Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Hardware

AnandTech Reviews ATI's Mobility Radeon 9000 125

Posted by timothy from the portable-graphics dept.
Mike Bouma writes "AnandTech has reviewed ATI's latest mobile graphics solution. According to the reviewer this small and energy efficient chip is the new king when it comes to mobile graphic chips for Notebooks. Also John Carmack is apparently very positive about the chip and also stated that Doom 3 will be able to run smoothly with this new Radeon chip."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

AnandTech Reviews ATI's Mobility Radeon 9000 More

AnandTech Reviews ATI's Mobility Radeon 9000

Comments Filter:
  • So, if Doom 3 will run smoothly on this card, how will it run on my lowly Geforce 2?
    • I guess Carmack has now formally achieved the the status in the computer world that EF Hutton had in the financial world ...

    • Read somewhere it need a video card pixel shader support.
      So GeForce 3 or an ATI 8500 at the minimum.
    • I do not know about doom3 but unreal2003 is a little less demanding and will only do 2 or 3 fps on a geforce2 card. I saw the benchmark on the www.firingsquad.com. I believe it uses vertex shaders as well but not to the same extent as doom3. The 2 or 3 fps was done on a pentium4 1.7ghz. A new video card is indeed needed. I believe the cpu has to do the shader calculations in a geforce2 but I could be wrong(correct me if I am).

      Anyway could someone tell me what a shader is?

      • I play American Army [americasarmy.com] (unreal2003 engine based) and I get 35fps, with lows at 19 on very heavy battles. But I also like pushing my resolution at 1024x768 with 2x AA on an AMD 1800, GF3/TI500, so a GF2 should be able to do 600x480 with no AA at almost playable speeds.
        • Americas Army is based on a recent build of the Unreal engine, not the unreal2003 engine - trust me, the graphics aren't all that impressive.

          Also, Americas Army plays decently on a P3-700 with a GF2 at 800x600 (the lowest the Unreal engine supports anyway).
          • Better check again, it is powered by the unreal2003 engine. And the gfx are suppose to be war based, its not suppose to be robots with glowing lasers and floating power ups.
            • Apparently you are right - then I'm extremely unimpressed. It seems that, aside from small exceptions, that games like MOHAA and RTCW look better then AA. Nevertheless, my orginal contention that the game runs smooth on a GF2 still stants - my roommate was just playing it with such a setup today.
              • Its no MOHAA or RTCW, thats the point, its a SIM that masks as a FPS. Kinda like CS without the cheats. The GFX are extremely good [gamershell.com], thou some maps are dull(real life...) It does need a high end card with AA, which the new Radeon will give.

                Hopefully we start to see UT2K3 benchmarks in reviews, I'm tired of Q3A, I hope Doom replaces it for benchmarks.
    • Here is something I found in an online review of the doom 3 presentation:


      The presentation was also running the game on a 2.2Ghz Pentium 4 with that lovely Radeon 9700, so it was no wonder that it was moving smoothly. Both Tim Willits during out little talk and Carmack in his keynote later were quick to point out that the game could run on anything as low as a GeForce1 however. "The game running at full features is with a GeForce3 video card or higher. It'll run on anything down to a GeForce1 because of the hardware acceleration, but we feel that some of the graphical features would have to be turned down. But with the new products from ATI and nVidia coming out before the release of the game, we're sure that we'll have great penetration for the game full feature."
    • You mean your Geforce2go?
  • Today ATI is announcing the 36 million transistor Mobility Radeon 9000, a chip that promises to bring mobile gaming to places it has never been before.

    Is there a new Trek game out?

  • It's great but. . . (Score:3)

    by AlaskanUnderachiever ( 561294 ) on Saturday August 31, 2002 @06:04PM (#4178273) Homepage
    While it's great that we're getting mobile video that can finally keep up with the processor, it's rather sad that the "fastest" mobile video solution seems to be barely on the "approved" list for this game. New engines are great, but not when 80% of your market can't run them. The impression that I've been getting is that the news sites are telling me I'm going to actually need the New GeForce 5 Ti6660 or perhaps The Radeon 12000 to play this game?

