radeon 8500 thoughts

DREDD · 12-30-2001, 01:13 AM

I've been looking at this card more and more often. I'm impressed with ATI's DVD and 2D quality but for a gaming card what is the general thoughts here? If I say don't care about the FPS as long as the game is smooth and want the image quality and overall playability of the card (read no dropped frames) to be high is a Radeon 8500 going to fit my needs? Mostly I feel the need to upgrade some component in my system. I really don't need a CPU right now, but I believe a new high end video card would really put my system into the top 15% of gaming-rigs for the next year to 2 years.

DREDD · 12-30-2001, 01:24 AM

I can get a Radeon 8500 Retail for the price of a GeForce 3 (not a ti model). Should I get the GF3 or the Radeon? I'm talking the overall quality of the card from the 2D to the Gaming aspect. Overall on a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the perfect card where do these fit?

sbp · 12-30-2001, 10:18 AM

The 8500 will definitely satisfy your current and future gaming needs.

In general, the GeForce 3 Ti500 is the slighty faster performing game card over the 8500. The Radeon 8500 is a more feature rich and better value for the money than the Ti500. The 8500 will be faster than GeForce 3.

The GeForce 3/Ti500 does better filtering but it takes more of a performance hit compared to 8500. The Radeon 8500 performs better looking anti-aliasing but that takes more of a performance hit compared to GeForce3/Ti500.

The last drivers ATI released improved performance and fixed some problems. The drivers do need to mature especially WinXP ones.

A lot of people say GeForce 3/Ti500 image quality has been improved compared to GeForce 2.
I say: With a Radeon 8500 you will get great image quality. With a GeForce 3/Ti500 you may get great image quality.

~~assnips~~ · 12-30-2001, 10:28 AM

what bout 8500 OEM??

sbp · 12-30-2001, 10:48 AM

Retail versions of the 8500's are clocked at 275Mhz (core)/275Mhz DDR memory. Radeon LE's/OEM versions are clocked at 250/250 or 230/230 and don't come with DVI ADAPTER cable and game pack. They will be somewhat slower but still fast.

RADEON 8500 boards: Retail, LE, LELE. Visual differences: http://www.reactorcritical.com/#l994

http://www.xbitlabs.com/video/radeon-8500/ ATI RADEON 8500 and RADEON 8500LE Graphics Cards Review

Ladogaboy · 12-30-2001, 02:37 PM

Hey, sbp, do you know of any results of people oc'ing the 8500 oems?

I know it probably wouldn't be worth it...

And DREDD, I'd go with the 8500 if I were you. You sound a lot like me in the sense that I value DVD playback more than gaming, but I still want to know that if I had the urge, I could buy a new game off the shelf and play without problems.

I'm not in a hurry to upgrade right now, but if I were, I'd go with the AIW 8500DV... but that is essentially the same as the 8500, but with the extra goodies that come with AIW.

sbp · 12-30-2001, 02:45 PM

A lot but not all of the 250Mhz OEM 8500s have made it to retail levels.

http://www.Rage3d.com has posted news links to sites {mostly in German or French) reviewing Radeon LE's.

Ladogaboy · 12-30-2001, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sbp
A lot but not all of the 250Mhz OEM 8500s have made it to retail levels.

http://www.Rage3d.com has posted news links to sites {mostly in German or French) reviewing Radeon LE's.

K, thanks...

How's my German... doh!.. Better stick with French!

~~assnips~~ · 12-31-2001, 12:42 AM

is there a point of getting a vid card now........

since geforce 4 is coming......and ATI R300 if i were get a new mobo and processor and ram........

sbp · 12-31-2001, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by assnips
is there a point of getting a vid card now........

since geforce 4 is coming......and ATI R300 if i were get a new mobo and processor and ram........

You could ask the same question when the GeForce 4 and R300 come out. Why get those when there will be a faster videocard coming out in a few months beyond that? At some time you have to make the move to upgrade.

~~assnips~~ · 12-31-2001, 11:14 AM

good point

wont a geforce 3 or 8500 last for 2 years.......WHO NEEDS such extremly high quality graphics when no games even are made for such cards yet............

but which is safer buy geforce 3 ti200 or radeon 8500 oem

the prices are like 40 bux apart CAD (POOR POOR DOLLAR)

sbp · 12-31-2001, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by assnips
WHO NEEDS such extremly high quality graphics when no games even are made for such cards yet............

You do if you want to play a game with good framerates while using anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering.

Quote:

but which is safer buy geforce 3 ti200 or radeon 8500 oem

Buy both.

DREDD · 12-31-2001, 04:46 PM

Maybe if Nvidia and ATI gave developers an incentive to use more of the available GPU power we would see the need for a faster card. Most games today use old engines (UT, Q3, lithtech) and they don't really push a GPU to the limits anymore. Once in a while a game like max Payne really forces a good video, but most of the time you can get by with a year old card and have a great experience with all but the most maxed settings.

GBubonis · 01-05-2002, 07:58 AM

If there was a benchmark held for both the Radeon 8500 and the GF3 Ti to see which performed better under OpenGL, which would win and by how much?

ATI's OpenGL performance sucks for my Radeon 64mb DDR ViVo

DREDD · 01-05-2002, 10:54 PM

Well, OpenGL Nvidia would come out on top by about 5% which could be 3fps in a game or maybe more depending on the resolution 9higher rez the scores even out). In DirectX 8.1 the radeon 8500 wins in almost every test expecially fill rate benchmarks and textel and pixel shaders. 3dmark 2001 scores show the radeon to have a hefty lead over Nvidia.

~~assnips~~ · 01-05-2002, 11:12 PM

so in a buying point of view

8500 le or 8500 is better than geforce 3 ti200

Memo · 01-06-2002, 01:16 AM

ATI SUCKS FOR DRIVERS. Plain and simple. They seem to be getting their act together with the 8500 but who knows. I'm really not a fan of ATI at all. If you really don't do any games then you really don't need an 8500 either. You can go for a less expensive card with the same features.

~~assnips~~ · 01-06-2002, 01:29 AM

i want a FAST COMP thats it.. and some pretty good graphics for like nfl 2k2 and stuff

Ladogaboy · 01-06-2002, 01:54 AM

This is the way I look at things... I'm not a big gamer, so GREAT graphics is not a big issue. A minus on nVidia's part. I do like watching dvds as well as capturing/editing video on my computer. That is a plus in Matrox and Ati's favor. Also, the first and foremost thing I want in a computer is stability. Any of the three will do for that.

But then there is something else. I like the idea of being able to buy a game (if I get the sudden urge), load it on to my computer, and have it run well. That leaves Matrox out... atleast for now.

For me, the kicker is, which one gives you the most for your money. Right now, I'd have to say Ati.

UT's right, their drivers in the past haven't been as good, but they seem to be getting better. Also, from what I've seen, the hardware (if Ati can get drivers to fully optimize it) for the 8500 easily puts it in the same league as the Ti500.

NuTs62 · 01-06-2002, 02:54 AM

I myself just purchased a ATI AIW 8500DV. Haven't put it to the test yet though. Like others in this discussion, I just want the ability to run pretty much anything out there at any time I choose. Perhaps it is overkill right now, but if I'm going to get something, I'm getting the best (that my wallet can afford). As for holding off to the GeForce4, what for? I mean there will ALWAYS be bigger and better things coming out. If you're satisfied with what you got right now, stick with it. But I'd say 8500 is rather yummy lookin

~~assnips~~ · 01-06-2002, 12:13 PM

nuts u LUCKY S O B

would n e like to donate me one

please send to

Happy Dude
c/o no money

sbp · 01-06-2002, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by assnips
so in a buying point of view

8500 le or 8500 is better than geforce 3 ti200

Just buy something.

sbp · 01-06-2002, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GBubonis
If there was a benchmark held for both the Radeon 8500 and the GF3 Ti to see which performed better under OpenGL, which would win and by how much?

ATI's OpenGL performance sucks for my Radeon 64mb DDR ViVo

It depends on what operating system, game/application and resolution are used.

sbp · 01-06-2002, 05:29 PM

ATI has gotten better with drivers. However, drivers continue to be a weak spot for ATI.

--------------
The best bang for the buck videocard out now is the GeForce 3 Ti200. The Radeon 8500 has a good price/performance ratio.

