[Floyd WHO]

I need to upgrade the video card in my G4 AGP and was curious if the 9000 is a good selection? You pick these cards up new on Ebay for $118 which sounds like a good deal. I'm confused as to the number of monitors it will drive though. Will it drive two CRT monitors??

[indigoimac]

It all depends on wat u have now

[Floyd WHO]

Originally posted by indigoimac:
It all depends on wat u have now

G4 400Mhz AGP (sawtooth) With an old ATI AGP Rage. Changing the video card should improve the system performance. True??

[Captain Egotist]

Not a whole lot. You'd be better off getting a CPU upgrade, or an OEM apple chip that someone doesn't want anymore (933 or 1ghz chip).

- Rob

[Detrius]

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
Not a whole lot. You'd be better off getting a CPU upgrade, or an OEM apple chip that someone doesn't want anymore (933 or 1ghz chip).

- Rob

That's not entirely true. While a CPU upgrade will definitely speed up processing, etc... it won't do nearly as much as a graphics card to speed up the user interface. If he's got an old rage card, his machine isn't even running Quartz Extreme. ANY graphics card upgrade is going to make that machine feel silky smooth.

Your normal applications won't run any faster, but the GUI will no longer be computed on the processor--it'll be on the graphics card. That, in turn, makes your machine run programs a hair faster (not noticeably, but measurably). It will feel much better.

Then consider a processor upgrade before jumping ship to a new machine.

Check http://www.macsales.com to see what they have. Last I looked, they had a modified 9600 for $120, and that would be much better than a 9000.

[italiano]

The 9600's are for 4X AGP Machines (Digital Audio Models and above) - they will not work in a Sawtooth or a Gigabit Ethernet Mac.

[Floyd WHO]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Detrius:
That's not entirely true. While a CPU upgrade will definitely speed up processing, etc... it won't do nearly as much as a graphics card to speed up the user interface. If he's got an old rage card, his machine isn't even running Quartz Extreme. ANY graphics card upgrade is going to make that machine feel silky smooth.

Your normal applications won't run any faster, but the GUI will no longer be computed on the processor--it'll be on the graphics card. That, in turn, makes your machine run programs a hair faster (not noticeably, but measurably). It will feel much better.

Then consider a processor upgrade before jumping ship to a new machine.

Check http://www.macsales.com to see what they have. Last I looked, they had a modified 9600 for $120, and that would be much better than a 9000. [/QUOTE

I went to macsales and the 9600 is for a 4X computer and will not function in my computer, (I think). They have a 9800 but it is >$200. So again I'm looking at the 9000. Is there a reason that you are opposed to this card??
Let me ask another question will it drive two CRT monitors. It appears like in the description that it will but the verbage is kind of vague.

[bossep]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Floyd WHO:

Originally posted by Detrius:
That's not entirely true. While a CPU upgrade will definitely speed up processing, etc... it won't do nearly as much as a graphics card to speed up the user interface. If he's got an old rage card, his machine isn't even running Quartz Extreme. ANY graphics card upgrade is going to make that machine feel silky smooth.

Your normal applications won't run any faster, but the GUI will no longer be computed on the processor--it'll be on the graphics card. That, in turn, makes your machine run programs a hair faster (not noticeably, but measurably). It will feel much better.

Then consider a processor upgrade before jumping ship to a new machine.

Check http://www.macsales.com to see what they have. Last I looked, they had a modified 9600 for $120, and that would be much better than a 9000. [/QUOTE

I went to macsales and the 9600 is for a 4X computer and will not function in my computer, (I think). They have a 9800 but it is >$200. So again I'm looking at the 9000. Is there a reason that you are opposed to this card??
Let me ask another question will it drive two CRT monitors. It appears like in the description that it will but the verbage is kind of vague.

I have the same Mac as you have, and bought ATI 8500 with 64MB memory. The card made a HUGE difference! You can take advantage of QE. My Sawtooth felt like new! I can recommend it highly!! The alternative is the ATI 9800 Mac Edition 128MB 2x/4x. I am about to switch as ATI 8500 do not seem to be in the 'Tiger' list Apple has. Go for ATI 8500 if you are it stands between that one and ATI 9000.

[Skip Breakfast]

I have the 9000 128MB card, and I can tell you that it may give your machine a little more life, but it will not be as rewarding as it would had you a faster logic board.

