Radeon 9600 XT vs. 9600 Pro

[Michael Sabadish]

Hello,

I'm contemplating one of the above. I've yet to see a head to
head comparison of the cards or of their specs and I'm wondering if
anyone has seen this info. It seems the XT will be worth waiting for
as I assume it should run faster than the Pro and will come bundled
with HL2.
Finally, what is the benefit of the 256mb over the 128mb versions
of each?

Many thanks in advance,

Michael

 

[neopolaris]

Hello,

I'm contemplating one of the above. I've yet to see a head to
head comparison of the cards or of their specs and I'm wondering if
anyone has seen this info. It seems the XT will be worth waiting for
as I assume it should run faster than the Pro and will come bundled
with HL2.
Finally, what is the benefit of the 256mb over the 128mb versions
of each?

Many thanks in advance,

Michael

I'm not sure there is a 256MB version of the 9600XT. I preordered a 128MB
one today. The core clock is 100MHz faster than a 9600pro while the memory
remains the same.

neopolaris

 

[S.SubZero]

The XT is simply clocked higher and has a larger fan. That's the only
difference besides the bundle.

Also, 128MB vs 256MB.. I don't know many games that use over 64MB now (maybe
UT2K3 but barely). Doom3 is the first game I can think of where 128MB is
recommended. 256MB is fine, but you may be upgrading again before they even
fill 128MB.

-SSZ

 

[Thomas]

The XT is simply clocked higher and has a larger fan. That's the only
difference besides the bundle.

Also, 128MB vs 256MB.. I don't know many games that use over 64MB now
(maybe UT2K3 but barely).

I think if you play a more serious game at 1600*1200, at 16x Aniso, and 4x
FSAA, you'll come near the 128 MB limit ;-)

But well, i limit myself to 1280*960 anyway...

Thomas

 

[Ed Forsythe]

Doesn't the 9600XT's 0.13 Micron core make it a better OC candidate than the
older 0.15 Micron chips?

 

[Inglo]

Doesn't the 9600XT's 0.13 Micron core make it a better OC candidate than the
older 0.15 Micron chips?

The 9600 Pro is 0.13 too. You could be cynical and say the 9600XT is
just an overclocked 9600 Pro, and you'd be relatively close to the
truth. Plus the HL2 "bundle" is actually a Steam subscription that lets
you download the single player HL2 when it comes out in April.
I have my 9600 Pro core going at 475 MHz, running perfectly stable. So I
bet if you did a benchmark comparison between the two you wouldn't see
too much of a difference.
I think the push back of the HL2 release is going to hurt the XT sales,
there's not that much of an incentive to buy one now. If HL2 was going
to be available next month and you were absolutely ready for a new card,
I'd say hell yes to getting an XT.

 

[J.Clarke]

Isn't the XT built with the new low voltage R360 core which is
completely different from the R350 of the current 9600?

Where did you see any indication that the R360 was "completely
different" from the R350--the press seems to think that the
only difference is that it's a little faster.

According to
ATI, it won't require a secondary power input because it needs less
power, and should run much cooler than the 9600 Pro.

No existing 9600 requires a secondary power input, and the 9600 Pro
already runs pretty cool--take a look at the heat sink on the Sapphire
9600 Ultimate vs the 9800 Ultimate--it's pretty small.

The 9600 XT uses
the same core as the 9800 XT and is reported to have temperature
sensors on the board and be supplied with ATI's Overdrive software
which will allow for "adaptive" overclocking.

That's a new feature of the XT boards--clever idea. As for the 9600,
the 9600 uses an RV360, which appears to be an RV350 with a higher clock
speed.

From all I've read, I'd
say the 9600 XT is a very different card.

Where have you read anything to this effect?

 

[Frank Weston]

Isn't the XT built with the new low voltage R360 core which is completely
different from the R350 of the current 9600? According to ATI, it won't
require a secondary power input because it needs less power, and should run
much cooler than the 9600 Pro. The 9600 XT uses the same core as the 9800
XT and is reported to have temperature sensors on the board and be supplied
with ATI's Overdrive software which will allow for "adaptive" overclocking.
From all I've read, I'd say the 9600 XT is a very different card. It could
approach the 9700 Pro in performance, be affordable, and work well in
systems with smaller power supplies and/or less cooling capability. I'm
waiting for some independent testing, but if it's anything like ATI's
claims, I'll sure find good use for one.

 

[neopolaris]

I don't see any secondary power connector on the 9600XT. It's red too ;-)

neopolaris

 

[Thomas Andersson]

The XT is simply clocked higher and has a larger fan. That's the only
difference besides the bundle.

Not true, there's been ome redesigning of the core. The memory controller is
improved and they've added the thermal sensoring for example..

Also, 128MB vs 256MB.. I don't know many games that use over 64MB now
(maybe UT2K3 but barely). Doom3 is the first game I can think of
where 128MB is recommended. 256MB is fine, but you may be upgrading
again before they even fill 128MB.

Not entirely true that either, I think there's already games that takes
advantage of the extra ram and run faster with it (I think Comanche 4 is
one).

Best Wishes
Thomas

 

[Thomas Andersson]

Doesn't the 9600XT's 0.13 Micron core make it a better OC candidate
than the older 0.15 Micron chips?

9600 have always been .13, 9800 is .15

Best Wishes
Thomas

 

[Inglo]

I don't see any secondary power connector on the 9600XT. It's red
too ;-)

neopolaris

There's no secondary power connector on the 9600 Pro either.

 

[Frank Weston]

The differences are adaptive overclocking, a faster clock, a different core,
and a different manufacturing process. Review are starting to show up, so
read them and make up your own mind. Go here:
http://www.neoseeker.com/Hardware/new.html?date=2003-10-15#61933

 

[@lias]

9600 have always been .13, 9800 is .15

Best Wishes
Thomas

Now it's using SOI...