How is a ATI Radeon™ 9000 Pro 128MB?

I'd go for the Ti4200. Whilst Toms Hardware isn't the best site around, this link should give you a basic idea of how the cards perform: http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20021218/index.html

ahem, this belongs in techtalk:emutalk:

Also go all out, get a 9700....good god...I cant believe I said that

From my experience ATI radeon 9000 pro is a really good mid range card. So far all the games I have run are fast and image quality is great with AA and fsaa enabled in pj64 and pc games. From what I found, The PNY Ti 4200 card you want is 250/500 while the default Radeon 9000 pro is 275/550 mhz...

Whobetta said:

From my experience ATI radeon 9000 pro is a really good mid range card. So far all the games I have run are fast and image quality is great with AA and fsaa enabled in pj64 and pc games. From what I found, The PNY Ti 4200 card you want is 250/500 while the default Radeon 9000 pro is 275/550 mhz...

Click to expand...

Mhz are nothing. The GF3 series and up (including all gf4 MX's), all have Accuview Anti-Aliasing, which outperforms the Radeon 9000's FSAA by a very very significant amount. Overall, the Gf4 ti4200 outperforms the 9000 in about every aspect.

AA enabled (radeon 9000) estimated % speed loss:

2x: 25%

4x: 50%

AA enabled (GF3 and higher, gf4 mx included) estimated % speed loss:

2x: 15%

4x: 30%

Quincunx: 20%

6x (hack): 50%

8x (hack): 75%

cooliscool said:

Mhz are nothing. The GF3 series and up (including all gf4 MX's), all have Accuview Anti-Aliasing, which outperforms the Radeon 9000's FSAA by a very very significant amount. Overall, the Gf4 ti4200 outperforms the 9000 in about every aspect.

AA enabled (radeon 9000) estimated % speed loss:

2x: 25%

4x: 50%

AA enabled (GF3 and higher, gf4 mx included) estimated % speed loss:

2x: 15%

4x: 30%

Quincunx: 20%

6x (hack): 50%

8x (hack): 75%

Click to expand...

hey cools how can you get the hacked AA?

Although if you were considering a 9500 (which is also 150$) it might be a bit more of an even match, I've recently had the opertunity to play with both cards extensivly and the Geforce 4 outpreforms the 9500 in every aspect, including the fact that ATI still has crashy buggy drivers (I was to early to test the 3.0, which, from all accounts, are the buggiest yet).


For 150$ get a gold sample Geforce 4 4200 and O/C it to near 4600 speeds, tis what I did.

Oy, on another thought - going from Geforce 2 to anything isn;t gonna help roms much, yer card already does everything bout as fast as it will do it, even with AA my preformance didn't go up any. But UT2003 from 10FPS all details lowest to 60FPS all details Highest rocks.

Although if you were considering a 9500 (which is also 150$) it might be a bit more of an even match, I've recently had the opertunity to play with both cards extensivly and the Geforce 4 outpreforms the 9500 in every aspect, including the fact that ATI still has crashy buggy drivers (I was to early to test the 3.0,
which, from all accounts, are the buggiest yet).

Click to expand...

I dont know what you tested but 9500 pro beats ti 4200 and even matches or beats ti 4600 in most benchmarks. Go here: http://www.xbitlabs.com/video/radeon9500-9700

Plus its a fully Compliant directx 9 card. The catalyst 3 drivers are also good I have had barely any problems with them, and ATI is the first to release DX9 drivers, so they will be improved..

I really wish people were more informed...

If you can get a Radeon 8500 for cheaper, its probably the better deal. A Ti4200 is better than both 8500 & 9000, but its more worthwhile to purchase a 9500 Pro, as a Ti4600 cant even contend with AA & AF, or even high res.

Mhz are nothing. The GF3 series and up (including all gf4 MX's), all have Accuview Anti-Aliasing, which outperforms the Radeon 9000's FSAA by a very very significant amount. Overall, the Gf4 ti4200 outperforms the 9000 in about every aspect.

Click to expand...

the GF3 & GF4 series also do multi-sampling AA, while the 9000 does super-sampling. Thats the reason why both the 9000 and 8500 suffer loss, but the final result is much clearer, as it also does texture aa at the same time. The GF3 sucked @ AA, also, and all nVIDIA GPU's upto date cant do AF at all, unless you like slideshows.

6x (hack): 50%

8x (hack): 75%

Click to expand...

So software hacks allow hard ware anti-aliasing? Quincunx is just regular multi-sampling with a blur filter. Unless this so called 6x & 8x AA is ordered grid and done in software, its not possible.

Which of the 2 graphics cards above would be a better choice, and will help my ROMS!! Thanks!

Click to expand...

A better CPU would help a lot more than a gfx card update, but that would be saying all the games you play are emulated. Also, it sounds like you have SD-Ram (just by the PC configuration), and since a P4 has a quad-pumped bus its best to have ram as fast as possible to keep up with the proccesors bus, and SD-Ram is the slowest :saint:.

The next suggestion, get rid of that POS Live .

Radea said:

I really wish people were more informed...

If you can get a Radeon 8500 for cheaper, its probably the better deal. A Ti4200 is better than both 8500 & 9000, but its more worthwhile to purchase a 9500 Pro, as a Ti4600 cant even contend with AA & AF, or even high res.


the GF3 & GF4 series also do multi-sampling AA, while the 9000 does super-sampling. Thats the reason why both the 9000 and 8500 suffer loss, but the final result is much clearer, as it also does texture aa at the same time. The GF3 sucked @ AA, also, and all nVIDIA GPU's upto date cant do AF at all, unless you like slideshows.


So software hacks allow hard ware anti-aliasing? Quincunx is just regular multi-sampling with a blur filter. Unless this so called 6x & 8x AA is ordered grid and done in software, its not possible.


A better CPU would help a lot more than a gfx card update, but that would be saying all the games you play are emulated. Also, it sounds like you have SD-Ram (just by the PC configuration), and since a P4 has a quad-pumped bus its best to have ram as fast as possible to keep up with the proccesors bus, and SD-Ram is the slowest :saint:.

The next suggestion, get rid of that POS Live .

Click to expand...

In the GF3+, 6x and 8x are apperent in the hardware, just not selectable. I'll find the article on it.

In the GF3+, 6x and 8x are apperent in the hardware, just not selectable. I'll find the article on it.

Click to expand...

:O :O :O

Please do! (really) I'd be interested in that