BTW, this thread belongs in Peripherals or Power Macs, as video card upgrades are not mods.

[Floyd WHO]

Originally posted by Skip Breakfast:
I have the 9000 128MB card, and I can tell you that it may give your machine a little more life, but it will not be as rewarding as it would had you a faster logic board.

BTW, this thread belongs in Peripherals or Power Macs, as video card upgrades are not mods.

I appoligize, I thought by removing the Apple OEM video card and replacing it with an Third party product I would be Modifying my computer.

[Skip Breakfast]

Nah. The card slots are there for a reason. Mods really involve case swaps, overclocking, radical cooling measures, soldering, cutting metal, making your own cables, etc.

[SSharon]

An 8500 card was just sold in the marketplace for under $50 so it may be worthwhile to see what else is there. Also, from that same thread in the marketplace it seems that the 8500 is better than the 9000, at least the 9000 pro that I have.

[Floyd WHO]

Originally posted by Skip Breakfast:
Nah. The card slots are there for a reason. Mods really involve case swaps, overclocking, radical cooling measures, soldering, cutting metal, making your own cables, etc.

How about upgrading my processor, The computer already needs and has one but by buying a third person processor it would radically change the performance of my computer. Mod or Peripheral????

[bossep]

Originally posted by SSharon:
An 8500 card was just sold in the marketplace for under $50 so it may be worthwhile to see what else is there. Also, from that same thread in the marketplace it seems that the 8500 is better than the 9000, at least the 9000 pro that I have.

I have read somewhere, can't remember where, about the 'development' or 'mod' chain that included 8500, 9000 and something else. What I am sure about is that the 8500 is better than 9000. Not very logical for me!

[bossep]

Originally posted by Floyd WHO:
How about upgrading my processor, The computer already needs and has one but by buying a third person processor it would radically change the performance of my computer. Mod or Peripheral????

Oh yesssss!!! Go for 1.2 or 1.4GHz, you will benefit from the L3 cache. I am going for a cpu upgrade, may will wait for the 7448.

[OldCodger73]

Floyd, back to your original question. I have the older 64MB ATI Radeon 9000 Pro Mac Edition in a G4 dual 450 gigabyte computer, and it has two connectors, an ADC and a DVI. I think it included a DVI to VGA adapter. If the 128 MB is the same you would need an ADC to VGA adapter to run two CRTs, which I'm assuming are VGA. Also if you do buy on eBay, make sure it's for the Mac as PC cards won't work unless you can somehow flash them.

I think the 8500 might have DVI and VGA connectors instead of the ADC, but I'm not sure. Again, if you go this route, make sure it's for a Mac.

Does your present ATI APG Rage even support two monitors?

As far as a proccessor upgrade and a new video card, be sure and add up all cost for upgrading and compare it to the cost of a new computer. There's a certain point where it doesn't make any sense to upgrade, but it's up to you on deciding where that is.

[MORT A POTTY]

on GPUs, the 9800Pro is definitely worth 200 bucks. how can you complain about the price? I paid 300 just a month or so before the price drop and you know what? it doesn't bother me because it's such a fantastic card.

and you're running a card that won't even use Quartz Extreme, much less Core Image when tiger is out, and I tell you this, you WILL want a nice GPU once Tiger is out. it makes the nice effects look so much better. the ripple when you launch dashboard widgets is awesome, and that's just the beginning. once developers actually leverage the technology I promise you, you'll want a nice high-end GPU, and the Radeon 9800 Pro, now for how cheap it is is a great deal and there is no better time to buy it.

after that, look into a nice dual processor upgrade.

[Floyd WHO]

Originally posted by OldCodger73:
Floyd, back to your original question. I have the older 64MB ATI Radeon 9000 Pro Mac Edition in a G4 dual 450 gigabyte computer, and it has two connectors, an ADC and a DVI. I think it included a DVI to VGA adapter. If the 128 MB is the same you would need an ADC to VGA adapter to run two CRTs, which I'm assuming are VGA. Also if you do buy on eBay, make sure it's for the Mac as PC cards won't work unless you can somehow flash them.

I think the 8500 might have DVI and VGA connectors instead of the ADC, but I'm not sure. Again, if you go this route, make sure it's for a Mac.

Does your present ATI APG Rage even support two monitors?