    I really feel for everyone that will be playing this thing on their P3 1.2gHz and GeForce3 Ti500.
    "Wow John, you got above 15frames a minute? That's incredible!"

    Where is my demo! Bring me my demo!


    • Games have always pushed computer systems...

      I remember folks whining that their 3d-shooter games wouldn't play fast on the 486SX-16, and that the designers were only writing them for the 'rich-boys' with their 486DX-66's...

      A year after the release, most all common computers being sold could run the game just fine. Point being, let the designers create the game with long-term lasting power by putting it at the limit of todays hardware. Let the hardware designers push their new products by showing how well they can do the same job as the most expensive card out there (Using games like this as a benchmark)
    • id has never really been about hitting the mainstream gamer. All of their engines have been on the very high system requirements side when first released. Since they are a small company they still manage to rake in millions, especially since lots of other companies start to license their engines when the mainstream DOES catch up to their engines.

      If nobody pushes the envelope, there will be no reason for consumers to buy new cards and graphics technology will stagnate, so lighten up.

      Anyway, what id is doing now has worked out great for them throughout their history -- why would they change it now?

    • Its not as bleak as you say it is. At least compared to when Doom1 was comming out. Unreal2003( the other vertex engine game)can run quite nice on a geforce3 as long as you do not jump up the video settings too high. How many people reading this are using a cheap geforce2 card to play quake3 or UT? Quite alot. Id knows that after the game is out hardware will advance and Carmack himself said the new engine would be standard for most games for the next 5 years!

      Sure we can't put our monitors to 1600x 1800 with the latest video cards like we can under quakeIII but do we really need this?

      QuakeIII when it first came out had simuliar high requirements. Now even the e-machines desktops can run it fluidly. 800x600 with 32 bit color is fine for me and my new upcomming Radeon 97000 pro.

    • The original Doom3 demo performed very well on GF3 (this is before the Ti500 was even available).

    • Re:It's great but. . . (Score:3, Interesting)

      by koreth ( 409849 )
      This will sound like a troll, but it's not: if you don't want to have to stay top speed on the hardware treadmill, try playing games that are a couple years old -- not only will they run lightning-fast on your year-old hardware, but they're a lot cheaper, they're more stable (having gone through several revisions of patches) and you'll find tons of thorough FAQs and walkthroughs on the net. In terms of gameplay, a 1999 game is just as likely to be fun as a 2002 game; it just won't look as pretty. Heck, I'm only now getting around to playing the first "Baldur's Gate" (for which I paid under $10 a few weeks ago) and it screams on my lowly 1.4GHz Athlon box.

      I think there's no way around needing the latest, greatest hardware to play the latest, greatest games; the two go hand in hand, always have. And I for one love it, since it means games get immersive and realistic a lot faster than they would if nobody was pushing the envelope.

      Doom 3 will push lots of people to buy fancy graphics cards now rather than a year from now, which will prompt other developers to release their snazzy eye candy games a year from now rather than two years from now, which will cause enough content to be available that the non-Doom crowd will upgrade sooner rather than later, etc. Not good for people on a budget, but people on a budget are rarely on the cutting edge of any technology, so no reason to expect games to be any different.

  • With the updated drivers, my Thinkpad X22 with an ATI Mobility still can't play Counter-Strike for more than 3 minutes before getting screwed up. ATI is notorious for having crappy drivers.
    • ATI's sketchy driver support has always been my reason for steering clear of their graphics prodcuts. It'll be interesting to see if they can improve upon what has always been their "fatal flaw" in the past...
    • I have a presario 1692 (K6-2 433) with ati rage mobility m1 and I can play quake1 for hours on end without the laptop choking. Of course, it's hard on the eyes. This is at 800x600, OpenGL. So maybe your problem is IBM and not ATI.

  • Why? (Score:3)

    by ImaLamer ( 260199 ) <john.lamar@NospaM.gmail.com> on Saturday August 31, 2002 @06:06PM (#4178282) Homepage Journal
    "Also John Carmack is apparently very positive about the chip and also stated that Doom 3 will be able to run smoothly with this new Radeon chip."

    Nice, so I can play on my laptop, almost as great as playing a PS2 on a tv from 1950.