--------------
If you have a videocard from this generation {Radeon 8500, GeForce 3} skip the GeForce4. It ain't going to be a compelling upgrade. Plus it will cost mucho money.

cross56 · 01-07-2002, 11:14 PM

I don't know much about ATI but with out a doubt i'd go with the GF3 rather it be a ti200 or ti500. The only way I would even consider buying an ATI is for DVD playback or image editing. You just cant beat the driver support of the Nvidia chipsets. When I updated my drivers from 6.50 to 21.83 just the drivers alone give me a 300 pt boost in 3d mark 2000. My brother inlaw has a 32mb version of the Radeon ddr and when he got MaxPayne he had to update the drivers befor he could play it. The known bad driver support on ATIs history would make for an easy pick of the two. The real choices should realy be get the ti200 for performance for the buck or the ti500 because its faster. Just my 2 cents worth.

NuTs62 · 01-08-2002, 04:24 AM

Well, one of the main reasons why I went with The Radeon 8500 is the specs. From what I read, it had an edge over the GeForce3. But as everyone knows, ATI isn't the best at updating their drivers. I put that to chance. And another reason why I got the All-In-Wonder Radeon is for the TV Tuner and other features. I guess for all you hardcore gamers, its very important, but for me, I just like to stay on top of things, and have adequate equipment that will last me several years, and run most anything I throw at it. I also like the DVD playback and 2D.

Two Cents · 01-09-2002, 07:29 AM

You 3DMARK fanatics ought to go read Tom's Hardware guide. In many cases, the new drivers are optimize to increase 3DMARK scores, but has not real effect on actual games and applications. ATI is guilty of the same thing (really guilty) on their next to last driver update.

sbp · 01-09-2002, 03:56 PM

Releasing a driver that improves a score for a benchmark is nothing new. Years ago, ATI released the Rage Pro Turbo driver that only increased performance in the benchmark WinBench 98.

The DetonatorXP drivers improved performance in different games not only in typical benchmarking programs.

As for the newer 8500 drivers they did improve performance from the lackluster drivers ATI sent Radeon 8500 out with.

DREDD · 01-09-2002, 11:19 PM

I noticed that RTCW supports Trueform in the radeon 8500. Has anyone tried this yet?

12-30-2001, 01:13 AM	#1
DREDD Lieutenant Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 339	radeon 8500 thoughts I've been looking at this card more and more often. I'm impressed with ATI's DVD and 2D quality but for a gaming card what is the general thoughts here? If I say don't care about the FPS as long as the game is smooth and want the image quality and overall playability of the card (read no dropped frames) to be high is a Radeon 8500 going to fit my needs? Mostly I feel the need to upgrade some component in my system. I really don't need a CPU right now, but I believe a new high end video card would really put my system into the top 15% of gaming-rigs for the next year to 2 years.

12-30-2001, 02:37 PM	#6
Ladogaboy Admiral Join Date: Jan 2000 Location: Hiding amongst the minnows Posts: 6,843	Hey, sbp, do you know of any results of people oc'ing the 8500 oems? I know it probably wouldn't be worth it... And DREDD, I'd go with the 8500 if I were you. You sound a lot like me in the sense that I value DVD playback more than gaming, but I still want to know that if I had the urge, I could buy a new game off the shelf and play without problems. I'm not in a hurry to upgrade right now, but if I were, I'd go with the AIW 8500DV... but that is essentially the same as the 8500, but with the extra goodies that come with AIW. __________________ It is not enough to merely touch the face of god; you also must open your eyes so that you may see your palm.

01-05-2002, 07:58 AM	#14
GBubonis Ensign Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 27	OpenGL Combat If there was a benchmark held for both the Radeon 8500 and the GF3 Ti to see which performed better under OpenGL, which would win and by how much? ATI's OpenGL performance sucks for my Radeon 64mb DDR ViVo

01-09-2002, 07:29 AM	#27
Two Cents Lieutenant Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: In a world of hurt Posts: 398	You 3DMARK fanatics ought to go read Tom's Hardware guide. In many cases, the new drivers are optimize to increase 3DMARK scores, but has not real effect on actual games and applications. ATI is guilty of the same thing (really guilty) on their next to last driver update. __________________ Everybody is ignorant, only at different subjects. — Will Rogers

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

12-30-2001, 01:24 AM	#2
DREDD Lieutenant Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 339	I can get a Radeon 8500 Retail for the price of a GeForce 3 (not a ti model). Should I get the GF3 or the Radeon? I'm talking the overall quality of the card from the 2D to the Gaming aspect. Overall on a scale of 1-10 with 10 being the perfect card where do these fit?