As far as a proccessor upgrade and a new video card, be sure and add up all cost for upgrading and compare it to the cost of a new computer. There's a certain point where it doesn't make any sense to upgrade, but it's up to you on deciding where that is.

Thanks for the Info. No my ATI Rage doesn't support two monitor but I have an even older PCI Video card installed that drives my second monitor. This is definetly computing on a shoe string. But what the heck at least it isn't Windows.
Upgrading my video and CPU will probably cost <$600 still signifigantly less than a new computer unless I buy a Mini and I have a SCSI card that I wouldn't have a slot for if I went that route. Thanks again for the Info.

[Floyd WHO]

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
on GPUs, the 9800Pro is definitely worth 200 bucks. how can you complain about the price? I paid 300 just a month or so before the price drop and you know what? it doesn't bother me because it's such a fantastic card.

and you're running a card that won't even use Quartz Extreme, much less Core Image when tiger is out, and I tell you this, you WILL want a nice GPU once Tiger is out. it makes the nice effects look so much better. the ripple when you launch dashboard widgets is awesome, and that's just the beginning. once developers actually leverage the technology I promise you, you'll want a nice high-end GPU, and the Radeon 9800 Pro, now for how cheap it is is a great deal and there is no better time to buy it.

after that, look into a nice dual processor upgrade.

Now this is really helpfull. I didn't know until this post that Tiger would utilize features that I would not get with a cheaper lower end card. How do I know buy reading the card Spec's that the card will be compatable with these new technologies?? What do I look for in the Spec's??

I beleive Sonnet offers a Dual Processor card and I ran their compatability test and It came back that My G4 Sawtooth (400) was not compatable (I wonder how many times I can misspell Compatable). Will this be true in all cases of third party cards????

[italiano]

The 9800 Pro card ROX!

[Macola]

I upgraded a single 450 with an ATI Rage to a dual 1.4 with the ATI 9000 Pro 128 MB card. It was a huge performance boost in CPU-intensive tasks, obviously, but the GPU performance went from X-bench scores of Quartz:72 and OpenGL:60 to Quartz:166 and OpenGL:132.

The 9000 Pro has ADC and DVI outputs, so you'll need the appropriate adapters to drive two CRTs. If you have the cash, go for the 9800, but you'll still be pretty happy with the 9000.

[reader50]

Originally posted by Floyd WHO:
... How do I know by reading the card Spec's that the card will be compatible with these new [Tiger] technologies?? What do I look for in the Spec's??

I believe Sonnet offers a Dual Processor card and I ran their compatibility test and it came back that My G4 Sawtooth (400) was not compatible (I wonder how many times I can misspell Compatible). Will this be true in all cases of third party cards????

Here are some answers to these questions, and to several earlier ones.

Apple published a list of graphics cards compatible with Core Image, linked from this page. They were the Radeon 9500 (and higher) on the ATi side, and the GF 5200 (and higher) on the nVidia side. However, when the Mac Mini was introduced with a 9200 graphics chip, the list of compatible cards vanished. An Apple engineer admitted that the specs for Core Image compatibility have not been finalized - this was during MacWorld SF in January. The compatible cards list is still missing today. I suspect that Core Image will use multiple rendering paths, and weaker graphics cards will implement fewer of the features, but will still implement some. Until Apple reposts a revised list, no one knows for sure.

Your test for compatibility of dual CPU cards discovered a known problem with early Sawtooth models. Early models shipped with a northbridge chip (which contains the memory controller, among other things) Rev 3 - this version is not compatible with dual CPUs. Later Sawtooths shipped with the northbridge chip Rev 7, which is compatible with dual CPUs. This problem affects dual CPU cards from all sources, not just Sonnet.

The Radeon 8500 is somewhat more powerful than the Radeon 9000. In ATi's numbering scheme, the first number designates the "generation" of the graphics card, while the later numbers place the card's performance within that generation. An 8500 is a midrange 8th generation card, while the 9000 is the bottom-level 9th generation card. The current ATi generation is the 10th generation, which they label as the "X" generation. ie - Radeon X800 is a high-level card, and X300 is a lower-level card within the X generation.

The Radeon 8500 had been intended to put ATi on top of nVidia again, and there were going to be other 8th generation chips. But nVidia came out with souped-up drivers for the GF3 at the time, and ATi decided to abandon the 8th generation and concentrate on finishing the 9th generation chips. This turned out to be a good decision, the Radeon 9700 and related chips proved to be excellent chips, and nVidia had performance problems with their competing 5th generation chips, such as the GF5700. The Radeon 8500 was left stranded as the only 8th generation chip that made it to market.

