Ati radeon 9800 xt review: ATI RADEON 9800 XT 256MB Card Review

ATI’s Radeon 9800 XT graphics card

WE’VE SEEN IT in processors, and it’s already happened in graphics. The rise of the exotics: high-end computer parts that cost hundreds of dollars and promise to take gamers to the extremes of possible performance. These Ferraris made of silicon are growing ever more expensive, and in turn, more exclusive to own. It’s a stunning counter-trend in the world of computers, where components consistently drop in price over time as Moore’s Law enables wondrous new things. Somehow, these two trends coexist, this creeping exclusivity and the constant march of semiconductor progress. For proof see today’s Exhibit A, ATI’s brand-new Radeon 9800 XT, a bright red, five-hundred-dollar graphics card with eight pixel pipelines and more bandwidth than a 360 Modena’s tachometer. This exotic aims to be the fastest graphics card on the market, and it replaces ATI’s similarly pricey Radeon 9800 Pro 256MB, offering more performance than its predecessor.

The Radeon 9800 XT is based on ATI’s R360 chip, which is essentially a minor revision of the R350 chip used in the Radeon 9800 Pro. The chip is still fabbed by TMSC using 0.15-micron process technology. ATI has modified R360 silicon in order to clean up some trouble areas and to allow for higher clock speeds. Beyond that, the R360 has all the familiar R350 features, including support for floating-point pixel formats, programmable shaders, and F-buffer logic that enables longer shader programs without conventional multipass rendering. With the tweaks, the Radeon 9800 XT has reached new highs: a 412MHz core clock speed with an effective 730MHz clock speed on its DDR memory. That’s just a step or two up from the 380/700MHz core and memory speeds of the 9800 Pro 256MB.

Other changes from the Radeon 9800 Pro to the XT are similarly simple. The 9800 XT card is a new circuit board design, visibly distinct from the 9800 Pro 256MB. Also, to keep the R360 chip cool at its higher clock speeds, the Radeon 9800 XT comes stock with a fancy new copper cooler, like so:

The Radeon 9800 XT sports a fancy new spoiler.. er, cooler

The rear copper plate acts as a heatsink, too

This new cooler is larger and heavier than the almost-wimpy heatsink/fan combos on previous Radeon 9800 cards, but it’s nothing compared to the massive hunks of metal strapped to every GeForce FX 5900 Ultra. The larger fan on the XT’s cooler varies its speed according to chip temperatures. It runs a lower speeds during normal use, and kicks up to a faster speed when the R360 chip gets a workout. Running full tilt, the XT’s cooler isn’t horribly loud, but it’s definitely audible. When it’s rotating slowly, the fan is nearly silent. Of course, the same could be said for the cooler on the Radeon 9800 XT’s primary competitor; the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra’s blower is quiet at low speeds, and not too terribly loud going flat out.

With the new cooler, new PCB layout, and tweaked silicon, ATI says the 9800 XT is more overclockable than its forerunner, although we haven’t had the card long enough to test that theory just yet.

As you can see in the pictures, the 9800 XT comes with the standard array of outputs: one VGA, one DVI, and one video out. We’ve long wished to see these top-end cards come with dual DVI outputs and a pair of adapters for VGA, but apparently neither ATI nor NVIDIA has gotten that message yet. Hope springs eternal here at TR, though, so we’ll keep mentioning it.

The clock speed equation
The higher clock speeds of the Radeon 9800 XT mean better performance, particularly in the pixel-pushing department. From simple pixel filling to complex programmable pixel shader effects, the primary bottlenecks to all-out performance in graphics today are related to pixel pushing. The Radeon 9800 XT is all about high resolutions and a healthy dose of (both edge and texture) antialiasing in current games, plus fluid frame rates in next-generation games. To get a sense for what the 9800 XT brings to the table, let’s bust out one of our world-famous chip charts.

