the latest radeon gfx card

i think i have been conned by time computers. i bought a time powerstaton for 800 which said in the ad that it had the latest ati radeon gfx card which was a radeon 9200se 256mb agp 8 card. i checked the ati site and i think they go the latest is a radeon 9800 pro? can anyone set me straight? shud i ask for my money back?

it has a kt400 motherboard in there with an athlon xp 2600+ and i would like to get the atlon xp 3000+ is that compatible with the motherboard? the 2600 has an fsb of 166 which compared to the newer intels is crap cos thay have 800fsb innit? wondering whther i shuld give it back. this is the total spec:

AMD Athlon XP2600+
1024Mb DDR RAM
160Gb hard disk
16x DVD-ROM Drive
DVD / CD Multi-writer
KT400
ATI Radeon 9200SE 256MB graphics
2xFirewire
S-Video
6 channel built in
10/100 for networking and ADSL
Windows XP Home Edition
5x USB
Standard Serial and Parallel
56k V92
Full ATX case with 7 drive bays
Multi-media keyboard
Logitech wheel mouse
Floppy
ConnectPro Memory Card Reader

I think the 9200 is the latest graphics card from ATI - it's certainly one of the latest. What it isn't is the fastest, which is the 9800 Pro.

As for your motherboard, most KT400 motherboards will accept the 3000+, but it depends on the actual motherboard really. I can see know real reason why it shouldn't though.

But to be honest, you really won't notice much difference between a 2600+ and a 3000+, and it certainly doesn't warrant the price that you'd be paying.

The AMD Athlon 2600+ does only run at a 166MHz front side bus, but it's really not that far off a Intel. An Intel 2.6GHz processor is only a little (I mean a tiny amount) quicker than a AMD 2600+.

What matters more than numbers is the way that the processor works, and AMD have certainly got a good processor design.

thanks mate for that response. i prob stick with the 2600

The intel 2.6 is way quicker. The 800 mhz fsb makes a big difference. I amn't just saying that coz I'm an intel fan ( I'm not, I own two Athlons and no pentiums) The 2.6c though, is well more expensive than the 2600+. For value for money in the low/mid price range then I will continue to stick to AMD.

Also, the Radeon 9200, 9600 and 9800 are all the new Radeons. It's just like the new GeForce 5200, 5600 and 5900

Oh, and the fsb of the 2600+ is 166, but it's double pumped to 333. The 2.6C is 200mhz, but intel quad pump them to 800. (I don't really understand the whole pumping a processor fsb, but that's what it is ) The 3000+ and 3200+ have a 200 mhz fsb (400 mhz double pumped)

Baz

Forgot to say. If your DDR is PC3000 (or DDR333) then there is no point getting a 3000+. If it is PC3200 (DDR400) or higher then there is a more obvious gain to made.

Baz

Bazza, I have to disagree again - my system (2400+) can out perform P4s of the same level. It's 50-50... P4 2.4s have a much better overclocking potential, but if you pair an Athlon 2400+ with a NForce2 motherboard (like my Epox ERGA+) and set it up right, then it will comfortably live with most P4s...

maybe true.

The best 2 buys at the moment (imho) are the xp2500+ ( i have mine clocked at 2.2Ghz which is 3200+ speed) and the pentium4 2.4c (which can also be overclocked massively)

But, like you say, and I said, for value for money I'd go with AMD every time.

Baz

I've just ordered a 2500+ a few days ago... waiting for it to arrive before I slot it in next to my new RAID controller... :P

With the aid of my watercooling, it should overclock nicely up to those speeds :D

Cool, what watercooling you got/getting?

I'm looking into that stuff once I've got me a gfx card.

Will probably go for danger den maze 4 blocks.

Baz



Post Edited (07-28-03 09:35)