The Radeon 8500 has two texturing units per rendering pipeline, while the Radeon 9000 has one texturing unit per pipeline. That is the only performance differance worth noting. If a game uses multiple textures per pass, and that was the sole bottleneck, then an 8500 could reach twice the frame rates of a 9000. In practice, there will always be other bottlenecks, but the 8500 will tend to be a little faster than a 9000 at the same clock speed and with the same amount of VRAM.

ATi eventually bowed to the confusion of people thinking that an "8500" is less than a "9000" and renamed the 8500 -> 9200. That put it in the proper performance range for the 9th generation series of chips. And yes, that means the Mac Mini is actually powered by a Radeon 8500 with 32 MB of VRAM.

The Rage 128 Pro has two video ports (DVI and VGA) but it is a single-monitor card. If you plug into both ports at the same time, you get the DVI output - the VGA output is blanked.

The Radeon 8500 is a dual-monitor card. It has DVI, VGA, and S-video out. If you use all three ports, only two will work at a time. The S-output steals the analog signal from the DVI port, so you can't use the DVI port with an adapter to drive a VGA monitor at the same time the S-port is used. When the S-port is not used, you can use the VGA port and an adapter on the DVI port to drive two VGA monitors. A DVI -> VGA adapter is included in the retail package.

The Radeon 9000 is a dual-monitor card. It has ADC and DVI ports. A DVI -> VGA adapter is included in the retail package. Even if the ADC port is not powered in your system, you can still use it with adapters to drive a DVI or VGA monitor. Adapters from ADC -> DVI or ADC -> VGA are not included in the retail package, they must be obtained separately.

[Disco Scottie]

Originally posted by reader50:
ATi eventually bowed to the confusion of people thinking that an "8500" is less than a "9000" and renamed the 8500 -> 9200. That put it in the proper performance range for the 9th generation series of chips. And yes, that means the Mac Mini is actually powered by a Radeon 8500 with 32 MB of VRAM.

New poster here, just signed up tonight...

So am I understanding correctly that if I buy a 9200 new from OWC, I'm essentially getting an 8500 with 128mb instead of 64mb? I too have a 400mhz G4 AGP that I want to upgrade, and was going to buy an 8500 off eBay so I could have dual monitors. But I'd rather go with the 9200 if it's the same thing.

[reader50]

Yes, the 9200 retail from OWC is a Radeon 8500 chip with a new name and more VRAM. But there are a few other variables:

The retail 9200 is a PCI card, the retail 8500 is an AGP card. Also, I don't know offhand the GPU and VRAM clock speeds of the two cards, which can have a significant impact.

The 128 MB of VRAM is very useful, but you will probably get better performance from the AGP card under most circumstances. I'd expect you to get lower frame rates from the PCI card at the same settings, but you could increase texture quality with less impact. Expos� performance (with the QE PCI hack enabled) might like the 128MB if you run your monitors at high resolutions with lots of windows. But it's hard to say, since each of these situations stress not only the amount of VRAM, but also the interface bandwidth and (to a lesser extent) the interface latency.

[a2daj]

The 8500 was rebadged the 9100, not 9200. The 9200 is a Radeomn9000 with compatibility for AGPx8 (which is not taken advantage of on the Mac side). The 9000 has better memory management. Somethings the 9000 will be faster while others the 8500 will be faster. For the most part, however, they're basically equivalent. The main difference on the mac side is in the ports on the card. 8500 has VGA, DVI, and SVideo while the 9000 has ADC and DVI ports.

Another way to look at the Radeon cards is based on their chip core name, like R100, R200, R250, etc.

R100 is the original Radeon.

R200 = 8500 R250 = 9000 R280 = 9200.

R300 = 9700 R350 = 9800. R360 = 9800 XT.

R420 = X800 XT

[Captain Egotist]

Originally posted by Floyd WHO:
I appoligize, I thought by removing the Apple OEM video card and replacing it with an Third party product I would be Modifying my computer.

See, I thought so too. I posted some speakers in the mod section and was reprimanded for it. I was then told that a mod involves a screwdriver.... well, you need one to put in a new video card... so, it'd be amod.

