ATI v ATI?

[John]

I just wondered which of these cards you'd chose? Would you go for
the older one with more Memory or the newer one with less? I couldn't
seem to find any information about the speed of these cards on the ATI
site. Usually they have something in Mhz that says how fast they are
don't they? I'd just presume that the 9600 was faster than the 9200
but had less memory?

Sapphire ATI Radeon 9200 256MB DDR TV-Out - Retail

or

Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600 128MB DDR TV-Out/DVI - Retail

I may even just go for the 9600 with 256MB, but it is a bit more
expensive again.

If you can tell me which you'd prefer between those anyway I'd be
interested to know your opinion. The 9600 is just a bit more than the
9200 with 256MB.

Thanks

John

 

[Thor]

9600. At 128Mb it will do more for you than the slower one at 256. 128Mb of
dedicated graphics memory is more than enough.



...

 

[mike]

I just wondered which of these cards you'd chose? Would you go for
the older one with more Memory or the newer one with less? I couldn't
seem to find any information about the speed of these cards on the ATI
site. Usually they have something in Mhz that says how fast they are
don't they? I'd just presume that the 9600 was faster than the 9200
but had less memory?

Sapphire ATI Radeon 9200 256MB DDR TV-Out - Retail

or

Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600 128MB DDR TV-Out/DVI - Retail

I may even just go for the 9600 with 256MB, but it is a bit more
expensive again.

If you can tell me which you'd prefer between those anyway I'd be
interested to know your opinion. The 9600 is just a bit more than the
9200 with 256MB.

Thanks

John

I'd opt for a 9600 Pro 128Mb. Not sure what the price difference would
be but, if you are dead set on one of the two you named then get the
9600 with 128Mb. Aside from the fact that it's unlikely you will ever
need 256Mb (within the cards useful life anyway) of video ram the 9200
lacks the power to run a program that would use anywhere near that
kind of graphics power.

 

[The Cybrow]

I just wondered which of these cards you'd chose? Would you go for
the older one with more Memory or the newer one with less? I couldn't
seem to find any information about the speed of these cards on the ATI
site. Usually they have something in Mhz that says how fast they are
don't they? I'd just presume that the 9600 was faster than the 9200
but had less memory?

Sapphire ATI Radeon 9200 256MB DDR TV-Out - Retail

or

Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600 128MB DDR TV-Out/DVI - Retail

I may even just go for the 9600 with 256MB, but it is a bit more
expensive again.

If you can tell me which you'd prefer between those anyway I'd be
interested to know your opinion. The 9600 is just a bit more than the
9200 with 256MB.

Thanks

John

Hey John,

Below is a link to a comparison of several cards including a 9200 and
a 9600. While they don't have the 256MB versions the results should
still be very close. The extra memory doesn't add much speed to the
cards even at higher resolutions. That said, if you are a gamer, newer
games may see bigger gains with the larger memory so if can't hurt to
have it.

I'd go for the 9600, a Pro if you can afford it. The 9600 will allow
you to use higher quality settings with playable framerates while I
suspect the lesser cards will be doggin' it pretty hard in demanding
situations.

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/radeon/connect3d-2.html

 

[Vince Slevin]

Id go with the 9600 cuz it has dvi for lcd flat screens. the extra 128mb is
just a not very noticeable luxury.

 

[Adrian Kwa]

When buying a 9600Pro do look out for the memory speed. There are some cheap
9600Pro out ther with slower memory chips (200mhz rather than 333).

Adrian

 

[mike]

Those are the 9600 Pro EZ video cards. I think ATI is getting a little
too damn happy with all these different cards.... 9600, 9600 Pro, 9600
Pro EZ, 9600 Pro Ultra.....

 

[Tim]

Neither one. I would go for the 9800 non pro. It has the same hardware as
the pro version with all of the latest features. The only difference is a
slower clock speed. And it's priced about $200 less than the pro, at least
here in Canada.

I have my eye on an OEM Sapphire 9800. Just waiting for Newegg.com to drop
the price below 200 US clams.

 

[J.Clarke]

Those are the 9600 Pro EZ video cards. I think ATI is getting a little
too damn happy with all these different cards.... 9600, 9600 Pro, 9600
Pro EZ, 9600 Pro Ultra.....

Nope. ATI makes the 9600, 9600 Pro, and 9600 All-In-Wonder. The 9600
Pro EZ is a PowerColor model not made by ATI, and the 9600 Pro Ultra is
a Sapphire model, possibly made on the same line as that boards that ATI
sells under their own brand but not an ATI brand board.

