![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
my 9500pro still rocks
- Thread starter NexusX
- Start date
FadedSpark
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2005
- Messages
- 7,556
nice spam... <_< get a life/girlfriend/?
yes, 9500;s are fine... no, we dont need to hear about it
yes, 9500;s are fine... no, we dont need to hear about it
That's where you're wrong. The 9500 could be modded, but not the Pro- the distinction of the Pro from the other cards was in the PCB and bus width, not in the actual core (number of pipelines).Nightrain said:
Sorry, just had to prove that you could make a discussion out of this thread.
I think main thing is how doo You feel about Your PC. If 9500 plays games You play and way it's good for You then it's a good card.
Like many people play CS 1,6 with MX440 and it works good for them. They realy doo not need 7800GTX in SLi to play that game faster at 800x600.
In My laptop I have Centrino 1,6 1 MB L2, 512 MB DDR333 and Ati Radeon 9000 with 64 MB and it runs CS CZ quite good. Still My main gaiming PC has 6800GT cause I like to play newer games to.
So it rocks fro You it's O.K. just doo not say it rock for all people cause one with 1200$ invested in their GPU's will have a good lugh at You and become very agressive. Compairing to their grafic solution even my card realy sucks (4x slower)
MD
Like many people play CS 1,6 with MX440 and it works good for them. They realy doo not need 7800GTX in SLi to play that game faster at 800x600.
In My laptop I have Centrino 1,6 1 MB L2, 512 MB DDR333 and Ati Radeon 9000 with 64 MB and it runs CS CZ quite good. Still My main gaiming PC has 6800GT cause I like to play newer games to.
So it rocks fro You it's O.K. just doo not say it rock for all people cause one with 1200$ invested in their GPU's will have a good lugh at You and become very agressive. Compairing to their grafic solution even my card realy sucks (4x slower)
MD
In the interest of contributing some worthwhile discussion to an almost worthless thread, I will say that my 9500 Pro served me well until I got my x800xt a few months ago. I played all the way through HL2, D3, and Far Cry, on decent settings at 1024x768 res. The best part was I bought it retail when Best Buy was fazing them out for $120, and was replacing them with the 9600 Pro. Best purchase I ever made, hands down. 2 years of gaming for $120? I wish I could do that every 2 years for the rest of my life!
jebo_4jc said:
LOL
jebo_4jc, I paid the extra $70? to get a 9800 pro and passed the games you listed in much much higher settings and still have my card kicking ass today! The path you took was silly, you buy a powerful card only after all the good games are gone, what sense does that make
. At least NexusX overclocked his video card to equal my 9800 pro even though his cpu royally sucks LOLSomehow, you aren't understanding. Notice that I said I bought the 9500 Pro when it was still in retail. Back then, the 9600 and 9800 series were just coming out, and the 9800 Pro was a $300 card......Jasonizer said:LOL
And all the good games are gone? WTF are you trying to say?
QwertyJuan
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2000
- Messages
- 11,285
All I have is an ATI 8500 128MB
Sucks to be me.
QJ
Sucks to be me.
QJ
skyeandangus
n00b
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2004
- Messages
- 57
GVX said:The 9500pro is no better than my 9600XT, which isn't a very good card.
I suppose if all you do is play Lemmings for DOS, than the 9500pro may be good enough, but in any kind of modern gaming neither of our cards are any good
dude, it's just a 9700 pro with 128bit instead of 256bit. I run EQ2 and High Performance settings with little problems. The card is better than a 5900 , IMHO. It still has legs. I run Doom, half life 2, and BF2 at reasonable rates too.
Note: I mean a stock ATI 9500 pro, and not that those lame 9500s with the dumbed down RAM. Those kinda stink.
pr0nasaurus rex
n00b
- Joined
- May 23, 2005
- Messages
- 62
Imagine nVidia releasing a down-clocked 7800GTX, with cut-down memory bus, but still with all 24 pipes, for $200. That's what it was like back then, and the 9500 Pro is a very capable card. In fact, it blows the doors off a 9600XT.
...nope:pr0nasaurus rex said:
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041004/vga_charts-07.html
In Doom3 at standard 1024x768 settings these are the results:
9500pro = 26.7fps
9600xt = 25.3fps
-both of which, of course, are completely disgraceful framerates. The 9500pro may have 8 pipelines, but it's clocked nearly half as high as the 9600XT and has a lower memory bandwidth:
9600XT= 2.104 gigapixel/sec fillrate (w/ overdrive) & 9.6 gigabyte/sec bandwidth
9500pro=2.2 gigapixel/sec fillrate (no overdrive) & 8.6 gigabyte/sec bandwidth
In the end, the specs between the two cards are almost identicle. Although, thanks to the extra quad, overclocking the core on the 9500pro would obviously give much better results than with a 9600xt.
Big Fat Duck
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2005
- Messages
- 601
i think the 9700 pro right when it came out was the best card ever
silentnswift
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2005
- Messages
- 262
Hmmm, I was looking for a cheap alternative to my 8500. But I cant seem to find a 9500 Pro ANYWHERE, only the 9600XT. I find the 9550, whats that?
the 9550 is a 4-pipe card clocked at 250Mhz (in other words, STAY AWAY FROM IT!!1).silentnswift said:
Seriously, if the 9600XT is a pos at playing today's games than anything less than that will be truly wretched. I would recomend nothing less than a 6600 for playing today's games.
BTW, the 9500pro was discontinued nearly two years ago when it was replaced by the 9600XT (you won't find a new one anywhere).