[Captain Egotist]

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
the Radeon 9800 Pro, now for how cheap it is is a great deal and there is no better time to buy it.

Actually I'm pretty sure it'll somehow be even CHEAPER in a few months.

[Lateralus]

Are you sure? Because Mac graphics card prices seem to stay at their price for many many months on end.

[Floyd WHO]

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
See, I thought so too. I posted some speakers in the mod section and was reprimanded for it. I was then told that a mod involves a screwdriver.... well, you need one to put in a new video card... so, it'd be amod.

I'm glad someone agrees with me. I think if you are removing Apple OEM parts from the internal of the computer it's a mod. But the thread was moved to Power Mac and that's cool. I have gotten more useful information from this thread than any I've ever read or posted.
The outcome of this thread is that I am going to upgrade the CPU and the video card. The 9800 will probably be the Graphic selection and the OWC 1.4 will be the CPU. Can't wait.

[jamil5454]

And...

RV300 = 9500
RV350 = 9600
RV360 = 9600XT


The Radeon 9000, 9100 and 9200 are all modified versions of the 8500. However, there is one major difference - the 9000 and 9200 only have one texture unit while the 9100 has two. The 9100 is almost identical to the 8500, and it was the first of the low-end 9xx0 series. So, to sum it up:

Radeon 8500 has 4 pixel pipelines and 2 TMUs
Radeon 9100 has 4 pixel pipelines and 2 TMUs
Radeon 9000 has 4 pixel pipelines and 1 TMU
Radeon 9200 has 4 pixel pipelines and 1 TMU

The 9200 is basically a 9000 with AGP 8x support.

Theoretically, at the same clock and memory speed, all these cards will have the same performance when doing single texturing. However, when using multitexturing (which is almost always), the 8500 and 9100 will technically perform 2x better. Thus, if you can find an 8500 with 128mb of memory then I would get it, assuming the drivers for it are up to par. But unless you're a heavy gamer (which is near impossible on a mac), any card with 128mb of memory will serve you well. Expose REALLY likes that RAM.

[bossep]

Originally posted by jamil5454:
And...

RV300 = 9500
RV350 = 9600
RV360 = 9600XT


The Radeon 9000, 9100 and 9200 are all modified versions of the 8500. However, there is one major difference - the 9000 and 9200 only have one texture unit while the 9100 has two. The 9100 is almost identical to the 8500, and it was the first of the low-end 9xx0 series. So, to sum it up:

Radeon 8500 has 4 pixel pipelines and 2 TMUs
Radeon 9100 has 4 pixel pipelines and 2 TMUs
Radeon 9000 has 4 pixel pipelines and 1 TMU
Radeon 9200 has 4 pixel pipelines and 1 TMU

The 9200 is basically a 9000 with AGP 8x support.

Theoretically, at the same clock and memory speed, all these cards will have the same performance when doing single texturing. However, when using multitexturing (which is almost always), the 8500 and 9100 will technically perform 2x better. Thus, if you can find an 8500 with 128mb of memory then I would get it, assuming the drivers for it are up to par. But unless you're a heavy gamer (which is near impossible on a mac), any card with 128mb of memory will serve you well. Expose REALLY likes that RAM.

But not when Tiger has jumped into your Mac! Then you will need a 9600, 9700, 9800 or X800, otherwise CI will not be fully working.

[P]

Here's a page detailing the difference between the 8500 (R200) and the 9000 (RV250). The 9200 is indeed the same as the 9000, only with AGP 8x support.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=1655&p=2

The 9000 actually has a few improvements over the 8500 as well.

[Disco Scottie]

Okay, one more question... can you use a 9800 in a Sawtooth? Actually if someone could list which cards will work in my machine, that would help tremendously in making a final decision! Then I just have to decide what CPU upgrade to go with...

[bossep]

Originally posted by Disco Scottie:
Okay, one more question... can you use a 9800 in a Sawtooth? Actually if someone could list which cards will work in my machine, that would help tremendously in making a final decision! Then I just have to decide what CPU upgrade to go with...

You can use the ATI 9800 Mac Edition AGP 2x/4x. I am concidering it, but I am not sure if my power supply is enough. I have two hard drives and one USB2 PCI-card. I am not sure if the Sonnet 1.4GHz upgrade card together with ATI 9800 is such a great combination? The Sawtooth has 200W power supply. The level 3 cache makes the Sonnet card consume power. The alternative is the 1.7GHz card without level 3 cache, or wait for the 7448.

