![[H]ardOCP](/images/blank.gif){kind=small}
- Date:
- Sunday , December 08, 2002
- Author:
- Brent Justice
- Editor:
- Sean Quinn
- Google +1
Radeon 9500 Pro Review
We've already previewed the 9500 Pro a while back, and now it's time to take a look at the final retail version of the card that's shipping and compare it with the competition. Read inside for the lowdown on ATI's answer to the mainstream market.
Unreal Tournament 2003:
Full Installation of Unreal Tournament 2003 with patch 2136 was used. For our tests, we're using our UT2003 Benchmarking utility. (Feel free to distribute or use this benchmark tool, as we hope it will help give us more comparable "apples to apples" benchmarks across the web.) Resolutions of 1024x768, 1280x1024, and 1600x1200 were tested in High Quality mode with no anti-aliasing, 2X anti-aliasing, and 4X anti-aliasing in the Antalus, Inferno, and Suntemple maps.
In the Antalus map in every resolution and graphic setting, the 9500 Pro is faster than even the Ti 4600. Once AA and AF are enabled, the 9500 Pro doesn’t take as big of a hit as the Ti 4600 does. Even at 6X AA and 16X AF, the 9500 Pro is playable at 1024x768. 1280x1024 puts a lot more strain on the video card, as is shown in the graph. The only playable settings for the Ti 4600 and Ti 4200 are without AA or AF. The 9500 Pro even comes in barely playable with 2X AA and 8X AF enabled, but is able to maintain an average FPS above 30 even with 6X AA and 16X AF. Unfortunately, the minimum FPS dipped down in the single digits, meaning at times it could get very choppy. At 1600x1200, things are even worse; the Ti 4200 is barely playable with no AA and no AF. The 9500 Pro is also only playable with no AA and no AF.
In the Suntemple map the same scenario is present, with the 9500 Pro taking the lead in every graphic setting. At 1024x768, the 9500 Pro is playable all the way at 6X AA and 16X AF and shows a noticeable lead compared to the Ti 4600 card with AA and AF. At 1280x1024, things take a much larger hit in performance. You could probably play at this resolution with 4X AA and 8X AF on the 9500 Pro, but there will be times when the framerate dips quite low. The best setting here might be to turn AA off on the 9500 Pro and just run it with 8X or 16X AF for better texture quality. At 1600x1200, the Ti 4600 and Ti 4200 are just killed in terms of performance with AA and AF on. The 9500 Pro doesn’t fare much better, with unacceptable frame rates with AA and AF.
The Inferno map is a little more aggressive for the video card. Our 9500 Pro is still able to attain an average 44 FPS with 6X AA and 16X AF at 1024x768, although the minimum FPS dips into the single digits at times. Compared to the Ti 4600, it's playable at AA and AF settings where the Ti 4600 is not. At 1280x1024, it's really only playable with no AA and no AF as well as the Ti 4600 and Ti 4200. At 1600x1200, we have the same situation, except the Ti 4200 is now below 30 FPS.
So while UT2003 may say “NVIDIA, the way it was meant to be played”, ATI shows us that the 9500 Pro is actually the better card to have if you want excellent performance with quality graphic settings when compared to the Ti 4600.