    It's not really the screen size, some laptops have better sized screens than my desktop, but the angle.

    • It's not really the screen size, some laptops have better sized screens than my desktop, but the angle.

      I usually play sitting just in front of my monitor. How about you?
    • It's not really the screen size, some laptops have better sized screens than my desktop, but the angle.

      IMO the big problem with laptop gaming is the poor refresh rates of your standard LCD. Lots of nasty ghosty artifacts... But its still nice to have the option, I guess...And you can always plug the laptop into a monitor for desktop use (yeah this misses the point of the laptop, but you can still use it on the go for all your office stuff, and then use it at home for games, avoiding the usual practice of having to have a dedicated desktop gaming rig)...

    • Re:Why? (Score:3, Informative)

      by be-fan ( 61476 )
      He he. I'm sitting here on my Inspiron 8200 with its 1600x1200 resolution, 25ms pixel response (no ghosting, even in Quake3) and thirty degrees of freedom in either direction. Laptop LCDs have come quite aways since 1990. Plus, there's talk that the Inspiron 8200's might be upgradable, video-wise :)
      • Eh, but Dell's have exceptional screens when you pay the buco bucks for their higher end "mutlimedia" laptops. Most affordable laptops still have screens that have some level of ghosting, although it has gotten much better of late.

      • Re:Why? (Score:2, Informative)

        by Rude Turnip ( 49495 )
        I must back up be-fan. I'm using an Inspiron 8200 with a GeForce 440 Go video card and the Dell Ultrasharp display, which gives you super refresh rates and no ghosting. My current online crack addiction is multiplayer Soldier of Fortune.

        If you're going to get a laptop and you still want to play the higher end games, then there's really no excuse not to get an Inspiron with the Ultrasharp display. Of course, the biggest advantage with Inspirons is that you can upgrade the graphics card by calling Dell and having the new card shipped out. True, you don't get the wide range of choices like you would with a regular PC, but then there are trade-offs with laptops.

      • Plus, there's talk that the Inspiron 8200's might be upgradable, video-wise :)

        So, you own one, and you're still not sure if it's upgradeable or not? Or are you unsure about which videocard you can actually put in it?

        Personnally, that's one of the reason I'm not likely to buy a laptop: you're not told up front what you can and cannot change once you bought it. In a normal self-made tower, you know you can easily change or add any part (except what you chose to be integrated on the MB). And I'm still not sold to an LCD, even if some people like their expericence with them.

        (Last thing: thirty degrees of freedom in either direction? What is it supposed to mean in the context of a laptop?)

        • Well, what happens is that since the Inspiron 8000, Dell laptops have had the same graphics add-in card). So you could upgrade from a Geforce2 to a GeForce4 MX. We don't know yet if that will hold for the next Inspiron when the NV31-based mobile GPUs come out.

          As for the LCD, its magnificent. 1600x1200 on a 15" screen gives 133 dpi, and with ClearType, its like reading a piece of paper.

          As for the degrees of freedom, I meant that you can swing about thirty degrees to either side without losing the image on the LCD.
        • I got an Inspiron 8000, and before I got it I knew how to take it apart. Dell had complete instructions on thier website on how to remove and replace every component in the laptop.

          I've recently changed the Mini-PCI card in my laptop from wired ethernet to wireless.

          I could also change the screen, swap out the processor, change the video card, or get a different media bay option by finding the parts on Dell's website.

  • Its nice to see Anan being fair to ATI. Even with the appearance of the 9700 Anan said that the new Geforce (vapor)line would blow it away.
    • I'd like to see your link where they say that. They DO say however that ATI is not afraid of the NV30 and that they{ATI} will be ready with another Ace up their sleeve when the NV30 is released.
  • ATI has a unique vision of the future. What they see is one mobile motherboard design being used in everything from the value segment to the high-end segment.
    I just can't wait for the days when I will be able to go order a new video card for my laptop. I was very interested to ready that you can already upgrade the video cards on some Dell laptops from the GeForce2Go to the Geforce 4 card, maybe those days aren't far off for most new laptops.
    • Unless you're talking about a really small motherboard, then having one design for all laptops is a bad idea. Laptops are very specialized devices bought for different purposes. A salesman might want something really small and light that can be carried around, such as a tiny Vaio. Someone like myself would want a large one that would be used for working on all day, to produce the product that would be used to pay said salesman's commissions :)
  • ATI is also about PORN. That new video smoothing feature sounds sweet.

    They've given us some nice features for notebooks for a while now...that anti-aliased resizing on non-native resolutions, for one. Dunno if Nvidea et al eventually got round to matching that one. But ATI had it first by a long shot.
  • ...while the rest of the world hated them. They have had the worst drivers of any video card maker, EVER. They have had so many bugs with games it's not even funny. Most people when they hear about an ATI run away screaming. If you look at their biggest competitor, NVidia, you are just blown away by their incredible driver support and constant updates. Just recently they squeezed another 25% speed increase out of their drivers. You wont be seeing this anytime soon, if at all from ATI. They'll still be trying to get the latest games to work correctly on theor cards..

    And you know what it comes down to? Apple. Apple has a deal to use ATI cards in their Macintoshes. They're STUCK using these crappy cards forever, and it's no wonder Carmack never disses them, he has always had a sweet spot for Apple. Why, I have no idea, but I wish he'd call it like it really is. ATI just plain SUCKS. Their drivers suck, their All-In-One-TV-OUT-DVD-Replay-Work-Your-Toaster SuperRAGEKillerXXXtreme 3D cards STINK.

    • Carmack has noted in the past that Nvidia's drivers are far better ("gold standard" were the words he used). But you have to keep in mind that as a 3D games guy, it is not in his best interests for a monopoly to emerge in the consumer 3D video card world. Competition keeps the new features coming, which gives Carmack new hardware to write new games for.

    • And you know what it comes down to? Apple. Apple has a deal to use ATI cards in their Macintoshes. They're STUCK using these crappy cards forever, and it's no wonder Carmack never disses them, he has always had a sweet spot for Apple. Huh? Yea, that was true..like maybe 3-4 years ago. All macs have the build-to-order option of having either a radeon 8500 or a geforce 4 Ti4600 (well i BELIEVE its a 4600), also, the imacs are standard built with a geforce2mx in it. Not entirely sure about the mobile systems though.
    • Err..."up to" 25%. 3DMark scores shot up, but pretty much every game benchmarked showed marginal improvements.

      Please don't buy the hype before seeing the reviews.
    • Ati has learned there lesson and their drivers are better and the raedon series proved it. I believe they listened to their customers and noticed the migration towards nvidia and reacted properly. As a side note macintosh drivers have to be very good quality to have apple's seal of approval. Unlike the Windows world where everything goes, you need to have a license to access some of the inner working of the OS and to actually sell hardware on the mac platform.(this is was what it was like in the 80's)

      This is one of the few advantages if any of being tied into a single software/hardware platform. Many Unix guru's prefer sun over Lintel boxes for that very reason. Quality and consitancy. It is likely that apple itself could of partially written the drivers if ATI's own drivers didn't meet the requirements bill or if they prefered to pay apple to do it instead.

      Also remember that Windows (Windows95 & 98 particularly)have a horribe and I mean horrible driver model and sdk. Infact this is what caused all the those infamouns bsod. Even NT4 has everything running in the kernel which is supposed to be there server line OS. WIndows2000 is improving however.

      Oddly enough I am getting the newer cards because of better linux support. Better linux support...from ATi? Well since ATI never releases Linux drivers but rather reveals all its technical secrets to the community, I can just wait for the write drivers to come on in with dri XF86 support. I have to rely on nvidia with opengl under linux which I have observed will not compile properly with certain kernels and is very unstable with certian VIA athlon chipsets. Not to mention nvidia does not use the standard dri architecture. With now improved Windows drivers and supperior opensource linux ones, I will buy an ati. If there is a problem discovered in the linux ati drivers, it will be fixed and I do not have to wait for a corporation to do it. Its rumoured that ATI is even developing a unified driver model which is simuliar to nvidia's that will upgrade all its drivers for all recent cards! Oh, and its almost twice as fast as a gefore4!

