what does everyone think of the new radeon 9700 pro's

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Lichee

Senior member
Jan 2, 2001
645
0
71
Originally posted by: Mats
jima: You asked what "everyone thinks" of the new Radeon - I simply posted my opinion. Whether I have one or not is immaterial, I prefer to do some research before buying a new card, don't you? Because it gets a higher fps in games, doesn't mean it "must be good". There are many other factors to judge a card by, one of the most important being the drivers. Orbius: OK that's what you think or would like to believe, but the fact is that ATi drivers are broken in certain circumstances. Their drivers are bad, believe it. Even John Carmack has said that nVidia dirvers are the "golden standard". When ATi release a new card or drivers, many devs have to come up with workarounds or release patches to get their games to work. These issues never appear with nVidia or even Matrox. Electric Amish: The card is powerful (however 'brute' and unrefined that it is) but I believe a card and it's drivers go hand in hand, therefore the card was a let down and unless ATi sort out there drivers, it's a waste of hardware. So you have no issues, nice, but this still does not detract from the fact that ATi does have serious driver issues that need to be resolved. The card required patches for games from ATi aswell as from game devs themselves. So no, the card was not ready. The release was all marketing and publicity, nothing more.
IMO, I tend to like opinions from someone that has been around on the forums more so than some lesser known guy. With this in mind, here is what BFG10K had to say about the 9700 pro in this thread:

"Quote

<HR>
But not becausse the image quality is considrably superior to any nvidia based card; that is in both 2d and 3d, colors are richer details are more defined . **CRAP**
<HR>

It's not crap at all. The image quality of the 9700 is absolutely superb - from anisotropic filtering to FSAA to colour richness it blows the Ti4600 away. I have never seen a video card exhibit such high image quality and rendering quality in all my years of using them.

After seeing a 9700 the Ti4600 can perhaps be described as having a dull plastic look when performing 3D rendering.
"

another:


"Quote

<HR>
If you don't mind flaky drivers and GF3 level perf the over-priced Matrox Parhelia is the king of IQ, I would expect the Rad9700 to be the second best with the Rad8500/9000 and GF4TI cards pretty close behind,
<HR>

There is nothing that can touch a Radeon 9700's anisotropic filtering and FSAA image quality, especially not the Parhelia with its half-baked implementations. Once you see the image quality of the 9700 with respect to anisotropic filtering and FSAA there is just no going back to any card.
"

After reading what he says, i tend to feel more enthusiastic about the 9700 more so than someone that doesnt own an ATi card. his opinions hold more water and come from someone that has actually tried the card. he also has tried an Nvidia too so that makes it even more worthwhile to read what he says. That is what makes it more informative than your propaganda that you got off the web from other people.

btw, i own a 8500 and will testify to the problems i had with drivers when the 8500 first came out. in fact, i got it around Nov and i think the card actually came out in sept or oct, but the drivers were still an issue back then. Ati was really slow with updates. However, my issues were mainly in the desktop (the notorious transparent shadow problem). After a few upgrades, im sure ATi hired a few more guys to the driver team cuz my problems were diminishing quite rapidly. Even now, i havent really had a problem. The last one was with Warcraft 3 and some minor texture problems. Jedi 2 played nicely and the UT demo was great too. so, from my standpoint, ATi has fixed their drivers and have done a good job and have earned my loyalty with future products. It was also nice to get something that performed like product 'X' only to have it transform into product 'Y' for less $$ with a few drivers. reminds me of Nvidia cards.
 

rachaelsdad

Member
Aug 26, 2001
130
0
0
ATi released the 9700 before it was "ready for primetime". I agree with many of the issues Dereck Smart raised with regards to the driver issues of the Radeon 9700. The driver department of ATi suck. ATi have become notorious for their drivers and nothing has changed, as such, I think the 9700 is a let down.
The lack of W buffers should not be a problem; W buffers are not even a Dx9 or Dx8 spec. I have heard that ATI is going to put a fix in to allow W Buffers in a later catylyst release.
The lack of a 32bit Z buffer could be a problem but I do not believe any card supports an unforced 32 bit Z buffer.
 

dfloyd

Senior member
Nov 7, 2000
978
0
0
Umm I have looked at my GF3 and my friends 9700 side by side and I see nothing to lead one to believe it has superior image quality. Yes it is MUCH MUCH MUCH faster, but only slightly nicer image quality if any at all (In 99% of games I could see no difference, although Rune seemed a bit nicer). And 2d there is no difference.

