_j5689_
Dreads & Bergers
+364|7174|Riva, MD
Which one is better.  I don't plan on upgrading to either i'm just wondering because I know someone who bought a MicroATX mobo from AsRock and a 1.5GHz P4 for under and he has an AGP slot but is running Windows 98.  Judging by that predicament, I am guessing he has an insufficient power supply for a graphics card that requires a power supply hook-up due to this very small budget(what a stupid bottlenecking idea in the first place, designing graphics cards that require extra power).  Seeing as how these are the 2 best unpowered cards for AGP, which one is better?
_j5689_
Dreads & Bergers
+364|7174|Riva, MD
Nevermind, neither one is even compatible with Windows 98 according to Newegg.  However, some of the 9550s are compatible.  The thread is still open to discussion on which card is better though.

I'm glad I did this, I just found what is currently the best microATX graphics card available, it beats the older but more popular Rage 128 in the microATX category: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6814129070

This card even meets the standards to play BF2 on a microATX computer, lol.
Sup3r_Dr4gon
Boat sig is not there anymore
+214|6785|Australia
Don't expect to play with brillliant settings though. I have a 9600, with a P4, and I get 800x600, medium/low setting that stays at a smooth frame rate 80% of the time.
doc. josh
Member
+48|7002

_j5689_ wrote:

Nevermind, neither one is even compatible with Windows 98 according to Newegg.  However, some of the 9550s are compatible.  The thread is still open to discussion on which card is better though.

I'm glad I did this, I just found what is currently the best microATX graphics card available, it beats the older but more popular Rage 128 in the microATX category: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6814129070

This card even meets the standards to play BF2 on a microATX computer, lol.
wow 4 pixalpipes thats bad
cablecopulate
Member
+449|7195|Massachusetts.
100 dollars for a 9550? ha.
Ender2309
has joined the GOP
+470|7028|USA
i have one laying around that i have no use for. its ATi built, and i'll send it to for...say....25+ shipping. it just came out of my machine 2 weeks ago, so its still in working condition.
Jbrar
rawr
+86|6999|Winterpeg, Canada
I can get a 9600 for $50, CDN! My 9550 in my other rig (256mb version) does a fine job at medium/low settings. Oh, and I can get another one for $70 cdn.
_j5689_
Dreads & Bergers
+364|7174|Riva, MD

Sup3r_Dr4gon wrote:

Don't expect to play with brillliant settings though. I have a 9600, with a P4, and I get 800x600, medium/low setting that stays at a smooth frame rate 80% of the time.
I play it at 1024x768 on medium settings, 100% view distance, and no AA.  Using a Radeon 9600, 2.2GHz Pentium 4, and 2GB of PC 2700 RAM.


doc. josh wrote:

_j5689_ wrote:

Nevermind, neither one is even compatible with Windows 98 according to Newegg.  However, some of the 9550s are compatible.  The thread is still open to discussion on which card is better though.

I'm glad I did this, I just found what is currently the best microATX graphics card available, it beats the older but more popular Rage 128 in the microATX category: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6814129070

This card even meets the standards to play BF2 on a microATX computer, lol.
wow 4 pixalpipes thats bad
I still play with that much.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard