9600pro vs. 9500softmod stats

See the posts below for stats....

I know to alot of people already know the outcome but I figure some people might like to see the statistics. Also I was bored and remembered I had some scores saved so I figured I would compare them. They are almost excatly the same except for the 9600pro had a 185 FSB which I forgot I could run on this board so I'm off to change that and test it. .

This is good info, man. I kinda suspected it before, but thanks for clearing it up. The 9500p is like 50 bucks cheaper than the 9600p and the softmod doesn't cost anything, so new buyers should take this into consideration.

It showed it to you? It was giving me stupid problems, I'll try and get it back up.

*EDIT there we go.

2 bad links...

me thinks 3dM03 can only have one valid published compare link at a time...the free version anyway

could you just tell us the scores? without seeing them i am a little confused......are you saying the scores are both neck and neck?

there's no guarantee that the softmod will work without artifacts, in fact it usually doesn't

A 50% chance does NOT equal "usually doesn't"... In fact, it seems to me that the newer cards are softmodding BETTER, most likely because the yields on the R300 cores are probably at an all-time high as the manufacturing process runs longer and longer and gets better.

Just for some anecdotal evidence on the SoftMod success rate:

I've had three Radeon 9500 NP that I tried to softmod in the past month. The first one failed (produced checkers) but overclocked to 385/315; the second one failed (checkers again) and had trouble remaining stable at even stock speeds (it was RMAed); the third one - which is in my rig now - also failed to Softmod without producing checkers (although not as bad as the first two) and overclocks to 385/325. I'm not trying to make any guess on the success rate here, but for people who are expecting a successful mod, caveat emptor.

Oh no James.Miller the 9500 beats it by 600+ points in 3dmark03. Here is the 9600p stats, I'll post the 9500sm in the next reply.

Operating System Microsoft Windows XP

DirectX Version 9.0a

Mobo Manufacturer Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd.

Mobo Model GA-7VAXP Ultra

AGP Rates (Current/Available) 8x / 4x, 8x

CPU AMD Athlon(tm) Processor 2312 MHz

FSB 185 MHz

Memory 512 MB



Display Information

Graphics Chipset ATI RADEON 9600 Series

Driver Name RADEON 9600 PRO

Driver Version 6.14.10.6343

Video Memory 128 MB

Core Clock 502 MHz

Memory Clock 360 MHz



Sound Information

Sound Adapter Driver Name Avance AC97 Audio

Sound Adapter Driver Version 5.10.0.4010



Benchmark Settings

Program Version 3DMark03 Revision 2 Build 0

Resolution 1024x768@32 bit

Texture Filtering Optimal

Pixel Processing / Antialiasing None

Post Processing false

Vertex Shaders Optimal



Main Test Results
3DMark Score 4161 3DMarks

CPU Score 467.0 CPUMarks



Detailed Test Results


Game Tests

GT1 - Wings of Fury 137.1 fps

GT2 - Battle of Proxycon 26.0 fps

GT3 - Troll's Lair 24.0 fps

GT4 - Mother Nature 27.7 fps



CPU Tests

CPU Test 1 54.7 fps

CPU Test 2 7.9 fps



Feature Tests

Fill Rate (Single-Texturing) 1091.3 MTexels/s

Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing) 1924.2 MTexels/s

Vertex Shader 13.0 fps

Pixel Shader 2.0 34.7 fps

Ragtroll 17.0 fps

9500np soft mod stats

Operating System Microsoft Windows XP

DirectX Version 9.0a

Mobo Manufacturer Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd.

Mobo Model GA-7VAXP Ultra

AGP Rates (Current/Available) 8x / 4x, 8x

CPU AMD Athlon(tm) Processor 2430 MHz

FSB 180 MHz

Memory 512 MB



Display Information

Graphics Chipset ATI RADEON 9700/9500 Series

Driver Name RADEON 9500

Driver Version 6.14.10.6360

Video Memory 128 MB

Core Clock 302 MHz

Memory Clock 304 MHz



Sound Information

Sound Adapter Driver Name VIA AC'97 Enhanced Audio (WAVE)

Sound Adapter Driver Version 5.12.1.3513



Benchmark Settings

Program Version 3DMark03 Revision 3 Build 0

Resolution 1024x768@32 bit

Texture Filtering Optimal

Pixel Processing / Antialiasing None

Post Processing false

Vertex Shaders Optimal



Main Test Results
3DMark Score 4771 3DMarks

CPU Score 537.0 CPUMarks



Detailed Test Results


Game Tests

GT1 - Wings of Fury 160.0 fps

GT2 - Battle of Proxycon 32.0 fps

GT3 - Troll's Lair 29.0 fps

GT4 - Mother Nature 27.2 fps



CPU Tests

CPU Test 1 61.4 fps

CPU Test 2 9.3 fps



Feature Tests

Fill Rate (Single-Texturing) 1472.2 MTexels/s

Fill Rate (Multi-Texturing) 2209.3 MTexels/s

Vertex Shader 14.6 fps

Pixel Shader 2.0 43.7 fps

Ragtroll 20.5 fps


I realize most people know this but this ends it IMHO, even with less FSB the 9500np beats it out.