12-30-2001, 10:18 AM	#3
sbp Chief of Naval Operations Join Date: Dec 1999 Posts: 11,037	The 8500 will definitely satisfy your current and future gaming needs. In general, the GeForce 3 Ti500 is the slighty faster performing game card over the 8500. The Radeon 8500 is a more feature rich and better value for the money than the Ti500. The 8500 will be faster than GeForce 3. The GeForce 3/Ti500 does better filtering but it takes more of a performance hit compared to 8500. The Radeon 8500 performs better looking anti-aliasing but that takes more of a performance hit compared to GeForce3/Ti500. The last drivers ATI released improved performance and fixed some problems. The drivers do need to mature especially WinXP ones. A lot of people say GeForce 3/Ti500 image quality has been improved compared to GeForce 2. I say: With a Radeon 8500 you will get great image quality. With a GeForce 3/Ti500 you may get great image quality.

12-30-2001, 10:28 AM	#4
~~assnips~~ Banned Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 398	what bout 8500 OEM??

12-30-2001, 10:48 AM	#5
sbp Chief of Naval Operations Join Date: Dec 1999 Posts: 11,037	Retail versions of the 8500's are clocked at 275Mhz (core)/275Mhz DDR memory. Radeon LE's/OEM versions are clocked at 250/250 or 230/230 and don't come with DVI ADAPTER cable and game pack. They will be somewhat slower but still fast. RADEON 8500 boards: Retail, LE, LELE. Visual differences: http://www.reactorcritical.com/#l994 http://www.xbitlabs.com/video/radeon-8500/ ATI RADEON 8500 and RADEON 8500LE Graphics Cards Review

12-30-2001, 02:45 PM	#7
sbp Chief of Naval Operations Join Date: Dec 1999 Posts: 11,037	A lot but not all of the 250Mhz OEM 8500s have made it to retail levels. http://www.Rage3d.com has posted news links to sites {mostly in German or French) reviewing Radeon LE's.

12-31-2001, 12:42 AM	#9
~~assnips~~ Banned Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 398	is there a point of getting a vid card now........ since geforce 4 is coming......and ATI R300 if i were get a new mobo and processor and ram........

12-31-2001, 11:14 AM	#11
~~assnips~~ Banned Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 398	good point wont a geforce 3 or 8500 last for 2 years.......WHO NEEDS such extremly high quality graphics when no games even are made for such cards yet............ but which is safer buy geforce 3 ti200 or radeon 8500 oem the prices are like 40 bux apart CAD (POOR POOR DOLLAR)

12-31-2001, 04:46 PM	#13
DREDD Lieutenant Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 339	Maybe if Nvidia and ATI gave developers an incentive to use more of the available GPU power we would see the need for a faster card. Most games today use old engines (UT, Q3, lithtech) and they don't really push a GPU to the limits anymore. Once in a while a game like max Payne really forces a good video, but most of the time you can get by with a year old card and have a great experience with all but the most maxed settings.

01-05-2002, 10:54 PM	#15
DREDD Lieutenant Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 339	Well, OpenGL Nvidia would come out on top by about 5% which could be 3fps in a game or maybe more depending on the resolution 9higher rez the scores even out). In DirectX 8.1 the radeon 8500 wins in almost every test expecially fill rate benchmarks and textel and pixel shaders. 3dmark 2001 scores show the radeon to have a hefty lead over Nvidia.

01-05-2002, 11:12 PM	#16
~~assnips~~ Banned Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 398	so in a buying point of view 8500 le or 8500 is better than geforce 3 ti200

User Name
Password
Remember Me?

01-06-2002, 01:16 AM	#17
Memo Admiral Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: East Village Posts: 5,659	ATI SUCKS FOR DRIVERS. Plain and simple. They seem to be getting their act together with the 8500 but who knows. I'm really not a fan of ATI at all. If you really don't do any games then you really don't need an 8500 either. You can go for a less expensive card with the same features.

