I hear Ati is going to release their awesome new Radeon 9700s for mac very soon. How do these cards compare to the stock GeForce 4 MX in my current comp? I'm a semi-hard-core gamer. I have a 17" Apple Studio LCD. The thing about it is that I need to put games i9n 1280x1024 (native) resolution or it will look blurry/grainy/bad. With my graphics card, however, I need to turn graphics down considerably to play games like Urban Terror, etc.. And even on pretty low gfx, the fps still skips in big battles. I want to buy the Ati Radeon 9700 when it comes out. What will the speed increase be? I heard they are going to be $400. I can afford that, and I can sell my current GF4MX on ebay (I see a mac one now up to $122.50). Does anyone know more about this card? Will it be worth buying? Does it have an ADC plug on the mac version? I hope so, since the DVI -> ADC adapter is $150 (!)
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Radeon 9700 vs. GeForce 4 MX?
- Thread starter admiraldennis
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What comparrison the GF4MX is the low end slow GF4. The ATI 9700 is the high end of the ATI 9000 series comparable to the GF4Ti. The 9700 is faster by as much as double over the GF4Ti.
Originally posted by Chaszmyr
More accurately:
The GF4 MX is abou 10% faster than the Radeon 9000.
The Radeon 9700 is about 10% faster than the GF4 Ti.
The Radeon 9700 is about 150% faster than the GF4 MX.
Nice. But what exactly do you mean with the percents? When you say "150% faster" do you mean it like 2.5x faster? or like half of the GF4MX speed added to itself would equal 9700 speed (that would be 50% faster, or 150% the speed)? I.E. as if 100% is twice the speed vs 100% is no speed increase?
I know I don't have any hard evidence to back this up but isn't the Radeon 9000 faster than the GF4 MX, even if it's the one off the quicksilvers with 64Mb instead of 32Mb like the GF4 MX in the new towers come with ?
Apple charge extra for having a radeon 9000 over a GF4 MX and I'm sure doubling the video memory isn't something that would seriously effect performance if both cards were effectively the same speed.
I was under the impression that the Radeon 9000 was designed to be faster than the GF4 MX purely because ATI made the card to compete with it and the GF4 MX is no more than a GF3 with some of the guts ripped out to save on cost (in total laymen's terms at least)
Originally posted by Chaszmyr
More accurately:
The GF4 MX is abou 10% faster than the Radeon 9000.
The Radeon 9700 is about 10% faster than the GF4 Ti.
The Radeon 9700 is about 150% faster than the GF4 MX.
I dunno where you got your info, but the Radeon 9700 is not 10% faster than the GF4 Ti. It's anywhere from 30%-100% faster (2x as fast), depending on the resolution and the quality of the image required. The higher the resolution, the greater the difference between the Radeon and the GF4 Ti. All of the recent benchmarks have proven this.
HardOCP
Actually here are some details:
GF4mx
No vertex shaders
2 rendering pipe lines
Don't bother with FSAA
Radeon 9700
vertex shaders
screaming FSAA
8 (yes eight) rendering pipelines.
Radeon 9700 is essentially 4x hardware of a GF4mx and it supports all the new rendering features being touted in upcomming games like DoomIII (while the GF4mx doesn't)
As far as comparable performance: The current cards stack up pretty much like this:
low end:
GF4mx
Radeon 9000 - GF3Ti
Radeon 8500
GF4
Radeon 9700
GF4mx
No vertex shaders
2 rendering pipe lines
Don't bother with FSAA
Radeon 9700
vertex shaders
screaming FSAA
8 (yes eight) rendering pipelines.
Radeon 9700 is essentially 4x hardware of a GF4mx and it supports all the new rendering features being touted in upcomming games like DoomIII (while the GF4mx doesn't)
As far as comparable performance: The current cards stack up pretty much like this:
low end:
GF4mx
Radeon 9000 - GF3Ti
Radeon 8500
GF4
Radeon 9700
Re: 9000 pro
No, the pro is faster than the regular 9000... that is the video processor is clocked higher, the memory is faster also.
The 9000 IS slighly slower than the 8500. The 9000 is replacing the 8500 mainly because it is less expensive for ATI to manufacture. In marketing terms, the 9000 is actually replacing the 7500 not the 8500 (it will be the new low end gaming card)
You are also mistaken about the 8500 on the Mac. The 8500 wasn't a BTO option on the Tower. It was GF4mx, ATI 7500, GF4.
