Radeon 9700 Pro.

Discussion in 'Games' started by Draft, Dec 10, 2002.

  1. Draft macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #1
    Just wanted to let everyone know that I just received this months MacAddict and on the MacMall ad, it has the Radeon 9700 Pro listed for $333.99. After seeing this, I went to the site and searched for it. Low-and-behold, I came up with this:

    http://www.macmall.com/macmall/shop/detail.asp?dpno=576569

    The price listed there is $359.00.

    What does this all mean? Is the 9700 just around the corner?

    Draft
     
  2. Draft thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #2
    Nevermind about the link. It's for the PC version of the card. There is still an ad for it in MacAddict magazine though.

    Draft
     
  3. MrMacMan macrumors 604

    MrMacMan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2001
    Location:
    1 Block away from NYC.
    #3
    Well you can always *try* to flash it.
     
  4. void macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2002
    Location:
    Not here
  5. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #5
    What does 8x AGP have to do with it? 8x AGP is fully backwards compatible with any AGP slot.
     
  6. Ambrose Chapel macrumors 65816

    Ambrose Chapel

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    #6
    nothing doing

    MacMall has had the Mac Radeon 9000 listed for a few months already...doesn't mean the card is anywhere near due to ship.
     
  7. Liquidity X macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Location:
    Windham, ME
    #7
    the 9000 is basicly a 8500 w/ a ADC port, and i even read some where the 8500 outplays the 900o in a lot of ways. I love my 8500, I hope the 9700 with run ok in my 2x agp, and that it comes with a vga/dvi, I wanna use Dual displays withthat one also. I donlt have a ADC display.
     
  8. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #8
    Was there any mention of the 9700 at the Expo?
     
  9. Chaszmyr macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #9
    Nope. By the time PowerMacs get 8x AGP they GeForce FX will be out... Dont hold your breath for a 970
     
  10. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #10
    You don't need 8x AGP to use the the 9700. I know it's being produced ATI has made announcements about it also it keeps showing up in sales fliers which usually means it's imminent.

    There was DDR ram for PowerMacs in the magazines a month before the new PowerMacs came out.
     
  11. Draft thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #11
    Was there any news from ATI about the 9700 at MWSF? Did anyone stop by the ATI booth at MWSF?

    Draft
     
  12. 8thDegreeSavage macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2002
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    #12
    The 9700 pro WAS on display at the expo.

    It was running UT2k3 on DP ghz G4's at a solid 80 fps.

    Wait till its done. they are using the PC code for the cards so mac users will get the EXACT same features as the PC world. We should get it in the next few months....and YEAH it does run fine on 4x AGP.

    Some of you talk out of your A$$.
     
  13. Liquidity X macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Location:
    Windham, ME
  14. 8thDegreeSavage macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2002
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    #14
    IM not sure about 2x currently, but 4x is a forsure, they had 6 out of 11 GHZ DP G4's running the 9700 at the MWSF.

    They said it should be out in retail in next two months or so..or they are hoping to have it out by then.

    I know currently almost all graphics cards dont quite saturate a 4x agp and that 8x agp is slightly excessive in almost all situations. So while you may be able to run the card in a 2x agp slot you may not get as much benefit as a card designed for that type pof slot or at max 4x agp as say a 4x agp slotted mac running a card designed to be 8x if needed and backwards compatible with 4x agp.

    Does that make sense for you?
     
  15. Liquidity X macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Location:
    Windham, ME
    #15
    yah i fiurged i'd take a performace hit due to a slower agp, but how mcuh was kinda what i was wondering. My G4 had been upgraded to a DP 800, so my CPU shouldn't bottle neck it to much, wjo know by then I may sell this and get a G5, who knows, just kinda wondering so I couldplan ahead if I donlthave a new box by then.
     