01-06-2002, 01:29 AM	#18
~~assnips~~ Banned Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 398	i want a FAST COMP thats it.. and some pretty good graphics for like nfl 2k2 and stuff

01-06-2002, 01:54 AM	#19
Ladogaboy Admiral Join Date: Jan 2000 Location: Hiding amongst the minnows Posts: 6,843	This is the way I look at things... I'm not a big gamer, so GREAT graphics is not a big issue. A minus on nVidia's part. I do like watching dvds as well as capturing/editing video on my computer. That is a plus in Matrox and Ati's favor. Also, the first and foremost thing I want in a computer is stability. Any of the three will do for that. But then there is something else. I like the idea of being able to buy a game (if I get the sudden urge), load it on to my computer, and have it run well. That leaves Matrox out... atleast for now. For me, the kicker is, which one gives you the most for your money. Right now, I'd have to say Ati. UT's right, their drivers in the past haven't been as good, but they seem to be getting better. Also, from what I've seen, the hardware (if Ati can get drivers to fully optimize it) for the 8500 easily puts it in the same league as the Ti500.

01-06-2002, 02:54 AM	#20
NuTs62 Vice Admiral Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: San Francisco Posts: 4,763	I myself just purchased a ATI AIW 8500DV. Haven't put it to the test yet though. Like others in this discussion, I just want the ability to run pretty much anything out there at any time I choose. Perhaps it is overkill right now, but if I'm going to get something, I'm getting the best (that my wallet can afford). As for holding off to the GeForce4, what for? I mean there will ALWAYS be bigger and better things coming out. If you're satisfied with what you got right now, stick with it. But I'd say 8500 is rather yummy lookin

01-06-2002, 12:13 PM	#21
~~assnips~~ Banned Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 398	nuts u LUCKY S O B would n e like to donate me one please send to Happy Dude c/o no money

01-06-2002, 05:29 PM	#24
sbp Chief of Naval Operations Join Date: Dec 1999 Posts: 11,037	ATI has gotten better with drivers. However, drivers continue to be a weak spot for ATI. -------------- The best bang for the buck videocard out now is the GeForce 3 Ti200. The Radeon 8500 has a good price/performance ratio. -------------- If you have a videocard from this generation {Radeon 8500, GeForce 3} skip the GeForce4. It ain't going to be a compelling upgrade. Plus it will cost mucho money.

01-07-2002, 11:14 PM	#25
cross56 Lieutenant Junior Grade Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Hamilton, Michigan Posts: 88	I don't know much about ATI but with out a doubt i'd go with the GF3 rather it be a ti200 or ti500. The only way I would even consider buying an ATI is for DVD playback or image editing. You just cant beat the driver support of the Nvidia chipsets. When I updated my drivers from 6.50 to 21.83 just the drivers alone give me a 300 pt boost in 3d mark 2000. My brother inlaw has a 32mb version of the Radeon ddr and when he got MaxPayne he had to update the drivers befor he could play it. The known bad driver support on ATIs history would make for an easy pick of the two. The real choices should realy be get the ti200 for performance for the buck or the ti500 because its faster. Just my 2 cents worth.

01-08-2002, 04:24 AM	#26
NuTs62 Vice Admiral Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: San Francisco Posts: 4,763	Well, one of the main reasons why I went with The Radeon 8500 is the specs. From what I read, it had an edge over the GeForce3. But as everyone knows, ATI isn't the best at updating their drivers. I put that to chance. And another reason why I got the All-In-Wonder Radeon is for the TV Tuner and other features. I guess for all you hardcore gamers, its very important, but for me, I just like to stay on top of things, and have adequate equipment that will last me several years, and run most anything I throw at it. I also like the DVD playback and 2D.

01-09-2002, 03:56 PM	#28
sbp Chief of Naval Operations Join Date: Dec 1999 Posts: 11,037	Releasing a driver that improves a score for a benchmark is nothing new. Years ago, ATI released the Rage Pro Turbo driver that only increased performance in the benchmark WinBench 98. The DetonatorXP drivers improved performance in different games not only in typical benchmarking programs. As for the newer 8500 drivers they did improve performance from the lackluster drivers ATI sent Radeon 8500 out with.

01-09-2002, 11:19 PM	#29
DREDD Lieutenant Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 339	I noticed that RTCW supports Trueform in the radeon 8500. Has anyone tried this yet?