Originally posted by soilchmst
Is the 9000 Pro just more memory than the 9000? Why did apple replace the 8500 on the old machines if the 9000 is slower? Also, wasn't the GF4MX the chip above the 8500 in the Quicksilvers?
Thanks
No, the pro is faster than the regular 9000... that is the video processor is clocked higher, the memory is faster also.
The 9000 IS slighly slower than the 8500. The 9000 is replacing the 8500 mainly because it is less expensive for ATI to manufacture. In marketing terms, the 9000 is actually replacing the 7500 not the 8500 (it will be the new low end gaming card)
You are also mistaken about the 8500 on the Mac. The 8500 wasn't a BTO option on the Tower. It was GF4mx, ATI 7500, GF4.
Well, that's the PC version. And even if it is 8x, it will still work in a 4x. Not quite as good, but it will still be much faster than an older card. I doubt theres much of a difference anyway...
From what I've read there is no current video card including the new ATI 9700 due to come that can max out a 4x AGP let alone need a 8x AGP.
Yes it will work with a 4x, 6x, or 8x AGP. Also from what I've seen at least with this card and the other current ones there will be no speed benefits to 6x or 8x AGP because they don't use that much bandwith.
Well then it seems like the ATI 9700 is the best choice for anyone who wants the most powerful card on the market and wants to use it in the future with an 8X AGP MAC. Anyone know on the release day of the new 9700? I'm going to do some research and see if i can find some comparisons between the 9700 and the Nvidia Geforce4 Ti
I know its more of a PC site but you might want to check out
http://www6.tomshardware.com/ They have a comparison of the
9700 and the 4600 Ti....
http://www6.tomshardware.com/ They have a comparison of the
9700 and the 4600 Ti....
TomsHardware usually has the best and most equal comparrisons. The thing to check out is the performance durring AntiAliasing. I think you will be pleasantly surprised.
Question about the GF4 Ti...
Hello all...
I have a G4 400MHz (Gigabit Ethernet) with the AGP 2x slot, and Apple specifically states that the GeForce 4 Ti card on their site will only work with an AGP 4x slot on the Digital Audio and higher G4s.
Is this a legal out for them so they don't have to support as many configurations, or is there a limiting factor in my computer that prohibits me from using this newer card? I know it will not be as good as it would be in a 4x system, but the AGP spec is supposed to be backwards compatible.
Thanks,
RL
Hello all...
I have a G4 400MHz (Gigabit Ethernet) with the AGP 2x slot, and Apple specifically states that the GeForce 4 Ti card on their site will only work with an AGP 4x slot on the Digital Audio and higher G4s.
Is this a legal out for them so they don't have to support as many configurations, or is there a limiting factor in my computer that prohibits me from using this newer card? I know it will not be as good as it would be in a 4x system, but the AGP spec is supposed to be backwards compatible.
Thanks,
RL
The real question to ask about the 9700...
If Apple puts the 9700 in their PowerMacs, then there will be an ADC port. Apple would never require any of their computers that REQUIRE a seperate monitor to use a DVI-ADC converter. So what we really need to know is wether this chip will migrate over to Cupertino.
Just my $2/100
RL
If Apple puts the 9700 in their PowerMacs, then there will be an ADC port. Apple would never require any of their computers that REQUIRE a seperate monitor to use a DVI-ADC converter. So what we really need to know is wether this chip will migrate over to Cupertino.
Just my $2/100
RL
Re: Question about the GF4 Ti...
Sorry but the 9700 is only backwards compatible down to 4x AGP. I'm not sure but I think when they went from 2x to 4x they changed the layout of the connector. If this is so then it wouldn't even plug into your computer.
To answer RogueLdr,
They will be making a 9700 version for the mac.
To everyone else,
If Apple supports and put it in a current/future model then there will be a version with an ADC connector.
Sorry but the 9700 is only backwards compatible down to 4x AGP. I'm not sure but I think when they went from 2x to 4x they changed the layout of the connector. If this is so then it wouldn't even plug into your computer.
To answer RogueLdr,
They will be making a 9700 version for the mac.
To everyone else,
If Apple supports and put it in a current/future model then there will be a version with an ADC connector.
the ATI 9700 if made for a mac will have an ADC and a DVI port, they make DVI and VGA for silly PCs.
There's no way that apple would make you pay $150 to connect their displays, if ATI would do that then everyone would go out and pick up whatever Nvidia's offering
There's no way that apple would make you pay $150 to connect their displays, if ATI would do that then everyone would go out and pick up whatever Nvidia's offering