  16. FattyMembrane macrumors 6502a

    FattyMembrane

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Location:
    bat country
    #16
    actually, img just posted an article today in which epic noted that ut2k3 would not support fsaa (although ati is expected to make an enabler to do this). it will also lack smp support (the pc version does not have it either, but it really should). do you know what kind of frame rates a comparable pc with a 9700 gets with ut2k3 at the same settings you wer using? it would be nice to see that we are finally getting games that run as well as their pc counterparts.
     
  17. Funkatation macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
  18. ddtlm macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2001
    #18
    I still wonder if there is any G4 out there that can really put a 9700 Pro to good use.
     
  19. FattyMembrane macrumors 6502a

    FattyMembrane

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Location:
    bat country
    #19
    wow. it looks like the 9700 is really lagging on the mac. i think that ddtlm may be right about the g4 being a bottleneck
     
  20. ddtlm macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2001
    #20
    FattyMembrane:

    Possibly also ATI's drivers. You may have seen the early benchmarks on the new AluBooks that showed the GF4G0-440 beating the Radeon 9000-M, which is not how things are in the PC world. Admittedly the newer laptop does have more memory bandwidth, but the (early) benches showed quite a difference, more than I would expect from memory bandwidth alone. There is also the possiblity that the Radeon 9000-M is clocked especially low in the TiBook.

    I look forward to real tests being performed to settle these questions.
     
  21. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #21
    Yes it will run in it but you will see no benefit from it from say an ATI 8500 to the ATI 9700 this is because the bus is saturated even with the ATI 8500 and even something like a G4MX at peak FPS for instance low screen size will saturate a 2x AGP bus at times.
     
  22. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #22
    The problem is we don't know the screen resolution or the game display preferences for the PowerMacs at the expo so the FPS are completely useless. Also we are talking about very early drivers if they are expecting a month or two still before release. Understand the only thing holding back the release is drivers and that means at least a month of development for just drivers yet.

    I have seen many early reports of video cards with beta drivers that only showed about half to 2/3 there FPS with the early drivers as compared to the final drivers. A good example of this was the early ATI Radeon cards.

    To just clarify one other point AGP 8x is actually known as AGP 3.0 and is by design fully backward compatible with all previous AGP revisions.
     
  23. ddtlm macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2001
    #23
    MacBandit:

    This is innacurrate. In the land of PC's I have read many reviews that compare AGP 8x to 4x, or 4x to 2x, and they always conclude that it is virtually irrelevant. I have yet to see any support for your claim that AGP speed makes much difference.

    On the other hand, I have seen again and again that FSB and memory speed, as well as CPU power and driver optimizations, make a big difference.
     
  24. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #24
    anandtech has shown that 2x AGP can be flooded very easily with modern graphics cards. I don't have a link for it but I do remember reading something there in the last year. Here is a rough explanation at Anandtech.com

    As stated in the last paragraph of this article the hardware T&L unit is quite capable of pushing more data than 2xAGP can feed even with the old Geforce3 cards. Seeing how the Geforce 4 and ATI9700 are capable of nearly twice the FPS of the Geforce3 I would say that the benefit of 2x to 4x AGP is even more important now.

    http://www.anandtech.com/guides/viewfaq.html?i=64

    For everyone else here is an article explaining AGP 1.0, 2.0, 3.0. So there is no longer any confussion on compatibility etc..

    http://www.anandtech.com/guides/viewfaq.html?i=35
     
  25. ddtlm macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2001
    #25
    MacBandit:

    But you ignore the numerous times that Anandtech qualifies the 2x -> 4x performance boost by saying it applies only to DDR or RDRAM systems, not PC133 systems. To quote anand:

    So clearly all Macs except those released very recently don't even care much about AGP 4x. Wether the latest Macs care or not is unknown, because although they do have DDR RAM, their FSB is still SDR.

    But are any other busses on any available Macs capable of pushing these higher data rates?

    As far as AGP 8x vs AGP 4x, here's a link which pretty much establishes AGP 8x as pointless at this time:

    http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2002q4/gf4-8x/index.x?pg=1
     

Share This Page