Which Radeon 8500?

[Omega2k1]

Which Radeon 8500 should i get. I'm going to get one and i'm wondering which variation i should get. Here's the list(remeber i'm 15 without a job so the more expensive ones are somewhat out of my reach).

Radeon 8500LE 64mb $109
Radeon 8500LE 64mb w/ Dual Head $128
Radeon 8500LE 128mb $148
Radeon 8500 64mb $160
Radeon 8500 128mb w/ Dual Head $229

I kinda want dual monitor support but i really want the 128mb, but i can't afford the last one. I want dual monitors because i'm into 3d Modeling(3d Studio Max 4) and Photoshop. So it helps. Plus i have an old 15in monitor laying around(max res is only 800x600 though so i'm limmited to 1600x600 on screen res though). So which is has the most bang for the buck(like i said the last one is probably out of the question)?

[NDD]

If you really need two-monitors - "Radeon 8500LE 64mb w/ Dual Head $128"
"Radeon 8500LE 128mb $148" will be faster in games, especially in high resolutions (above 1280x1024) with AA enabled.

Besides, you can o/c them both to stock Radeon 8500 speeds (275/275) or even higher ;)

[Omega2k1]

i planed on ocing anyway(i'm going for faster then 8500 speed :D). I just was wondering if the 2 monitors is better then 2x ram. BTW i cant run at 1280x1024(or whatever it was). My monitors max res is 1024x768(i can get it just one notch up but it sometimes gets artifacts, at like 11XX x9xx or somethingl ike that)

[NDD]

Check here (http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/02q2/020418/index.html) to see the advantage 128MB Radeon 8500 cards have over their 64MB "little brothers".

I just was wondering if the 2 monitors is better then 2x ram.

That's a tough one :)
If you don't know if you really gonna need two monitors, then who does ?! :confused:

[Bizkitkid2001]

ND I don't think the benchmark shows a good point. The 128mb radeon is slower than the 64 mb radeon because it is the LE version and the 64mb isn't.

[NDD]

128MB Radeon 8500LE is clocked 250/250. And in most cases can easily be o/ced to match retail Radeon 8500 (clocked 275/275) working frequencies. Yet - same Radeon 8500 with 128MB works faster than exactly the same card but with 64MB. Fact. Something to do with memory controller of Radeon 8500.
nVIDIA 128MB Ti200 also works a bit faster than 64MB Ti200. But here the difference is hardly noticeable, and mostly in high resolutions with AA enabled.

[Bizkitkid2001]

Ok thanks for clearing that up ND:)

[DABSON!~]

First stay away for the Radeon8500LE
Why ? Well the hole card is just clocked slower than the retail internally and the Core and the Ram.
This makes a huge difference.....
If you can get your hands on a Radeon8500 Retail 275/275 64/128meg card then your buying the right choice.

It makes a huge difference for me in games.....
HalfLife 4x FSAA max in 1024x768 Radeon8500LE
HalfLife 6x FSAA easily! in 1024x768 Radeon Retail 275/275.

I hear the 128 meg really runs great!

But the LE's are not so supper as the retails!! the 64meg Retail ties or beats the 128meg LE! So it just goes to show you thet POWER is better than more ram!
I prefer the Retail......... for me anyway! i noticed the difference from the LE version alot!

[Omega2k1]

I don't really want the Retail cause i don't have enough money for that. And if i had enough money i'd save up $40 more and get the Geforce 4 TI4400 128mb. But as you can see i don't. So i think i'm going with the 8500LE 128mb.

[DABSON!~]

The Radeon8500LE 128 meg is more expensive than the Retail 64meg And the The Retail64meg beats the Radeon8500LE 128meg........in alot of benches and or ties it.

[Omega2k1]

Where are you seeing these prices at? And anyway i'm in it for the long run where the new games take effect of the 128mb of ram. I've seen the benchmark for Jedi Knight 2, 128LE it beats the 64 Retail at higher resolutions(i think).

