What's better? ATI 9000 or ATI 8500?

sc_marktsc_markt
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Just got a nvidia geforce4 MX for my sawtooth so I can run QE and 10.3 and read in some forums that these aftermarket cards won't run panther on a sawtooth.



So I've decided to go ATI. Anybody know which of the 8500 and 9000 cards has better performance between the two?



Thanks in advance to all who answer.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 10
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    You will not see a difference...



    Go for the cheaper.
  • Reply 2 of 10
    splinemodelsplinemodel Posts: 7,311member
    the 8500 wins in some areas, the 9000 in others, but I think the verdict is that the 8500 is the overall winner.
  • Reply 3 of 10
    ipeonipeon Posts: 1,122member
    I don't know the difference between the two, but I installed the 9000 last night before updating to Panther on my 350 MHz PowerMac G4 AGP and it screams.
  • Reply 4 of 10
    nickweissnickweiss Posts: 11member
    the 8500 is faster, the 9000 was more crappily made and slower, still isn't BAD like say a GeForce2MX even a Radeon Mac Edition beats that thing
  • Reply 5 of 10
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    the radeon 8500 is faster. it's on par with the geforce 4TI from nvidia.

    ATI have been always bad for giving names to his products.

    Thus a 9600 even pro is slower than a 9500 pro, the 9000 is slower than the 8500, but the 9600 is faster than the 8500 especially for antialiasing.
  • Reply 6 of 10
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by nickweiss

    the 8500 is faster, the 9000 was more crappily made and slower, still isn't BAD like say a GeForce2MX even a Radeon Mac Edition beats that thing



    ummm... it was not made "crappily" compared to the 8500. They are almost the same. The 9000 is just a little lighter then the 8500. Lighter in terms of ATI improved the chip's efficiency but inturn striped it of a few things to even it out. The result is a new, well made, chip that is just behind its brother in some benchmarks.
  • Reply 7 of 10
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    There's also a big difference between the 9000 and 9000 Pro, and a big difference between the 8500 and the 8500 LE. The 9000 Pro is nearly as good as the full 8500, while the 8500 LE is only a little better than the standard 9000. However, I think only the standard Radeon 8500 and Radeon 9000 Pro were made in Mac versions so I'd say go with the cheaper one.
  • Reply 8 of 10
    splinemodelsplinemodel Posts: 7,311member
    I know that you can flash a PC 8500 with mac firmware (though you need a pc to do it. Check for details on that, because PC 8500's are el cheapo these days.
  • Reply 9 of 10
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    As I don't game much on my Mac, I would probably choose the 9000 Pro since I think it's cooled without a fan.
  • Reply 10 of 10
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Eugene

    As I don't game much on my Mac, I would probably choose the 9000 Pro since I think it's cooled without a fan.



    Umm...



    The 9000PRO has a fan... it is quite.

    The 9000 is fanless.



    This holds true for the PC side of ATI, I own a 9000PRO.
Sign In or Register to comment.