more than meet the needs of most users.

 

[Antoneo]

Thanks RobTV for that info . I purchased the retail ATI (built by ATI I assume) Radeon 8500 64 MB for $93 (shipping included) last night. I'll keep you guys updated and include my observations as well in the rest of the week.

 

[Antoneo]

^^

 

[kylebisme]

so how do you like your new toy?