[NDD]

Hate to say same thing twice, but THIS (http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/02q2/020418/index.html) article may clear few things up for you in terms of performance. Does somebody pay attention to what I post ?! :confused: ;)

[Omega2k1]

yeah i read it but i was to lazy to look at it again :p

[DABSON!~]

Originally posted by ND
Hate to say same thing twice, but THIS (http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/02q2/020418/index.html) article may clear few things up for you in terms of performance. Does somebody pay attention to what I post ?! :confused: ;) You just look evil...i'm scared to look.......:D~~~~~~~~~ SPERM.......~~

[DABSON!~]

Originally posted by Omega2k1
Where are you seeing these prices at? And anyway i'm in it for the long run where the new games take effect of the 128mb of ram. I've seen the benchmark for Jedi Knight 2, 128LE it beats the 64 Retail at higher resolutions(i think).

I personally don't think so.. The 128meg 250Core 4ns 500Mhz DDR card has slower Core and slower Ram than the Retail 64megs 3ns 550Mhz DDR And 275 Core, the card runs faster internally.... it should be faster.....
But the 128 Ram helps store the textures and makes the games much smoother I think with having more Ram...

[Omega2k1]

I'm still going to go with the 8500LE 128 cause i'm cheap, and i still like haveing 2x the ram then the Retail 64mb cause you know that games are going to start taking more advantage of that amount of ram.

[Xyllian]

Like Omega, I too am trying to decide on a Radeon 8500 card.

I like the looks of this version from Gigabyte :

http://www.hardwarepub.com/reviews/video/gigabyte8500le/index_2.shtml

I know it comes stock at 250/250 mhz but since it has lots of cooling fins and a good fan it can be OC'd by just increasing the voltage and then using PowerStrip to OC, right?

This is the 64MB LE version... I don't think Gigabyte has a 128MB version.

Anyone seen a Radeon 8500 that is tricked out like this one for <$200 USD?

[NDD]

Take a look at this (http://www.sysopt.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=104994) thread, especially to what I just said there about "ns" rating and o/cing capabilities ...

You just look evil...i'm scared to look.......:D
Welp, that's the way it should be :D
After all, it's an Evil Smiley™©® :cool:

[Xyllian]

I am starting to think I should forget the Radeon 8500 series and spend an extra $40 to go for a GeForce 4 Ti 4400 like the LeadTek Winfast or PNY Verto.

[NDD]

That's one hell of a good thinking ! :)
Me agree with you completely !

[Xyllian]

I decided on the LeadTek Winfast Ti4400 and ordered it today from NewEgg.com for $240 USD... they are a good online retailer, I have ordered lots from them before and they usually have the lowest or second lowest price.

I decided I wanted the 128MB of RAM for future games and the AA features of the GeForce4 chip... Radeon 8500 is fast but not so good at anti-aliasing I have been reading.

[DABSON!~]

Originally posted by Xyllian
I decided on the LeadTek Winfast Ti4400 and ordered it today from NewEgg.com for $240 USD... they are a good online retailer, I have ordered lots from them before and they usually have the lowest or second lowest price.

I decided I wanted the 128MB of RAM for future games and the AA features of the GeForce4 chip... Radeon 8500 is fast but not so good at anti-aliasing I have been reading.
it depends on the game your running ....But 16x aniso is outstanding! and a Radeon8500 doesn't need FSAA anyway! This card seems to show very little jaggies... for some reason compared to my GTS 2.

[NDD]

and a Radeon8500 doesn't need FSAA anyway! This card seems to show very little jaggies... for some reason compared to my GTS 2.

You can't really compare Radeon 8500 to GeForce2 GTS (or any other GeForce2). Comparison with GeForce3/4 series is more acceptible, although ATI's Anisotropic filtering is a bit defferent than one nVIDIA uses, and not always for ATI favor - pay attention that some surfaces upon different angles aren't getting filtered at all on Radeon cards !!!