is the radeon 9650 any good?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips, Advice and Discussion (archive)' started by applecrag, May 6, 2005.

  1. applecrag macrumors regular

    Jun 7, 2004
    hi i just got a new dual 2 ghz powermac with the radeon 9650. after reading the comparisons on the apple web page im having second thoughts about the chip. is it a powerful chip? will games run smoothly? can it take advantage of tigers new core image features? thanks for the help.
  2. brandon6684 Guest

    Dec 30, 2002
    It's a mid range card. If you play Doom 3 for the purpose of seeing if you can get more frame rates than your friends, even though can't tell the difference between any of them you may be a bit disappointed, but it should handle just about any game on the market today pretty well. It's also more than enough to handle core image. It's biggest advantage over the 9600 is the 256MB VRAM instead of 128MB, and that makes it more or less worth the rather small $50 increase.
  3. iBunny macrumors 65816

    Apr 15, 2004
    Will the 9650 run the GUI good? Like expose at high resolutions and stuff?
  4. zakatov macrumors 6502a


    Mar 8, 2005
    South Florida
    I didn't find it informative. It's supposed to compare cards in the same general area of performance and thus at reasonable loads. Doom3 @ 19x12 and Halo @ 19x12 brings the 9650 to 6 and 11 FPS, respectively. how does that help me?

    I know it compares the cards that apple is offering as BTO for the PM, but it's still rather useless.
  5. eXan macrumors 601


    Jan 10, 2005
    I wonder why Apple dropped Rad 9800 as BTO? And why they are not offering Rad X800 XT? Hmm.....

    If you want to play Doom3 get 9800 retail

    P.S.: 9650 is supported by Core Image, so you will get smooth GUI performance. Even GeForceFX 5200 Ultra is supported! :D
  6. jsw Moderator emeritus


    Mar 16, 2004
    Andover, MA
    My lowly 9600 runs Exposé, etc., just fine at 1680x1050.
  7. solvs macrumors 603


    Jun 25, 2002
    LaLaLand, CA
    It's just like the 9600, but 50 better. So... yes, it will. :p

    Seriously, it will. Pretty well actually. If the 5200 can do it, and the 9200 can even do some things just fine, you will not have any complaints with the 9650 unless you're a gamer.
  8. mackaveli macrumors regular

    May 1, 2005
    quick question about this card, will it be able to run 1920x1200 using the DEll fpw 2405 24" LCD? cause i was checking the cards and the 9600 or 9650 is not listed.

    and if i run at 1920x1200 if i dwl hdtv clips or people make hdtv stuff it will run on hd on the monitor?

    and what is core image?

  9. Ti_Poussin macrumors regular


    May 6, 2005
    The radeon 9650 is old technology it's not even PC low end anymore, it's the same thing as a 9600 with more ram and a clock a little higher I believe (not sure should be check). I don't understand why Apple put this in the Powermac?!?! Even the eMac is having the same GPU. That being say, get the lowest card from apple and go to an mac retail store and buy yourself a good card (Radeon 9800 or up). Or you may flash a PC card, the nVidia 6800 is flashable. Look over the web ( or you should found. For the price of the PC card you get a hell of performance compare to any mac specifique card.

    The main thing that have always stop me from buying an iMac is the graphic card. I only use Powermac so I can change it or flash a PC card. The only thing I hate in Apple hardware are video card, they plain screw it -periode-. This and the bus on the G4, hope Apple use Freescale chip soon, they have G4 dual core with high frequency bus out there waiting for us.
  10. AstroManLuca macrumors member

    Mar 18, 2005
    The 9650 is a lot like the 9600, but a bit faster. It's a rebadged 9600XT. According to Apple's own website, both the 9600XT and the 9650 have a 1.6 billion pixel/second fill rate, while the 9600 has a 1.3 billion pixel/second fill rate. More importantly, the 9600XT and 9650 have a 600 MHz memory clock, resulting in 50% higher memory bandwidth than the plain 9600, which has a 400 MHz memory clock.

