ATI Radeon 9550 256mb or X300 PCI-E 128Mb

[MKH9130]

Currently in the process of stripping and overhauling two computers, swapping parts, buying new parts and throwing away parts.

One computer has an ATI Radeon 9550 256Mb 8xAGP, the other has an ATI X300 PCI-Express 128Mb.

Which is faster?


Reports below, but they mean nothing to me!


RADEON

[ AGP 8x: Sapphire Radeon 9550 ]

Graphics Processor Properties:
Video Adapter Sapphire Radeon 9550
GPU Code Name RV350
PCI Device 1002 / 4153
Transistors 76 million
Process Technology 0.13u
Bus Type AGP 8x @ 8x
Memory Size 256 MB
GPU Clock 250 MHz (original: 250 MHz)
RAMDAC Clock 400 MHz
Pixel Pipelines 4
TMU Per Pipeline 1
Vertex Shaders 2 (v2.0)
Pixel Shaders 1 (v2.0)
DirectX Hardware Support DirectX v9.0
Pixel Fillrate 1000 MPixel/s
Texel Fillrate 1000 MTexel/s

Memory Bus Properties:
Bus Type DDR
Bus Width 128-bit
Real Clock 196 MHz (DDR) (original: 200 MHz)
Effective Clock 392 MHz
Bandwidth 6272 MB/s

Memory Timings:
CAS Latency (CL) 3T
RAS To CAS Delay (tRCD) 4T
RAS Precharge (tRP) 5T
RAS Active Time (tRAS) 8T
Row Refresh Cycle Time (tRFC) 14T
RAS To RAS Delay (tRRD) 3T
Write Recovery Time (tWR)

X300

[ PCI Express x16: ATI Radeon X300 (RV370) ]

Graphics Processor Properties:
Video Adapter ATI Radeon X300 (RV370)
GPU Code Name RV370
PCI Device 1002 / 5B60
Transistors 75 million
Process Technology 0.11u
Bus Type PCI Express x16 @ x16
Memory Size 32 MB
GPU Clock 324 MHz (original: 325 MHz)
RAMDAC Clock 400 MHz
Pixel Pipelines 4
TMU Per Pipeline 1
Vertex Shaders 2 (v2.0)
Pixel Shaders 1 (v2.0)
DirectX Hardware Support DirectX v9.0
Pixel Fillrate 1296 MPixel/s
Texel Fillrate 1296 MTexel/s

Memory Bus Properties:
Bus Type DDR
Bus Width 64-bit
Real Clock 297 MHz (DDR) (original: 297 MHz)
Effective Clock 594 MHz
Bandwidth 4752 MB/s

Memory Timings:
CAS Latency (CL) 4T
RAS To CAS Delay (tRCD) 6T
RAS Precharge (tRP) 6T
RAS Active Time (tRAS) 10T
Row Refresh Cycle Time (tRFC) 17T
RAS To RAS Delay (tRRD) 3T
Write Recovery Time (tWR) 5T

[ThePassenger]

There is a clue in the RV numbers of the cards. RV350 and RV370. You're looking at what amounts to the exact same basic card with a different bus. Neither are what I'd call 'good for games' but either will happily pull 2D Windows duty and basic none top of the line 3D stuff until the cows come home.

[MKH9130]

ThePassenger said:

There is a clue in the RV numbers of the cards. RV350 and RV370. You're looking at what amounts to the exact same basic card with a different bus. Neither are what I'd call 'good for games' but either will happily pull 2D Windows duty and basic none top of the line 3D stuff until the cows come home.

Thats OK, I don't really 'Get' computer games, just basic Windows stuff and the odd Photoshop session. Nothing too demanding.

[Scraggles]

well worth throwing the old parts to people on www.freecycle.org, saves landfills getting bigger and allows other people to recycle your junk

[ThePassenger]

MKH9130 said:

ThePassenger said:

There is a clue in the RV numbers of the cards. RV350 and RV370. You're looking at what amounts to the exact same basic card with a different bus. Neither are what I'd call 'good for games' but either will happily pull 2D Windows duty and basic none top of the line 3D stuff until the cows come home.

Thats OK, I don't really 'Get' computer games, just basic Windows stuff and the odd Photoshop session. Nothing too demanding.

Opps. Sorry that sounded rather insulting the way I said it. :S

Anyway, tootling around the net and doing the odd bit of none intensive shoppery... either will be fine depending on what your mobo will accept Personally I'd go for the PCI-E one as even though it's a crap card compared to mid-range ones it's still got a hoofing great PCI-E bus to feed it.
But that's just my gut reaction