Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

techweenie1 · Feb 23, 2004, 11:55 AM

Here is the deal, I currently have a Radeon 8500 in my G4, which originally came with a 400mhz. A few weeks ago I upgraded the processor to a OWC 1.4ghz DDR 2MB L3 Cache, which has increased the performance dramatically, however when it comes to gaming, which I do pretty often when I am not doing something important, games such as Halo run fine until 5-6 Aliens show up, then I get some serious lags. Wondering if it is worth it to upgrade to a Radeon 9800 Pro for this configuration, will it improve game play on Halo and other newer games? I plan on doing some other upgrades too, might bump up the ram from 512 mb to 1 gb..and thinking about getting one of those ATA 133 Cards with USB2 and FW800 if I can find one, only have seen ones with FW400.

SouthPaW1227 · Feb 23, 2004, 12:15 PM

I wouldn't drop the cash on that card...I don't even think it'll run under AGP 4x to be honest. A Radeon 8500 or something would be the best bang for your buck in this situation.

EdipisReks · Feb 23, 2004, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by SouthPaW1227:
I wouldn't drop the cash on that card...I don't even think it'll run under AGP 4x to be honest. A Radeon 8500 or something would be the best bang for your buck in this situation.

he already has a radeon 8500, as it says in his post. the 9800 will run on most 2x AGP equpped PC's, but that doesn't mean that it will run on 2x AGP equipped Macs. i would contact ATi and see. in terms of performance, you would give up a little bit running it on a 2x bus, but it shouldn't be more than 10%, max. i believe that www.anandtech.com did an agp bus comparison a while ago, and there wasn't that much difference between 2x, 4x, and 8x agp buses. the cards are simply not putting out enough data for the increased throughput to have much of an effect.

The Placid Casual · Feb 23, 2004, 12:49 PM

It is seriously not worth shelling out money on a 9800 Pro...

You will see little, or no improvement.

techweenie1 · Feb 23, 2004, 12:51 PM

I know that it works in 2X AGP, it's designed for AGP 4x/2x http://www.barefeats.com/rad9800.html I just was just curious if 2x would hinder its performace. Thanks for the link EdipisReks I will check out the performance between the 2x/4x performance.

techweenie1 · Feb 23, 2004, 01:05 PM

Hmm I thought this was intresting...
http://www.arstechnica.com/ask-ars/2000/ask-9.html

The Placid Casual, if you don't think this card will solve my problems, what do you think the culprit is? Maybe my 100mhz bus? I know the G5's now use 800mhz, 900mhz, and 1ghz system busses depending on the model...hmm eventually I will upgrade to it, but I want to get at most 2 more years out of this machine.

a2daj · Feb 23, 2004, 01:15 PM

It depends on the game engine. Not a lot of games take full advantage of the AGP bus but there are some games which do, like Halo. It's very dependant on the GPU. In fact, except in No Shader rendering, most of the graphics are handled by the video card. It relies heavily on the system bus and AGP port to feed the video card. With a AGP 2X port, a Radeon 9800 Pro may not be fed data quickly enough so you wouldn't be pushing the card. Maybe someday I can convince my brother to let me test my Radeon 9800 Pro in his 1.4 GHz Sawtooth to really see the impact of a AGP 2X port in various games.

Scotttheking · Feb 23, 2004, 02:24 PM

The 8500 is already bottlenecked by the 2X AGP. The 9800 isn't worth getting. Now if you got a DA chassis (133FSB, 4X AGP) then you'll see some improvement.

bstone · Feb 23, 2004, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by Scotttheking:
The 8500 is already bottlenecked by the 2X AGP. The 9800 isn't worth getting. Now if you got a DA chassis (133FSB, 4X AGP) then you'll see some improvement.

Is this realistic on this series of G4s?

techweenie1 · Feb 23, 2004, 04:43 PM

hmm I guess that means I should start saving up for the G5 eh?

ginoledesma · Feb 23, 2004, 06:48 PM

I agree with Scott. The Radeon 8500 on the G4/400 is already starved. The GeForce 3 did not fare any better. One note to consider is that newer cards like the Radeon 9800 have a much higher electrical power consumption, which the AGP 2X bus in the G4/400 cannot supply. You'll have to be sure that the card you get is "Universal AGP" (which means it has been _tested_ to work on different AGP busses). ATI usually sells cards that are universla AGP, but OEM/vendors may not.

If you're looking to improve performance on your Mac, the Radeon 9800 will definitely not give you any significant, much less observable, results. I'd go for a new Mac if you want to play newer games decently.

L E · Feb 24, 2004, 02:40 AM

The 9800 probably won't run at all due to the fact it has high voltage requirements that an AGP 2x slot can't provide.

voodoo · Feb 24, 2004, 06:25 AM

While AGP 2x is the bottleneck for some cards, AGP 4x isn't even saturated yet. AGP 8x is practically unused.

techweenie1 · Feb 24, 2004, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by L E:
The 9800 probably won't run at all due to the fact it has high voltage requirements that an AGP 2x slot can't provide.

Actually it does run, and has been tested, the non-OEM model 2x/4x AGP directly from ATI requires that you plug a power cable from your power supply into it, since the 2x/4x slot doesn't provide enough power to it. But I think I might try to find a 133 fsb 4x AGP mobo for this aging sawtooth (100 fsb, 2x AGP). Is there anyway I could just buy one from apple or somewhere other than Ebay? I highly doubt I can, even though I have a G4, albeit older. I know for a fact that the OWC processor I have will work in the Graphite and Digital Audio mobos with 133mhz fsb, also will my older power supply work with this board if I decide to get it?