My answer for you is, yes! You have to use the power cable meant for extra hard drives.

[Disco Scottie]

Originally posted by bossep:
My answer for you is, yes! You have to use the power cable meant for extra hard drives.

Hadn't thought about the power issue. And something else I didn't mention before, I still boot up in OS 9 on a semi-regular basis (audio apps I've never upgraded). So I really need a video card that will function in both 9 and X. Does that rule out the 9800?

Maybe I should just go with the 8500 for this machine, keep it as my dual-boot beast, and look ahead to a new box for all the Tiger fun...

[Floyd WHO]

Originally posted by bossep:
You can use the ATI 9800 Mac Edition AGP 2x/4x. I am concidering it, but I am not sure if my power supply is enough. I have two hard drives and one USB2 PCI-card. I am not sure if the Sonnet 1.4GHz upgrade card together with ATI 9800 is such a great combination? The Sawtooth has 200W power supply. The level 3 cache makes the Sonnet card consume power. The alternative is the 1.7GHz card without level 3 cache, or wait for the 7448.

My answer for you is, yes! You have to use the power cable meant for extra hard drives.

Thanks for another consideration I had not thought about. I too have two power supplies a bunch of USB devices. The 9800 is a lot more card than (see the sitck shift analogy on this thread) I need as I am not a gamer. I did notice on the OWC web site that they recommend a 300 watt supply.

[Floyd WHO]

Originally posted by Disco Scottie:
Okay, one more question... can you use a 9800 in a Sawtooth? Actually if someone could list which cards will work in my machine, that would help tremendously in making a final decision! Then I just have to decide what CPU upgrade to go with...

The sawtooth is a 2X AGP so when you look at card spec's make sure that it is compatable with 2X AGP.

[bossep]

Originally posted by Disco Scottie:
Hadn't thought about the power issue. And something else I didn't mention before, I still boot up in OS 9 on a semi-regular basis (audio apps I've never upgraded). So I really need a video card that will function in both 9 and X. Does that rule out the 9800?

Maybe I should just go with the 8500 for this machine, keep it as my dual-boot beast, and look ahead to a new box for all the Tiger fun...

Shouldn't be any problems! If upgrading, do go for ATI 9800, not the ATI 8500. Actually wait doing anything with you graphics card until Apple has announced their final list of 'Tiger' cards. If ATI 8500 pass, go for that, otherwise go for 9800. That is the way I am thinking.

[MORT A POTTY]

I seriously doubt the Radeon 8500 is going to pass for Core Image. it lacks some major major features that Core Image requires.

Vertex Shaders anyone?

[bossep]

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
I seriously doubt the Radeon 8500 is going to pass for Core Image. it lacks some major major features that Core Image requires.

Vertex Shaders anyone?

Agree
I believe the only ATI solution is the 9800 Mac Edition. The next question is what you miss out? Will my Sawtooth get slower? Will I only miss 'eye-candy'? I have asked at Apple Store in London, but they do not want/can't answer.

[Captain Egotist]

Originally posted by Disco Scottie:
Okay, one more question... can you use a 9800 in a Sawtooth? Actually if someone could list which cards will work in my machine, that would help tremendously in making a final decision! Then I just have to decide what CPU upgrade to go with...

Dude. This isn't like some rocket science. If your computer has a 2x/4x agp slot... guess what? It can use cards that are 2x/4x AGP!

If it has an 8x agp slot, it needs an 8x agp graphics card!

There really isn't any mystery to it.

[OldCodger73]

I'm definitely not sure of this but my understanding is that the sawtooth is 2X but will support a 4X card, as long as that card is also capable of running at 2X. I'm not sure if that's true of 8X cards too. But what's the speed gain if the card will only function at 2X?

[Captain Egotist]

Originally posted by OldCodger73:
I'm definitely not sure of this but my understanding is that the sawtooth is 2X but will support a 4X card, as long as that card is also capable of running at 2X. I'm not sure if that's true of 8X cards too. But what's the speed gain if the card will only function at 2X?

A sawtooth has a 2x agp slot. Most (if not all) 4x AGP cards can run in 4x and 2x agp slots. As for speed gains, I have no idea, depends on the card, system, everything. I do think that putting a 9800 in a 2x slot is kinda stupid.

