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
Aquamark3 Performance
Despite what some people would like everyone to think, Aquamark3 is really a test of how people developing software now envision DirectX 9 pixel and vertex shaders will be used in the future. The situation is very reminiscent of the first Sony PlayStation: the first games that used the technology were limited by the hardware until developers really learned to work with the hardware rather than on the hardware. As time progressed, we went from what were essentially ports of 16bit console games to amazingly complex and beautiful games like Gran Turismo 2. The same thing will happen with shader technology, and no amount of guessing and throwing functions at a GPU will tell you how its performance will really be in the future. Essentially, my advice is that any piece of software that claims it is a valid predictor of future performance should be taken lightly. We based our decision to include Aquamark3 on its popularity in the community. Aquamark3 is a cool piece of software, with some pretty neat tests, and a high score in any benchmark can still earn bragging rights in the forums. The only Aquamark3 test we ran was the publicly available 1024x768 4X AF no-AA in order to maximize the usefulness of these numbers to the community. Our drivers were set to allow application control of AF and AA.
The 9600 XT makes some good gains over the 9600 Pro in Aquamark. For a 25% increase in clock speed, we get more than a 17% increase in frame rate. We still aren't close to the 9700 Pro, but those kinds of numbers are not bad by any stretch.
We can attribute the solid increase in frame rate under Aquamark to its extensive use of shaders which make performance more defendant on core clock speed than any thing else.
All the other cards in this benchmark fall where we would expect them.
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