    It's not high end by any means but it'll suffice for gaming and it's absolutely fine for any 2D stuff you want to throw at it. And yes it'll run a Dell flat panel.
  11. SaleenS351 macrumors 6502

    Dec 2, 2004
    I had bought and an old imac with the 5200 and returned and got a BTO PM 2.0 with the 9650 and it plays Doom a hell of a lot better than the 5200 as expected, I'm fairly pleased woth the card it hick ups every so often not bad and it's not all the time. I don't do a lot of gaming so it satisfies my needs right now. I can always upgrade though wich is why I went with the PM.
  12. bushgreen macrumors newbie

    Jan 8, 2005
  13. Jonnie macrumors newbie

    Aug 13, 2004
    but is the 9650 better than a 9700

    No way! the radeon 9700 kicks the ass of the 9650.
  14. Mord macrumors G4


    Aug 24, 2003
    it'll run 1920x1200 fine, even my radeon 7500 will run that res fine.

    the 9650 is nothing more than a 256MB 9600XT with slightly slower memory and a dual link DVI port instead of the ADC port, nothing more.

    it'll run anything fine even motion or doom 3, it's just better graphics cards run motion and doom 3 better, the benchmarks are not all that usefull as most people dont run games at 1920x1200, and lower end card tend to do pretty well at lower resolutions and drop frames at higher ones.
  15. nek macrumors member

    Aug 26, 2003
    Do the 9600XT and 9650 really have a 600MHz clock? I've never used one, but based on the database of ATIcellerator users, it seems that the 9600XT has a 400MHz processor and 310MHz memory. I just checked and ATI's website also says 400MHz, but does the 9650 have a higher clock?

    edit: Barefeats has a table which says:
    9600 XT = 401MHz clock, 311MHz memory
    9650 = 401MHz clock, 270MHz memory
  16. Mord macrumors G4


    Aug 24, 2003
    DDR, thats the effective speed, it's both 620MHz and 310MHz depending how you look at it.
  17. mackaveli macrumors regular

    May 1, 2005
    so if im running motion or a 3d program should i change the resolution to be lower instead of 1920x1200?

  18. bushgreen macrumors newbie

    Jan 8, 2005
    if the ati 9700 is even faster than a 9650 then why the hell are apple using these slow cards. u can can get 9800s on pc for the imacs price. the imacs should come with 9800s and the powermacs should come with either the 6800 or x800 standard.

    it is pathetic how apple uses such rubbish cards.
  19. Mord macrumors G4


    Aug 24, 2003
    please point me to a place where you can get a pc with at least a 3GHz p4 or a AMD 3000+ a 17" 1400x900 widescreen lcd, a 9800 pro 160GB HD 512MB DDR400 and a combo drive for $1299

    no, if your playing a game then a res lower than 1920x1200 is a good idea with motion it'll just take longer to render.
  20. Alte22a macrumors 6502

    Feb 25, 2003
    back in London
    Hi guys,

    Helping a mate whos a Photoshop geek decide on the setup of his future G5, was really surprise to find that the 9800 has been dropped in favour for 9600 and 9650. What my main concern is wacom pen lag? I am assuming that better GFX card reduces pen lag am I right or am I looking at it the wrong way? can someone confirm this?
  21. macrumors 6502a

    Jul 17, 2002
    Bay of Fundy
    I don't have the full answer, but these two things shouldn't be related. for photoshop work the 9600 or 9650 are more than adequate, it'd be processor and ram that affect PS, and as for the tablet, the lag is either the speed of the tablet itself, the usb connection or the processor and ram I listed above
  22. CanadaRAM macrumors G5


    Oct 11, 2004
    On the Left Coast - Victoria BC Canada
    No, the difference between the cards is insignificant on 2-D programs like Photoshop.
  23. ~Shard~ macrumors P6


    Jun 4, 2003
    Are you schizophrenic? :p
  24. Cougarcat macrumors 604

    Sep 19, 2003
    Well, I think the reason the 9800 is not in the iMac is it's too big for the case. But yeah, there is no excuse why x800s are not standard. Apple is always stingy when it comes to graphics cards, which is a shame because they are the first thing to go out of date in a computer.

Share This Page