ahhh thats ok then. almost identicle to my score:
http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k3=737105
4102

it's not a 50% chance, it's a 20% chance, look at more sources buddy, and from what i noticed, newer cards have a lesser chance not greater

too many people claim to have successful mods, they keep the mod even with artifacts so they can claim to have a 9500->9700 card with higher benchmark scores, a mod with ANY artifact is UNSUCCESSFUL, sometimes you have to look hard and be sensitive to changes in the details, i'd say at least 40-50% of the "successful mods" are unsuccessful

once again, the point is you shouldn't encourage people to buy a 9500np thinking they will have a 9700 because they most likely won't, at least not without artifacts which is useless imo, artifacts shouldn't be tolerated, you benchmark junkies make me sick

Actually R4z0r4mu5 Pr|m3 I wouldn't say some artifacts makes it unsuccessful. I have very minor artifacts on mine, like in the glasses of the shooter in the lobby benchmark, and thats it. Too me thats plenty successful, I now have a 300.00 graphics card I paid 135.00 for. I wouldn't think most people use a card with small artifacts "just to say they have a soft modded card", that would be foolish and I really could care less if people like what card I have, I use it because its better than my old one.

R4z0r4mu5 Pr|m3 said:

it's not a 50% chance, it's a 20% chance, look at more sources buddy, and from what i noticed, newer cards have a lesser chance not greater

too many people claim to have successful mods, they keep the mod even with artifacts so they can claim to have a 9500->9700 card with higher benchmark scores, a mod with ANY artifact is UNSUCCESSFUL, sometimes you have to look hard and be sensitive to changes in the details, i'd say at least 40-50% of the "successful mods" are unsuccessful

once again, the point is you shouldn't encourage people to buy a 9500np thinking they will have a 9700 because they most likely won't, at least not without artifacts which is useless imo, artifacts shouldn't be tolerated, you benchmark junkies make me sick

Click to expand...

how can you say that? do you REALLY know weather cards are artifacting or not? of corse you dont.

I dont know why you dont believe in the cards, i really dont. Is it jelousy? hatrid of ati???? what is it?

whatever it is, i know you are wrong. ive seen quite a few softmodded cards myself and they all have zero artifacts - mostly sapphire but also some from grandmars.

whatever the success rate is, it's better than 20%.

R4z0r4mu5 Pr|m3 said:

it's not a 50% chance, it's a 20% chance, look at more sources buddy, and from what i noticed, newer cards have a lesser chance not greater

Click to expand...

Actually, if you've gone back to look at the poll per your own recommendation, you'd see that it is indeed better than a 50% chance of getting a 100% successful mod. I've been here, been on HardForums, been on Rage3D, been on AnandTech's forums, been just a whole lot of places and nearly everyone is having around 50/50 luck (or better) with the mod.

And don't give me the "People tend not to say anything if they fail" because they most certainly do. Your next retort will simply be "well those people who failed may not be on a website to offer their story", to which I say is total bull. The general idiot society of mankind wouldn't know about this mod except for what's available in the forums and on the hardcore websites that cover this type of news. If you're one of the people reading these few websites that offer information for the "mod", then you're VERY VERY likely one of those people who would have an account to their discussion forums.

R4z0r4mu5 Pr|m3 said:

too many people claim to have successful mods, they keep the mod even with artifacts so they can claim to have a 9500->9700 card with higher benchmark scores, a mod with ANY artifact is UNSUCCESSFUL, sometimes you have to look hard and be sensitive to changes in the details, i'd say at least 40-50% of the "successful mods" are unsuccessful

Click to expand...

Ok, so tell me something... If you have to take a still screenshot and go over it with a magnifying glass until you find the FOUR PIXELS who's RGBA value is three points less on the blue channel than they're supposed to be, does that mean the card is useless? No. If you have to sit and scruitinize each screen for three minutes until you find something wrong, then it obviously isn't very wrong. Or if you get a distortion in a 3DMark benchmark scene but in absolutely no other games you play, then is it really an issue?

I can say with 110% certainty that my card is PERFECTLY softmodded with absolutely zero issues. I don't care how many times I loop 3Dmark, Unreal Tournament, CounterStrike, Return to Castle Wolfenstien, NFS V, that certain alpha we can't talk about, and any number of other things -- I NEVER get artifacts. How hard is that to comprehend that many people are just as lucky?

R4z0r4mu5 Pr|m3 said:

once again, the point is you shouldn't encourage people to buy a 9500np thinking they will have a 9700 because they most likely won't, at least not without artifacts which is useless imo, artifacts shouldn't be tolerated, you benchmark junkies make me sick

Click to expand...

They most likely WILL, whether you admit it or not. Sore because you didn't get in on this deal? Too bad. You seem to think that every single person who has a 9500np that's modded has nothing else in mind except benchmarking it from hell to breakfast and somehow showing you up.

Guess what? A LOT of people who have 9500np's are using them for something else that maybe should be considered: CHEAP GAMING. You know, like the types of people who would buy a 9600 too?

R4z0r4mu5 Pr|m3 said:

you benchmark junkies make me sick

Click to expand...

LMAO

james.miller said:

how can you say that? do you REALLY know weather cards are artifacting or not? of corse you dont.

I dont know why you dont believe in the cards, i really dont. Is it jelousy? hatrid of ati???? what is it?

whatever it is, i know you are wrong. ive seen quite a few softmodded cards myself and they all have zero artifacts - mostly sapphire but also some from grandmars.

whatever the success rate is, it's better than 20%.

Click to expand...

first of all, i'm right about all of it, of course

i don't know why you urge others on to go ahead and buy crippled cards for a slim chance of making it a great card, i know they have artifacts because i've looked at a few forums and see people noticing artifacts sooner or later because some are only seen in certain games, it's not that i don't like or believe in a good valued card, i just don't like you guys recommending these cards with biased views

because it worked for you, doesn't mean it will work for them

because you see no artifacts doesn't mean there aren't any

what you have is a done deal, you got a good deal, a lot of people keep the mods with artifacts just for the scores and convince others and themselves that they're not artifacts, i've seen it (not saying you guys are doing it), it's not fair to the guy who buys it and gets screwed over 3 times in a row because you guys think the success rate is so high, it's really not, the poll on this forum is bogus, look at other forums plz

check out method().man's experience, 3 failed to mod

also, at least to me, ANY artifact is unacceptable

for the record, i don't hate ati, i will probably buy a 9xxx series card for my next upgrade if ati would just have better driver support, for linux and such

the reason you don't hear from people with failed mods is that, they don't like to talk about it, and you guys who think you have successful mods flaunt it like a cheap hoe

I dont know the actual numbers of failures to success but I do know that between myself and 2 friends we have gotten 3 successful mods with ZERO artifacts out of 5 cards.

Looks to be better then 50% success rate to me hehe.

I have another 9500np coming from Newegg that should be here monday for a system I am building for a friend, will let you know how that one goes.

I've seen the succes rate identified anywhere from 20% to as high as 50%...I'm thinking it depends *MUCH* on what people will live with as varying degrees of "succes."

My hunch is that only about 20% mod w/ no artifacts whastoever in any game, anysituation, and about 50% display verylittle artifacting at all, or very, very minor artifacting or checkerboarding, but in very few games or situations, that people have no problems living with.

R4z0r4mu5 Pr|m3 said:

first of all, i'm right about all of it, of course

i don't know why you urge others on to go ahead and buy crippled cards for a slim chance of making it a great card, i know they have artifacts because i've looked at a few forums and see people noticing artifacts sooner or later because some are only seen in certain games, it's not that i don't like or believe in a good valued card, i just don't like you guys recommending these cards with biased views

because it worked for you, doesn't mean it will work for them

because you see no artifacts doesn't mean there aren't any

what you have is a done deal, you got a good deal, a lot of people keep the mods with artifacts just for the scores and convince others and themselves that they're not artifacts, i've seen it (not saying you guys are doing it), it's not fair to the guy who buys it and gets screwed over 3 times in a row because you guys think the success rate is so high, it's really not, the poll on this forum is bogus, look at other forums plz

check out method().man's experience, 3 failed to mod

also, at least to me, ANY artifact is unacceptable

for the record, i don't hate ati, i will probably buy a 9xxx series card for my next upgrade if ati would just have better driver support, for linux and such

the reason you don't hear from people with failed mods is that, they don't like to talk about it, and you guys who think you have successful mods flaunt it like a cheap hoe

Click to expand...

actually i dont recommend people try for the mod. search for my posts - i always reccomend the 9500pro or 9700np over the 9500np. ALWAYS.

you havnt show any evidence to disprove me or anybody else. what you have is an opionion, not the facts. All im asking, that that you state its your opionion.

first of all, i'm right about all of it, of course

Click to expand...

OH yes, sorry, 'course you are - because you've show me some hard evidence, havn't you?

If people cards fail, believe me they DO talk about it.