Navigate:

Advice
Beginners
BIOS Guide
CPUs
Links
Mainboards
Memory
Network
Storage
Video/Sound Cards

Contact
Forum
SiteMap
Sponsors
WebNews
Home
. .

Prices:

Mainboards

ABIT
ASUS
Chaintech
Shuttle
Soyo
Tyan

CPU
Intel
P4 2.4C-800
P4 2.6C-800
P4 2.8C-800
P4 3.0-800
P4 3.2-800

AMD
AthlonXP
XP 1700+
XP 2000+
XP 2400+
XP 2500+
XP 2700+
XP 3000+
XP 3200+

Athlon64
Athlon64 3200+
Athlon64 FX-51

Opteron
Opteron 240
Opteron 242
Opteron 244
Opteron 246

Memory

Corsair
Crucial
Kingston
Mushkin
OCZ

What are you
shopping for?



































































































































































LOSTCIRCUITS

SHORTCUTS:
RADEON 9800 Pro
F-Buffer
Specs
Features / Overclocking
Test Configuration
3DMark2001SE-I
3DMark2001SE-II
3DMark2001SE-III
3DMark2003
Codecreatures => VillageMark
ChameleonMark
Conclusion

Your Comments?

Find the Best Deal on the RADEON 9800

 ATI RADEON 9800
Power to the F-Buffer (what else is new?)
(Review by MS, July 18, 2003)

Chameleonmark

Yes, we are committing the blasphemy of using an nVidia Benchmark for ATI graphics cards. But these chameleons are just incredibly cool predators.


Glass

RADEON 9800: blue-green; 9700: orange pink

Real

Shiny

Conclusion

The main conclusion is a very down to earth statement that there were no surprises. In almost all benchmarks, the RADEON 9800 was approximately 13% faster than the RADEON 9700, and the overall level of performance is such that it would be a crime to play any game at less than 1280 x 1024 x 32 at the highest level of AA and AF.

For online gaming, the situation, of course changes somewhat since resolution eats bandwidth but again, the excellent AA and AF quality will, in most cases, compensate for the lower granularity. At this point, we cannot compare the numbers to the latest offerings from the nVidia camp, rest assured, though, such comparison will come in the near future.

One thing about this review has been that we did not use real life gaming benchmarks and the reason is simple enough: There are no current games that would stress the feature set and performance of these high-end cards beyond generating absurd frame rates. Therefore, the synthetic benchmarks are sythetic but at the same time more forward looking and reflect the challenges of the next generation of game, without which, there would be no need for any of the new cards anyway.

So, all we need now are the games that take advantage of the new features and performance.

Next Page:    => more video reviews =>

Click here! If you enjoyed reading this article and found it useful, please consider making a small donation to LostCircuits.
Thank you!

General disclaimer: This page only reflects the author's personal opinion and assumes no responsibility whatsoever regarding any of the contents or any damages that may occur explicitly or implicitly from reading the contents of this site. All names and trademarks mentioned in this review are the exclusive property of the respective parent companies.
All contents of this site are protected by international copyright laws. Reproduction of the contents even in parts is not allowed except after written permission by the author and referral to this site.
Copyright 1998 - 2008 LostCircuits