Hi all,
I'm considering a video upgrade to a 9600XT, but I'm wondering if the
slow speed of my processor will greatly slow the video card. My system
has an XP 1700+ and 512MB of RAM.

Is a 9600XT the best upgrade for my system? Will it be worth the
investment?

Also, if anyone knows, how much slower is the performance of a 9600XT
on a 1700 Palamino versus, say, a 2500 Barton?

I found this test(poorly translated by Google) that shows how a 1700
performs. Looks pretty impressive, but what do you guys think?

> Hi all,
> I'm considering a video upgrade to a 9600XT, but I'm wondering if the
> slow speed of my processor will greatly slow the video card. My system
> has an XP 1700+ and 512MB of RAM.
>
> Is a 9600XT the best upgrade for my system? Will it be worth the
> investment?
>
> Also, if anyone knows, how much slower is the performance of a 9600XT
> on a 1700 Palamino versus, say, a 2500 Barton?
>
> I found this test(poorly translated by Google) that shows how a 1700
> performs. Looks pretty impressive, but what do you guys think?

Go ahead with it. I've just installed my 9600 XT on a dual *P3* with 840 MHz
CPUs. It was well worth it. Consider a fast card on a slow CPU to be free
FSAA and AF. Of course you won't hit FPS records, but it'll do well

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:53:38 +0100, "Dirk Dreidoppel"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> Hi all,
>> I'm considering a video upgrade to a 9600XT, but I'm wondering if the
>> slow speed of my processor will greatly slow the video card. My system
>> has an XP 1700+ and 512MB of RAM.
>>
>> Is a 9600XT the best upgrade for my system? Will it be worth the
>> investment?
>>
>> Also, if anyone knows, how much slower is the performance of a 9600XT
>> on a 1700 Palamino versus, say, a 2500 Barton?
>>
>> I found this test(poorly translated by Google) that shows how a 1700
>> performs. Looks pretty impressive, but what do you guys think?
>
SNIP
>Consider a fast card on a slow CPU to be free
>FSAA and AF.
SNIP

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Do you mean that it will be tto
slow to enable FSAA and AF, or... ??

BTW: Heres the link to that poorly translated Google article that used
an XP1700 and a 9600xt as a test system.

http://translate.google.com/translat...UTF-8%26sa%3DN

Hi !
Here are a couple of my tests, hope this helps.

Barton 2.4 Ghz (218FSB)
R9600XT 570/690 MHz

3DMark03 - 4400
3DMark01 - 14400
UT2003 Flyby/Botmatch : 205 / 97.4
Q3 Demo 001/002 : 272 / 288

---------------------------------------------

Barton 2500+ 1.83 GHz (166FSB)
R9600XT 570/690 MHz

3DMark03 - 4250
3DMark01 - 13000
UT2003 : 182 / 74,8
Q3 Demo 001/002 : 180 / 182

-----------------------------------------------

Barton 2500+ 1.83 GHz (166FSB)
R96000XT 500/650 MHz -Default

3DMark03 - 3900
3DMark01 - 12300
UT2003 : 173 / 74
Q3 demo 001/002 : 161 / 164

------------------------------------------------

Barton 1.1 Ghz (100FSB)
R9600XT 570/690 MHz

3DMark03 - 3900
3DMark01 - 9000
UT2003 Flyby/Botmatch : 118/45
Q3 Demo 001/002 : 140/142

---------------------------------------------

Barton 1.1 GHz (100FSB)
R9600XT 500/650 MHz Default

3DMark03 - 3600
3DMark01 - 8800
UT2003 : 104/44
Q3 Demo 001/002 : 136 / 139

Driver: Catalyst 3.8
Memory Timings in all tests (FSB 212,166,100) was
(7-3-3-2.5)

You didn't say what your old card was, but I went from a voodoo3 to a
9700pro on a 700mhz(!) athlon system over a year ago, and it gave dramatic
improvements.

Also remember your 1700+ can easily be overclocked to 3200+ levels given a
good motherboard, ram, and heatsink.

rms

> I'm not sure what you mean by this. Do you mean that it will be tto
> slow to enable FSAA and AF, or... ??

Exactly the opposite. On a slow CPU the card will run idle cycles without
FSAA and AF. When those are enabled, the idle cycles are used, but the game
will play at the same FPS as before, no slowdown.

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 17:52:41 GMT, "rms" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>You didn't say what your old card was, but I went from a voodoo3 to a
>9700pro on a 700mhz(!) athlon system over a year ago, and it gave dramatic
>improvements.
>
>Also remember your 1700+ can easily be overclocked to 3200+ levels given a
>good motherboard, ram, and heatsink.
>
>rms
>
My old card is a Radeon 64MB DDR VIVO(I think the model is actually a
7200???).

Unfortunately, my 1700 will barely overclock at all. It's the old
Palamino core, so it starts to choke if I raise the FSB above about
140 or so

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 15:51:33 +0100, ">>> MachaK <<<"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Hi !
>Here are a couple of my tests, hope this helps.
>
>
>Barton 2500+ 1.83 GHz (166FSB)
>R96000XT 500/650 MHz -Default
>
>3DMark03 - 3900
>3DMark01 - 12300
>UT2003 : 173 / 74
>Q3 demo 001/002 : 161 / 164
>

>Barton 1.1 GHz (100FSB)
>R9600XT 500/650 MHz Default
>
>3DMark03 - 3600
>3DMark01 - 8800
>UT2003 : 104/44
>Q3 Demo 001/002 : 136 / 139

Hmmm...Wonder if its more dependant on overall CPU speed or just
FSB....

I've done some testing with CPU @ XP 1700+ , for u to compare with Barton :
-----------------------------------------
Barton 1.47 GHz (133FSB) - XP 1700+
R9600XT 570/690

3DMark03= 4100
3DMark01= 11400
UT2003= 156/60

-----------------------------------------
Barton 1.47 GHz (133FSB) - XP 1700+
R9600XT 500/650 Default

3DMark03= 3800
3DMark01= 11000
UT2003= 152/58

-----------------------------------------

IMHO in DX8 games and benchmarks, R9600XT performs like a GeForce 4200 TI,
but DX9 is another story.With my setup i can get 4000 3DMarks03 with 4xFSAA
and 8xAniso - max quality settings .My opinion: i dont think R9600XT would
be a waste on your setup,and u can upgrade your cpu later.

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 08:37:28 +0100, ">>> MachaK <<<"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I've done some testing with CPU @ XP 1700+ , for u to compare with Barton :
>-----------------------------------------
>Barton 1.47 GHz (133FSB) - XP 1700+
>R9600XT 570/690
>
>3DMark03= 4100
>3DMark01= 11400
>UT2003= 156/60
>
>-----------------------------------------
>Barton 1.47 GHz (133FSB) - XP 1700+
>R9600XT 500/650 Default
>
>3DMark03= 3800
>3DMark01= 11000
>UT2003= 152/58
>
>-----------------------------------------
>
>IMHO in DX8 games and benchmarks, R9600XT performs like a GeForce 4200 TI,
>but DX9 is another story.With my setup i can get 4000 3DMarks03 with 4xFSAA
>and 8xAniso - max quality settings .My opinion: i dont think R9600XT would
>be a waste on your setup,and u can upgrade your cpu later.
>

Wow MANY THANKS Machak! This is VERY helpful. Those numbers look
pretty good. I think I'll buy(if newegg can keep them in stock for 5
minutes

I appreciate the help.