radeon 9600 vs 9650 without getting a 30" display

Discussion in 'Buying Tips, Advice and Discussion (archive)' started by Anarchy99, Apr 28, 2005.

  1. Anarchy99 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2003
    #1
    Im not getting a 30" display or else thered be no question but which is better for games and other 3d apps and will it be noticable difference
     
  2. macbaseball macrumors 6502a

    macbaseball

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    Northern California
    #2
    I'm personally getting the 9650, because it is 256 MB instead of 128 MB. It's only fifty dollars, so it can't hurt and video card keep on getting better. With HD getting bigger and bigger, having a good video card can help out. I don't know if you will be able to notice the difference, but I'm sure it will be better in high use situations.
     
  3. grapes911 Moderator emeritus

    grapes911

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Location:
    Citizens Bank Park
    #3
    I agree--get the 9650. If you are going to game, get the 256 MB. You'll notice a difference on high-end games.
     
  4. decksnap macrumors 68040

    decksnap

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    #4
    What IS the deal with the 9650? After unsuccessfully googling this thing- I really can't figure out how good it is. By some accounts, it's not as good of a card as the 9600. Granted I don't know what I'm talking about, but from what I've read the 128 vs. 256 isn't the only factor, ie bandwidth and such. Some people say it's not as good as the 9600?

    Anybody have any solid links or solid info on this? I will be buying a new Powermac imminently, and will NOT be using it for games, but I want the better card overall between the two.
     
  5. grapes911 Moderator emeritus

    grapes911

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Location:
    Citizens Bank Park
    #5
    I have no bechmarks comparing them, but I can tell you that I'm 100% positive that the GeForce 6800 blows them both out of the water.
     
  6. Bear macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Sol III - Terra
    #6
    Do you believe everything you read on the web? Seriously tho', the Apple Store has a short description of both cards.

    ATI 9600: 128MB VRAM, 1.3 billion textured pixeels per second, 2 single-link DVI ports.
    ATI 9650: 256MB VRAM, 1.6 billion textured pixeels per second, 1 single-link and 1 dual-link DVI ports.

    The 9650 seems to compare to the 9600XT (which is different from the 9600 referenced above) card in terms of performance (except of course the 9650 has a dual-link DVI port and twice as much VRAM).

    Based on the little bit above, the 9650 is a better card overall, even if you are not getting a display that requires the dual-link DVI.

    The downside of the NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL is that it blocks one of the PCI slots, which may or may not matter for some people. Although it is definitely the fastest card in the BTO options for the PwoerMac G5
     
  7. Bear macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Sol III - Terra
    #7
    I'm not sure how noticable it will be, but it should be some and I would say that the $50 difference is well worth it.
     
  8. enginerd macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2004
    #8
    The difference in fillrate between the two Apple 9600 versions is identical to the difference between the 9600 and 9600 Pro in the PC world. Maybe it's the same case on the macs but you'd figure they would call it a 9600 Pro 256MB, even if it's just for marketing reasons.
    The 9600 chip is too slow for 256MB to make a difference in gaming. By the time the resolution is set high enough to require extra RAM, the 9600 chip would be sputtering out a slideshow. Do production/studio apps like motion make good use of VRAM? It might be more helpful then (especially with dual displays) since I bet raw GPU horsepower is less important then. Performance gains will be minor at best but considering the price of the PM's themselves and the measly $50 to upgrade, go for it :)

    On a side note, my Tiger just arrived--yay!
     
  9. Platform macrumors 68030

    Platform

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    #9
    Yes I have heard that some cards that have 'more' VRAM than the normal versions.....eg. 9600 normal = 128...not 256...have slower types of RAM so not always better :rolleyes: :eek:
     

Share This Page