    • "Just recently they squeezed another 25% speed increase out of their drivers."

      They claim "up to 25% increase in performance", but just about the only place where you see that is the Nature-test in 3DMark. In _games_ (you know, the things we actually use these vid-cards for?) there is exactly _zero_ improvement! And I heard that they changed the default-setting for filtering to one notch worse, so the image-quality suffers. Also, these new drivers have severe stability-problems.

    • Of Apple's current systems, the new iMacs (the LCD ones) and the eMacs both use NVidia chips, not ATI. The Power Mac G4s use both NVidia and ATI (a given stock configuration having one or the other, and people buying directly from Apple can get custom configurations with whichever they want), and it's been this way for a while now. Only the portables and the old-style CRT iMacs are ATI-only.

      As for Carmack, he's very much known for giving his honest opinion. He's certainly never been inclined to hold back legitimate, often quite scathing criticisms of Apple, and it was only when Apple adopted OpenGL as its 3d API of choice that he really began offering praise.

  • I have been thinking about buying a Ti PowerBook, what would be my first Apple. I have noticed they seem to put the latest and greatest from ATI in them. Up until this that was the Rage Mobility 7500, what is currently shipping in them. I can wait 3-4 months before buying it. What are the chances that they will have a new revision of the PowerBook with one of these by then?
    • Well, Apple Expo 2002 in Paris is on September 10th. Something tells me we'll see an announcement for the 9000 to be included in an updated Ti. Maybe a 100 Mhz speed bump as well...
      • I'd say those are probably pretty realistic expectations. The Ti book line is over due for an update, and that would be the most likely place and time for one, and I'm sure Apple will be looking to capatilize on this newest offering from ATI. If they are announced, updated Ti's with the 9000 might not ship right away due to how close the availability date and the Expo date are, but I do think there is a strong chance if not at the Expo, new Ti's with this option will be announced within 3 months.
  • Especially my spread sheet program. Finally, I don't have to have that horrible graphic lag when moving cells. And man, /. is really going to fly. :) In all honestly though, I really would kill to get one of these for my Ti Book.
  • Well I'm using a GeForce4 2GO right now on my Satellite 5005, and well it seems to perform just like your average geforce 3 mx. While I'm used to an ATI rage mobility, the drive support for both windows and linux sucks. ATI is known for making really nice cards, but doing really shitty with driver support. nVidia makes chips and when the manufacturer of the card dies out, that's okay nVidia will jump in and give you their drivers. I have YET to see that from ATI. While I think competition is a wonderful thing, after getting a TNT a long while ago and watching the performance of this toshiba laptop (don't get me wrong even though it doesn't benchmark like a Geforce 4 TI, it still holds its own), I think that it will take quite a bit to take me away from nVidia.
    • GeForce 3 MX, huh?

      As far as I know...they don't exist. Did you manage to get your hands on some super-special one-off engineering sample or something?
    • I read the shitty ATI driver complain all the time on slashdot. But I have never ever experienced any problems with ATI drivers. I have a RAGE3D LE on my laptop. I never had a game not work or crash on my computer.

      Makes me wonder What do I have that you don't ?
  • Anyone want a Dell Inspiron 8200 so I can run Doom 3 on whatever I replace it with ? ;-)

    Bloody laptop video cards should be replaceable like their bigger brethren
  • Why doesnt Nvidia start making Geforce 3's for laptops? how about ATI making HIGH power 3d chipsets for laptops?

    I am in the market for a laptop, but the graphics chipsets suck horribly (Radeon mobility? it's crappy and isnt linux friendly... so under linux you get ZERO 3d accelleration) and are not powerful enough to do squat. I would pay a premium of upwards of $200.00 for high end graphics in a laptop, but nobody want's to offer it.

  • It seems to be a habit of certain people to bash ATI for their lousy drivers. I've used ATI cards in Macs since 1997 and NEVER had driver issues. Right now I have a Radeon 8500 in a G4/500/DP and it works. On the Mac people are complaining about buggy nVidia drivers. My next card will probably be another ATI.

Slashdot Top Deals

"It takes all sorts of in & out-door schooling to get adapted to my kind of fooling" - R. Frost

Close