ATI has little control over what third parties do with their chips.

 

[John Hall]

Yeah, I have one and am very happy. The nice thing is that you can turn on
the eye candy and 4x aa and 8 x anistropic filtering, and still get decent
frame rates.

JK

 

[mike]

Nope. ATI makes the 9600, 9600 Pro, and 9600 All-In-Wonder. The 9600
Pro EZ is a PowerColor model not made by ATI, and the 9600 Pro Ultra is
a Sapphire model, possibly made on the same line as that boards that ATI
sells under their own brand but not an ATI brand board.

ATI has little control over what third parties do with their chips.

ATI does it too, they have the 9200, 9200 Pro, 9200 SE. Enough
already. It's marketing hype and it clouds an already unclear issue.

 

[Chimera]

<snip>

buyer beware

 

[Tim]

Only 49 clams to go ;-)

Yeah, I have one and am very happy. The nice thing is that you can turn on
the eye candy and 4x aa and 8 x anistropic filtering, and still get decent
frame rates.

JK

 

[Lester Horwinkle]

Can someone explain ... is there a difference between frame rate and refresh
rate?

I know that I generally run at 75 Hz refresh rate.

But I've seen people claiming more than 100 frame rate. I know of no
consumer grade monitor that goes at 100 or more refresh rate. That's what
leads me to think that frame rate is different from refresh rate.

What say, Holmes?

 

[Randy]

I could be wrong but I think frame rate is the number of frames (clips)
like a movie can show pre second and refresh rate is how many times your
monitor will refresh per second or is that milliseconds. I did not do a good
job explaining but I hope you get the idea.

Randy

 

[derek / nul]

refresh rate is the scan rate that can be done by the monitor

Frame rate is the scan rate that can be done by a program (game) running on the
computer.

 

[Ben Pope]

Can someone explain ... is there a difference between frame rate and
refresh rate?

Yep.

Refresh rate is the number of frames the display draws per second and is
fixed (for any given video mode).

Frame rate is the number of times the screen is rendered per second. So if
the frame rate is half the refresh rate, every other time the display is
drawn, it can change.

I know that I generally run at 75 Hz refresh rate.

And I, 85Hz at 1600x1200, but drop the resolution to say, 800x600 and my
refresh rate will be 120Hz.

But I've seen people claiming more than 100 frame rate. I know of no
consumer grade monitor that goes at 100 or more refresh rate. That's
what leads me to think that frame rate is different from refresh rate.

Indeed.

The screen can only change when both the display is refreshed, and the frame
is redrawn.

You can redraw the image as fast as you like, but there is little point in
doing it faster than the refresh rate as the monitor has no way of
displaying it. In fact, if you do do it faster than the refresh rate, then
you can get a thing called tearing, where the top half of one frame is
drawn, and the lower half of another frame is drawn within one display
refresh - this locks horrible and is the reason I turn on "wait for verticel
refresh" or "vertical synch". If you turn off vertical synch you can render
as fast as you like, useful for benchmarking.

There is plenty of point in refreshing the screen faster than the redraw, as
the brightness of the phosphor on the monitor (if you have a CRT) decays
over time and this is why you can see flicker. I like to stay above 80Hz
refresh.

Ben

 

[Thor]

Can someone explain ... is there a difference between frame rate and refresh
rate?

I know that I generally run at 75 Hz refresh rate.

That is the refresh rate of the monitor. It redraws the screen 75 times per
second, and must be synced with the video output of the card. Therefore, the
card controls the refresh rate of it's video output stages.

But I've seen people claiming more than 100 frame rate. I know of no
consumer grade monitor that goes at 100 or more refresh rate. That's what
leads me to think that frame rate is different from refresh rate.

It IS different, but not totally unrelated.
the frame rate is how many times per second that a new scene can be rendered
by the card's graphic processor. While it may be possible for the card to
render a new frame of data 100 times per second, the monitor can only
display as fast as the refresh rate. They usually have to be "synced" to a
certain degree to prevent tearing. The tearing is caused by the card
redrawing the scene out of sync with the refresh interval of the monitor. As
I undertstand it, when you turn on Vsync, it forces the card to wait until
the refresh interval to render a new frame. Lastly, there are lots of
monitors that will do 100Hz or better refresh rate.