Is the card worth it? If you can afford it yes. Its very fast and running 16x af and 4x fsaa at perfectly smooth frame rates is nice.
 

kylebisme

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2000
9,396
0
0
quality of the monitor can make a big diffrence too dfloyd, that might account for the lack of a diffrence that you saw.
 

jjjayb

Member
Jul 4, 2001
75
0
0
I think it's an incredible card. Much better than I expected. Runs faster with full in game details (max textures, projection shadows etc..) 4x antialiasing 16x anisotropic than my 8500 ran with medium details and no shadows no aa and no af. Definitely give it 2 thumbs up.

Oh and about driver problems. Absolutely none. All the games I've tried have worked flawlessly. Games I've tried:

Jedi knight 2
soldier of fortune 2
operation flashpoint
mafia
motogp
return to castle wolfenstein
medal of honor
unreal tournament 2003 demo
nolf
nolf 2 demo
il2-sturmovik
crimson skies
madden 2003
system shock 2
battlefield 1942
army operations

No Driver issues whatsoever.

 

Lichee

Senior member
Jan 2, 2001
645
0
71
Originally posted by: jjjayb
I think it's an incredible card. Much better than I expected. Runs faster with full in game details (max textures, projection shadows etc..) 4x antialiasing 16x anisotropic than my 8500 ran with medium details and no shadows no aa and no af. Definitely give it 2 thumbs up. Oh and about driver problems. Absolutely none. All the games I've tried have worked flawlessly. Games I've tried: Jedi knight 2 soldier of fortune 2 operation flashpoint mafia motogp return to castle wolfenstein medal of honor unreal tournament 2003 demo nolf nolf 2 demo il2-sturmovik crimson skies madden 2003 system shock 2 battlefield 1942 army operations No Driver issues whatsoever.
wow. that is a huge list of games you "tested";). do you actually still play them?
 

jitspoe

Senior member
Mar 20, 2002
287
0
0
I made the mistake of getting an 8x AGP motherboard to go with this supposed 8xAGP video card... the two don't work together. I suggest reading this thread before making any purchases. Hundreds of posts by people having problems with 8xAGP. I wish I would have gone with a Geforce in my new system and waited for the NV30. :(
 

dfloyd

Senior member
Nov 7, 2000
978
0
0
TheSnowman,

Your correct, monitor could make a difference, but when we both have exact same Samsung 900ps I seriously doubt that is the case. Quality was almost exact, this in a side by side comparsion and we both agreed. He even says he notices no difference (in image quality) between his G3 Ti 200 and the new 9700. Although the 9700 is much faster.

I am not cutting the card down, I just dont believe there is any difference (From looking at the two side by side) in image quality. Not a bad thing as my Geforce III by no means looks bad :).
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,038
344
126
"It does not adhere to the AGP standard, but oh-well. I don't think you could get it to run as fast on the 15u die without the extra power. It still is the fastest thing around."

It does adhere to standard...the thing is that the MOTHERBOARD manufacturers that released 8X AGp mobos didn't adhere to a standard that wasn't even FINALIZED! What that means is they didn't have a 100% certified spec to work from...Intel only reciently made the spec for AGp 3.0 final.



"The card is powerful (however 'brute' and unrefined that it is) but I believe a card and it's drivers go hand in hand, therefore the card was a let down and unless ATi sort out there drivers, it's a waste of hardware. So you have no issues, nice, but this still does not detract from the fact that ATi does have serious driver issues that need to be resolved. The card required patches for games from ATi aswell as from game devs themselves. So no, the card was not ready. The release was all marketing and publicity, nothing more."

The card was more than ready. Don't tell me Nvidia never releases a bad driver. Please! If you believe that then maybe you need to go work for their PR team over in Cali. As far as driver issues...ATi has adressed the games in question even if it were the game that was causing the problem. Most of the Game devs release games using Proprietary Nvidia functions and NOT generic DX8.1 standard. They force you to use Nvidia cards in order to get the special effects that you can get with any card using the standards set by MS. The patch from ATi adressed a bunch of issues related to games. Maybe it was partially a lazy developer?


"Orbius: OK that's what you think or would like to believe, but the fact is that ATi drivers are broken in certain circumstances. Their drivers are bad, believe it. Even John Carmack has said that nVidia dirvers are the "golden standard". When ATi release a new card or drivers, many devs have to come up with workarounds or release patches to get their games to work. These issues never appear with nVidia or even Matrox."

