Fall 2003 Video Card Roundup - Part 3: ATI's Radeon 9600 XT
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Derek Wilson on October 15, 2003 10:26 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Warcraft III: Frozen Throne Performance no AA/AF
Warcraft III is an incredibly popular game, and while its not the most stressful graphics test out there, the replay mode offers the ability to track a player and speed the game up to 8 times its original speed. This can really push some numbers through the CPU and GPU. We ran this test on a replay of a tournament match we found online.
Here we see a marginal gain from the 9600 XT. Interestingly enough, the Ti 4200 performs better than the 5600 Ultra in this test. Of course, none of these cards can catch the 9700 Pro and 9800 XT.
Warcraft III: Frozen Throne Performance 4X AA/8X AF
Our performance improvements from XT evaporate when we turn on AA and AF. This seems to indicate that we have a memory bandwidth limitation which both cards share in this game. The 5600 Ultra and Ti 4200 appropriately swap positions when the memory bandwidth requirements are increased.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
70 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 15, 2003 - link
Anyone notice that the GeForce5600 Ultra beats out the 9600 Pro, and even the 9600 ProXT, in games that dont use DX (namely they use Open GL)? Like in Wolfenstein, Jedi Academy. I also seem to remeber it winning in Quake 3, in some other reviews I read. It also won in Never Winter Nights; is that an Open GL game too?Just seems to me that if Nvidia can fix whatever probelms the Geforce line of cards have with DX, they may prove to be very good cards, as open gl seems to suggest. Just a thought.
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 15, 2003 - link
Dear Anand Lal Shimpi & Derek Wilson,As I can't see the benchmark graphs I can't extract any useful information from this review. Please don't ever use Flash in your reviews again.
Thank you.
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 15, 2003 - link
Oh, yeah, thanks for including the Ti4200. Lessthanthree.Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 15, 2003 - link
It was the Radeon 9500 plain that could be modded, not the 9500 Pro, you NITRATE-OXIDIZING FIENDThe 9500 Pro was quite a buy, though, never mind modding.
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 15, 2003 - link
I've seen 9700 non-pro's going for around $200... Considering the performance hike from overclocking and the ability to just overclock/flash the NP to a Pro, I'd say the 9700 is a better deal than the 9600XT. :)Anonymous Posting: As I've said before, I'm unable to procure an email address that isn't blocked under AT's anti-freemail signup requirement, so I'm out of luck in replying to these entries if they lock it to unsubscribed users. :/
Lastly, I use a Ti4200 and I'm satisfied to see my Ti4200 putting out 28fps in Halo... On the other hand, I'd like to hear from the AT folks after they've played Halo for about an hour or so using 45.23 Dets with a 4200 clock of 265/545, because I've experienced game-ruining artifacting that V-sync can't correct... And no other game has the same error, so it's not the Dets or the clock speeds that's causing it (to my knowledge).
Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 15, 2003 - link
i think you can find the 9700pro at a few places for around $220Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 15, 2003 - link
Have I missed something in the pricing of these cards? "Given the very low price of the Radeon 9700 Pro we'd strongly suggest buying a 9700 Pro over a Radeon 9600 XT". A quick check on pricewatch indicates that very low price to be $249.00. Has the accepted price of a midrange card gone that high?Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 15, 2003 - link
Agreed to 22, this Anonymous posting system does nothing but feed the trollsAnonymous User - Wednesday, October 15, 2003 - link
Yawn.. the article responses have certainly gone to shit ever since this new reply and comment system was added.Anonymous User - Wednesday, October 15, 2003 - link
#20-sorry that you're an idiot