GPU Cheatsheet - A History of Modern Consumer Graphics Processors

ATI Chipsets

Below you can see our breakdown of the GPU guide for ATI video cards:

ATI Craphics Chips Overview
DirectX 9 with PS2.0b and VS2.0 Support
X700 Pro	RV410			8	1	6	128/256	128
X700 XT?	RV410	500	1000	8	1	6	128/256	128
X800 SE?	R420	425	800	8	1	6	128/256	256
X800 Pro	R420	475	900	12	1	6	256	256
X800 GT?	R420	425	900	16	1	6	256	256
X800 XT	R420	500	1000	16	1	6	256	256
X800 XT?	R423	500	1000	16	1	6	256	256
X800 XT PE	R420	520	1120	16	1	6	256	256
X800 XT PE?	R423	520	1120	16	1	6	256	256
DirectX 9 with PS2.0 and VS2.0 Support
9500	R300	275	540	4	1	4	64/128	128
9500 Pro	R300	275	540	8	1	4	128	128
9550	RV350	250	400	4	1	2	64/128/256	128
9550 SE	RV350	250	400	4	1	2	64/128/256	64
9600	RV350	325	400	4	1	2	128/256	128
9600 Pro	RV350	400	600	4	1	2	128/256	128
9600 SE	RV350	325	400	4	1	2	64/128/256	64
9600 XT	RV360	500	600	4	1	2	128/256	128
X300	RV370	325	400	4	1	2	64/128/256	128
X300 SE	RV370	325	400	4	1	2	64/128	64
X600 Pro	RV380	400	600	4	1	2	128/256	128
X600 XT	RV380	500	740	4	1	2	128/256	128
9700	R300	275	540	8	1	4	128	256
9700 Pro	R300	325	620	8	1	4	128	256
9800	R350	325	600	8	1	4	128	256
9800 "Pro"	R350/360	380	680	8	1	4	128/256	128
9800 Pro 128	R350/360	380	680	8	1	4	128	256
9800 Pro 256	R350/360	380	700	8	1	4	256	256
9800 SE 128	R350	325	580	8	1	4	128	128
9800 SE 256	R350	380	680	4	1	4	128	256
9800 XT	R360	412	730	8	1	4	256	256
DirectX 8.1 with PS1.4 and VS1.1 Support
8500 LE	R200	250	500	4	2	1	64/128	128
8500	R200	275	550	4	2	1	64/128	128
9000	RV250	250	400	4	1	1	64/128	128
9000 Pro	RV250	275	550	4	1	1	64/128	128
9100	R200	250	500	4	2	1	64/128	128
9100 Pro	R200	275	550	4	2	1	64/128	128
9200 SE	RV280	200	333	4	1	1	64/128	64
9200	RV280	250	400	4	1	1	64/128/256	128
9200 Pro	RV280	300	600	4	1	1	64/128	128
9250	RV280	240	400	4	1	1	128/256	128
DirectX 7
Radeon VE^	RV100	183	183	1	3	0	32	64
7000 PCI^	RV100	166	333	1	3	0	32?	64
7000 AGP^	RV100	183	366	1	3	0	32/64	64
Radeon LE	R100	148	296	2	3	0.5	32	128
Radeon SDR	R100	166	166	2	3	0.5	32/64	128
Radeon DDR	R100	183	366	2	3	0.5	32/64	128
7200	R100	183	183	2	3	0.5	32/64	64
7500 LE	RV200	250	360	2	3	0.5	32?	128
7500 AIW	RV200	250	333	2	3	0.5	32?	128
7500	RV200	290	460	2	3	0.5	32/64	128
* RAM clock is the effective clock speed, so 250 MHz DDR is listed as 500 MHz.
** Textures/Pipeline is the number of unique texture lookups. ATI has implementations that can lookup 3 textures, but two of the lookups must be from one texture.
*** Vertex pipelines is estimated on certain architectures. NVIDIA says their GFFX cards have a "vertex array", but in practice it performs as shown.
^ Radeon 7000 and VE Series had their Transform and Lighting Engine removed, and hence cannot perform fixed function vertex processing.

As far as the various models are concerned, ATI has DX7, DX8.1, and DX9 parts, as well as an unofficial DX9 with SM2.0b support - unofficial due to the fact that Microsoft has not actually certified this "in between" version of DX9. ATI has features that are part of SM3.0, but they do not include the full SM3.0 feature set. When they enable their 2.0b features, they fail WHQL compliance. Since not having WHQL compliance creates concerns among users (the dreaded "This device driver is not certified for use by Microsoft" warning), ATI will turn them off by default, and many people will not know enough to reenable them. It may not seem like a big deal, but software companies are less likely to optimize for non-standard features - especially ones that are disabled by default - so SM3.0 is more likely to see support than SM2.0b.

Generalizing somewhat, we can say that each family of ATI cards outperforms the older generation cards. There are, of course, exceptions, such as the 9550/9600 SE cards which are outclassed by the older 8500/9100 models, and the performance of the 9200SE is rather anemic in comparison to the 7500 in the majority of games. However, the added features and performance tweaks usually make up for the difference in raw numbers, and so comparing performance between the various generations of hardware does not always work.

Older ATI cards lacked support for multi-sample antialiasing, resorting to super-sampling as an alternative. Super-sampling, if you don't know, simply renders the screen at a higher resolution and then filters it down to a lower resolution, and in most cases it is limited to a maximum of 1600x1200. The quality is actually quite good with super-sampling, but the performance hit is enormous. Only with the R3xx cores did ATI begin to support multi-sampling, which helps to these cards to beat the previous generation when AA is enabled. Of course, once ATI did begin supporting multi-sampling, they did it very well, and the quality of their rotated grid sampling was regarded as being superior to the NVIDIA FX line.

ATI has also done anisotropic filtering very well for quite some time, although many believe it is due to "cheats" or "unfair optimizations". The real difference between ATI's implementation of AF and NVIDIA's is that ATI used a faster distance calculation. "True" anisotropic filtering does not really exist as such, and in the end it really comes down to getting improved image quality without killing performance. Today, it is very difficult to distinguish between the optimized and unoptimized filtering methods that both companies employ, and ATI has said they will address any situations where their image quality suffers.

At present, it is worth mentioning that all of the 9800 series chips and X800 series chips use the same base core. ATI validates the chips and in cases where portions of the chips fail, they can deactivate some of the pipelines and still sell the chip as a "light" version. With the 9800 SE cards, some people were able to "soft mod" their chips into full 9800 Pro cards, but success was not guaranteed. There are rumors that the same can be done with the X800 Pro cards, although success seems to be relatively rare right now, likely due to the large size of the chips. As the manufacturing process improves, success rates should also improve, but it's still a gamble. 9500/Pro cards were also based off the more complex 9700/Pro chip, and quite a few people were able to mod these cards into faster versions, but the introduction of the 9600 series put an end to that. We do not recommend purchasing the lower end cards with the intent to soft mod unless you are willing to live with the consequences, namely that success is by no means guaranteed and it will void the warranty. In our opinion, the relatively small price difference just isn't enough to warrant the risk.