[jamil5454]

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
I seriously doubt the Radeon 8500 is going to pass for Core Image. it lacks some major major features that Core Image requires.

Vertex Shaders anyone?

Actually, at least on the PC side of OpenGL, Vertex shaders can be efficiently emulated by the CPU. Pixel shaders are the one that needs to be supported by the GPU.

That said, the 8500 is only DX8.1-level hardware while the 9800 is DX9-level hardware. This means that the 9800 has more advanced shaders than the 8500, which in turn produces cooler effects.

I'm assuming that CoreImage will still produce effects with a DX8.1-level card, just not as good as it could be.

[bossep]

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
A sawtooth has a 2x agp slot. Most (if not all) 4x AGP cards can run in 4x and 2x agp slots. As for speed gains, I have no idea, depends on the card, system, everything. I do think that putting a 9800 in a 2x slot is kinda stupid.

I can only post this that I found at www.xlryourmac.com :

I got noticeable performance gains with a single 400 while I was waiting for my processor. all of this was already stated.

for his question, a single 1.2 with a 9800 is likely better than a single 1.7 with no L3 cache and keeping his 8500.

[MORT A POTTY]

Originally posted by bossep:
I can only post this that I found at www.xlryourmac.com :

I got noticeable performance gains with a single 400 while I was waiting for my processor. all of this was already stated.

for his question, a single 1.2 with a 9800 is likely better than a single 1.7 with no L3 cache and keeping his 8500.

not really, cause I doubt he could run the single 1.2 with a 9800 Pro. his PSU is only 200Watts. a great reason for going to the 7447A CPU is because it uses less power than 7455 based upgrades.

[MORT A POTTY]

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
not really, cause I doubt he could run the single 1.2 with a 9800 Pro. his PSU is only 200Watts. a great reason for going to the 7447A CPU is because it uses less power than 7455 based upgrades.

and yes, jamil, I meant pixel shaders. look at the time of the post, I was tired

[bossep]

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
not really, cause I doubt he could run the single 1.2 with a 9800 Pro. his PSU is only 200Watts. a great reason for going to the 7447A CPU is because it uses less power than 7455 based upgrades.

My plan is to combine the 9800 with the 7447A or wait and go for 7448.

[MORT A POTTY]

7448 CPUs won't be out till at least six months from now, and I'm betting even later than that. upgrade manufacturers don't ever get the newest CPUs at the same time as Apple. it could be as late as January before they get and start shipping them, which means we'll be in the same timeframe as the 7447As except one year later...

but, if you want to, go for it. they'll be fantastic processors.

[Amacapart]

Originally posted by jamil5454:
And...



Radeon 8500 has 4 pixel pipelines and 2 TMUs
Radeon 9100 has 4 pixel pipelines and 2 TMUs
Radeon 9000 has 4 pixel pipelines and 1 TMU
Radeon 9200 has 4 pixel pipelines and 1 TMU

The 9200 is basically a 9000 with AGP 8x support.

Theoretically, at the same clock and memory speed, all these cards will have the same performance when doing single texturing. However, when using multitexturing (which is almost always), the 8500 and 9100 will technically perform 2x better. Thus, if you can find an 8500 with 128mb of memory then I would get it, assuming the drivers for it are up to par. But unless you're a heavy gamer (which is near impossible on a mac), any card with 128mb of memory will serve you well. Expose REALLY likes that RAM.

This guy is 95% right. In theory 8500 & 9100 SHOULD be faster. Not usually born out in reality. What DOESN'T work are flashed 8500 & 9100's with 128 Megs of RAM. Will boot and run fine, until you use that 65th Meg. BLAMMO !!!! Hard freeze.

Anyone considering an 8500 or 9000 should re-consider.

Core Image will be here very soon.

For folks with VGA monitors, I'll pass on a valuable secret:

http://www.targetpcinc.com/Details.asp?ItemID=3107

That card flashes beautifully into a Mac card. Is 100% Tiger ready. Faster than a 8500 by quite a bit. All 128 Megs show up and card runs fine. DVI does not work but VGA out of either port does. And....this card takes an overclock like nobodies business !!! Stock clocks are 275/300. Runs fine to 350/350 at least. Does a halfway decent job with Doom 3 even once clocked up a bit.

So, there's your Tiger card for $60. (or less)