Sure and whatever Carmack says is written on a stone tablet from the Almighty himself right? BAH!
Nvidia is the golden standard because they've been the monopoly for a while and had majority of OEM and the retail market. You HAVE to code with Nvidia in mind or risk going bankrupt! When ATi releases new drivers it's more STANDARD than Nvidia. Nvidia has some proprietary calls in both OGL and DX that aren't available in Matrox, ATI, 3dlabs, SIS, Intel and other video boards. WHY? To force you to use an Nvidia card to get the most out of a game. This is a load of crap. If you code the game standard like Carmack does the cards perform the same functions as Nvidia's proprietary crap without killing off any hope for competitors to even play.

Take a look at Neverwinter Nights. The sparkling water in the game is ONLY present on the GeForce. The New ATi card can perform the same routines but without the Nvidia specific calls it doesn't even show up. Maybe you should go read Carmack's other plans where he states that the GeForce should technically be faster on a consistant basis in Doom 3 but just isn't.
 

kylebisme

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2000
9,396
0
0
dfloyd, fair enough i just figured i check and i didnt ever take it as you cutting down the card i just figured i would look into your statment as it contadicts my experiance. i noticed a defenate increase in immage quality when pulling my visiontek gefroce3 and replaceing it with a 9700. furthermore, i noticed a decrease in image quality when i pulled my voodoo5 on my second rig and replaced it with the gefroce3. looking at them both side by side the difference is blatently clear to me, this is with two 24-25dp trinitron tubes, one a 21" and the other a 17" wich i have yet to find any diffence in quality of picture in when useing the same hardware to drive each one. i cannot speak for the samsung 900ps as i have never used one but i have heard good things about them from sorces i respect so i doubt it is the monitor limmiting the radeon from looking beter than the gefroce, however the possiblity is still there. another possiblity is that due to varablies in the manufatureing process your freind got realy lucky with the image qualty on his gefroce, realy unlucky with the image qualty on is radeon. then again it could just be that you do no have such decerning eyes as myself and the people that are impressed by the image qality of the 9700 over a gefoce (no insult intened here as we all have our own strengths and weeknesses, just pointing out a posiblity). then again it could be a combonation of any or all of those possablities, but please trust me that i am not lying to you or even dissilusioned when i tell you that my radeon9700, looks beter than ever other video card i have ever owned.
 

BFG10K

Lifer
Aug 14, 2000
22,070
1,240
126
What do I think? It's a great card, the best I've ever owned. The image quality is superb, the speed is amazing and the drivers are pretty polished for the second release.
 

dfloyd

Senior member
Nov 7, 2000
978
0
0
The Snowman,

I wish I saw it friend.

Have not saw a decent increase in image quality in 3d rendering in a long time. Nor in 2d quality (Coming form Voodoo II, Voodoo III, Ati Radeon, Geforce III, and now playing with my friends Radeon 9700 quite a bit.

Maybe at a higher resolution than 1024 x 768 is where the quality level changes. As it stands though at 1024 x 768 I can tell no difference.

And 2d looks no better than any other at this rez, or at least if it does I cant see it (20 15 vision).

I use a Gainward Geforce 3 Golden Sample. I heard 2d is nicer on it than other (G3s) but have not saw many others to judge by. I just no from looking at mine and friends its almost like looking at the exact same screen.

I will probably buy one though (When price drops closer to the $200 mark). The speed is great and being able to use 4x fsaa at 1024 x 768 or have 1600 x 1200 very playable is nice.
 

sash1

Diamond Member
Jul 20, 2001
8,897
1
0
Originally posted by: BFG10K
What do I think? It's a great card, the best I've ever owned. The image quality is superb, the speed is amazing and the drivers are pretty polished for the second release.
I would have to agree totally on this. I had the pleasure to use this card for a few days on a really nice system, and would have to say, it is an amazing card compared to the GF4 Ti4200/4600.

I wouldn't personally buy one, however. I do have the money, but I'd rather save it for when the nv30 is released. Anything will be a huge improvement over what I have (actually, I have nothing, my computer broke down when I was testing the overclocking program I made... :D), but I did have the Kyro II.

Albeit, it is an amazing card, and I hope to see it improve even more with newer drivers.
 

kylebisme

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2000
9,396
0
0
dfloyd, resolution could defenatly be a factor, i run 1600x1200 desktop on a 21" and at those settings the sharper quality of the 9700 was a blessing. however, honeslty even the post screen looks sharper than it did on my old nvidia cards.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY