Not all SE's are bad

[Tw00sh]

For a sub 200 dollar card, this 5900SE looks rather impressive.

http://www.hothardware.com/hh_files/S&V/gffx_5900xt.shtml

Not sure how realiable this review is, but if those numbers are anywhere near accurate, this would be a nice mid grade alternative for under 200 dollars. Beats the 9600PRO series pretty soundly.

 

[Overclocker550]

man another "se" as if there werent enough slow editions and you can get a 9700 pro for $200 and itll own that soundly

 

[Tw00sh]

You obviosly did not look at the review

Also, currently on pricewatch

$230 - RADEON 9700 Pro 128MB
$187 GeForce FX 5900 128MB

For a sub 200 dollar card

You must of missed that part!

 

[glock19owner]

The test card was a 9600XT...not a 9600 Pro and the 9600XT will beat the 9700 Pro's also...

Just switched from Nvidia to ATI...and they used the CAT 3.9's...the CAT 3.2's are actually the best benchmarking CAT's right now...I would like to see what the 9600XT would do using the CAT 3.2's against the 5900SE then...bet there wouldnt be that much of a difference using the CAT 3.2's when testing...the 9600XT might probably beat the 5900SE in most test...

But it comes down to user preference...

 

[Tw00sh]

That is true and I really like to see more reviews, just cannot find any on line? It still beat it nicely though. Not sure the driver change would make up the loss?

 

[Overclocker550]

The test card was a 9600XT...not a 9600 Pro and the 9600XT will beat the 9700 Pro's also...

Just switched from Nvidia to ATI...and they used the CAT 3.9's...the CAT 3.2's are actually the best benchmarking CAT's right now...I would like to see what the 9600XT would do using the CAT 3.2's against the 5900SE then...bet there wouldnt be that much of a difference using the CAT 3.2's when testing...the 9600XT might probably beat the 5900SE in most test...

But it comes down to user preference...

what??????? the 9600xt eats a 9700 pro??????
also why use older cats? the 3.9s are the most recent. also you get HL2 with the 9600xt. you can get a 9700 pro used on ebay for $200 easy and itll own in most games, especially HL2

 

[glock19owner]

becasue the cat 3.2's are better for benching marking...newer doesnt mean better...and if you look at the ORB...the top ATI users...except OPP (using the 3.10's but has a massive OC that normal people can not reach) are using the 3.2's...they offer the fastest marks..expect nature...and yes...the 9600 XT does beat the 9700 Pro in most benchmarks...the buzz is...the 9600XT is what is going to be replacing the 9700 Pro shortly...which is why ATI is pressing it so much...

9600 XT specs:

Memory Interface: 128-bit
Rendering Pipelines: 4
Pixel Fillrate (Gpixels/sec): 2.0
Engine Clock (MHz): 500
Memory Clock (MHz): 600

9700 Pro Specs:

Memory Interface: 256-bit
Rendering Pipelines: 8
Engine Clock (MHz): 325
Memory Clock (MHz): 650

Sources: Ati and digital-life.com

 

[Yuriman]

Those are not correct. The 9700pro realy is:

9700 Pro Specs:

Memory Interface: 256-bit
Rendering Pipelines: 8
Engine Clock (MHz): 325
Memory Clock (MHz): 650

The 9800pro is the same way, just slightly higher clocks.

 

[glock19owner]

Those are not correct. The 9700pro realy is:

9700 Pro Specs:

Memory Interface: 256-bit
Rendering Pipelines: 8
Engine Clock (MHz): 325
Memory Clock (MHz): 650

The 9800pro is the same way, just slightly higher clocks.

I was editing when you posted...i caught the mistakes when I was re-reading it

 

[Yuriman]

Also, the 9800 is what replaced the 9700. The 9600xt is just replacing the 9600pro.

 

[glock19owner]

Also, the 9800 is what replaced the 9700. The 9600xt is just replacing the 9600pro.

Talking about the 9700 Pro replacement...I already knew that the 9800np replaced the 9700...

But I thought the 9800se was replacing the 9800 while the 9600XT was replacing the 9700 Pro...hard to keep up with one place saying one thing and another place saying something else...and so far ATI hasn't said either or...or nothing I have read has been from ATI press release...to me...just one of those things that I will wait to find out when ATI does disc. the 9700 Pro...

 

[glock19owner]

Yuriman, since you seem to be more up to date on ATI...just chnaged over a few months ago...and its hard to keep up when you have to work all of the time and have a family to support...got a QT for you...

Is this true...rumor ville...about the 9800se...I know it only has 4 pipe lines...but some people have said the other 4 pipe lines was disabled, while others state that they have been totaly taking out of the design...do you happen to know which is true?

I know this is somewhat off topic...but still goes with the thread becasue if the 9800se has the other 4 disabled and not removed, then it might be possible to mod the other 4 pipelines to achieve a full 8 pipe line design...and if that is the case...the 9800se will still be cheaper then the 5900se and would beat it with a mod to enable the other 4 pipelines...

 

[Yuriman]

The 9800se does have disabled pipelines. They can be enabled, but the success rate is less than that of the 9500 softmod last I heard. Also, all the 9800se's under $200 have ram 128bit, and if you get over that you might as well buy a full 9800. I think the AIW 9800se is the only one left with 256bit.

EDIT: I just looked on newegg, and they have a bunch of cheap ones using crappy ram running at 500mhz. It seems they are cutting back on the ram too.

 

[glock19owner]

Thanks for the info on the pipelines...much appreciated...and I noticed that about newegg a few days ago...that is why I have started looking at the 9600XT...if going with a 128 bit card...might as well go with one that kicks it...

 

[Speed_Mechanic2]

Your comparing apples to oranges when you compare a 5900SE with a 9800SE. Simply because they're both marked SE doesn't mean they are castrated the same.

The 9800SE is a bid for companies that used the R350 core to get rid of the increasing stockpile of slightly defective cores. There's only one ATI-approved version of the 9800SE, but this is not found easilly in the market (especially in North America). The castrated 9800SE with 128-bit memory interface (along with the 4 disable pipelines) is the one that flooded the market, and won't ever catch up with a true R3x0 card's performance. . .

eVGA's FX 5900SE uses nVidia's 5900 XT core, which are nVidia's new lower-end (as opposed to ATI's use of XT on their higher-end) NV35 cores. But this card still has a 256-bit memory interface and, therefore, performance isn't as affected as much by the use of a cheaper core, which I'm not entirely aware of exactly how it differs from a standard NX35 core (maybe not at all?). It appears that the 5900 XT (although on lower-end XT models; card makers are halving the memory-interface) is just a lower-clocked (and maybe slightly lower clock-for-clock) 5900.

 

[glock19owner]

You took that totally wrong...wasn't compairing them...was just stating that the 9800se could possible beat the 5900se IF it could be modded to achieve the full 8 piplines...

 

[Overclocker550]

"and yes...the 9600 XT does beat the 9700 Pro in most benchmarks...the buzz is...the 9600XT is what is going to be replacing the 9700 Pro shortly...which is why ATI is pressing it so much..."

really? I did not know! can you back up your claims with benchmark links proving that the 9600xt can indeed eat a 9700 pro? I was under the impression the 9700 pro was over 50% faster

 

[Speed_Mechanic2]

You took that totally wrong...wasn't compairing them...was just stating that the 9800se could possible beat the 5900se IF it could be modded to achieve the full 8 piplines...

I wasn't just referring to your posts, but just a sense of clarifaction. It's also not just if it can be modded, the card also has to have a 256-bit memory interface. Otherwise, it's simply like an overclocked RV350/RV360 card.

 

[Overclocker550]

I am thinking he is wrong but I give him a chance to back it up

 

[Bailey]

performance isn't as affected as much by the use of a cheaper core, which I'm not entirely aware of exactly how it differs from a standard NX35 core (maybe not at all?). It appears that the 5900 XT (although on lower-end XT models; card makers are halving the memory-interface) is just a lower-clocked (and maybe slightly lower clock-for-clock) 5900.

The core on ALL the 5900 lines is the same (NV35@400mhz), the difference is the speed of the memory, depending on the line it's either 2.2ns or 2.8ns. The XT does use lower RAM latancies to make up for the slower clock.

Someone please point me to a link where ANY 5900 gets "owned" by ANY 9600pro or 9600XT?

All I ever see are reviews like this one -

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/evga_e-geforce_fx_5900_xt_review/default.asp

And that's not to disparage the 9600, it's a damn fine 4 pipe card - but it IS a 4 pipe card & there's nothing you're going to do to it that will allow it to keep up with an 8 pipe card ala the 9700/9800/5900's.