  Core clock (MHz) Pixel pipelines  Peak fill rate (Mpixels/s) Texture units per pixel pipeline Peak fill rate (Mtexels/s) Memory clock (MHz) Memory bus width (bits) Peak memory bandwidth (GB/s)
GeForce FX 5800 Ultra 500 4 2000 2 4000 1000 128 16. 0
Parhelia-512 220 4 880 4 3520 550 256 17.6
Radeon 9700 Pro 325 8 2600 1 2600 620 256 19. 8
Radeon 9800 Pro 380 8 3040 1 3040 680 256 21.8
Radeon 9800 Pro 256MB 380 8 3040 1 3040 700 256 22. 4
Radeon 9800 XT 412 8 3296 1 3296 730 256 23.4
GeForce FX 5900 Ultra 450 4 1800 2 3600 850 256 27. 2

With another 32MHz over the Radeon 9800 Pro, the 9800 XT theoretically improves on its predecessor only a tad, but the 9800 Pro was already a behemoth. I won’t go into all the dynamics of it, because you can read the chart yourself, and because we’ll be testing things here in a moment.

Note how the Radeon 9800 XT matches up against the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra. With eight pixel pipes, the XT blows it away in pixel fill rate. The 5900 Ultra is faster with multitexturing, however, and has even more memory bandwidth than the XT. In these simple, theoretical measures, it’s a tight race.

The cooler won’t occupy an adjacent PCI slot


Also coming soon: the Radeon 9600 XT and CATALYST: Overdrive
ATI will also be introducing an XT version of its mid-range Radeon 9600 product soon. The new RV360 chip, on which the 9600 XT will be based, is a tweaked version of the chip on the Radeon 9600 Pro. It’s essentially a four-pipeline version of the R300 VPU from the original Radeon 9700. Like the current Radeon 9600 Pro, the Radeon 9600 XT will be fabbed with TSMC’s 0.13-micron process. Unlike the current 9600, though, TSMC will use a low-k dielectric in fabricating the new RV360 chips, which should reduce the RV360’s power requirements and allow for higher clock speeds. As a result, the Radeon 9600 XT should hit core clock speeds upwards of 500MHz, and ATI will pair it up with memory running at over 600MHz.

ATI says the Radeon 9600 XT will have a small, quiet cooler, and it won’t require a secondary power connector like the 9800 XT. 9600 XT cards will cost about $199 when they first arrive some time in October, and to sweeten the deal, all new Radeon cards will soon be shipping with Half-Life 2 in the box.

In November, ATI plans to unleash CATALYST: Overdrive, new software with dynamic overclocking capabilities built in. ATI says this is an “intelligent software solution that determines the optimal ASIC speed for maximum performance.” Without crashing, of course. ATI also says the increased clock speeds will be “ATI Quality Assured,” so you won’t void your card’s warranty by playing with this feature. As I understand it, only newer Radeon chips with built-in temperature sensors will allow for dynamic overclocking.

I expect real overclockers will find better performance by overclocking their cards manually, but CATALYST: Overdrive should allow casual overclockers a chance at some additional performance for free—and that’s what overclocking is all about. Personally, I can’t wait to give this feature a shot with a well-cooled Radeon 9600 XT.

Some frank words about our testing
Because of the recent controversies over various graphics benchmarks and game benchmarks, we are somewhat unsure how to handle graphics performance testing properly right now. Both ATI and NVIDIA have cheated on benchmarks in the past, but NVIDIA has been on the warpath against any benchmark that would show its GeForce FX chips in a negative light from the time of that product line’s first release. We have seen new NVIDIA driver revisions consistently use a range of tricks, from less-rigorous filtering to outright replacement of shader code, to improve frame rates at the expense of image quality.

We would like to take the time, when a new product like this one is released, to conduct detailed testing with innovative benchmarking methods and exhaustive image quality comparisons. ATI recommends as much to reviewers, as well. However, our Radeon 9800 XT review sample showed up on our doorstep this past Friday morning, so we were not able to spend as much time as we’d have liked testing the 9800 XT against its competitors. As a result, we’ve had to restrict our testing to a mix of old and new games, plus a couple of interesting new graphics benchmarks.

To better understand all the issues involved in graphics evaluation today, I spent some time last week talking with NVIDIA’s Chief Scientist, David Kirk. Mr. Kirk is an intriguing guy, part engineer and all politician, very much capable of telling you exactly what he wants you to hear and nothing more. During the course of our conversation, I took away a couple of important bits of information that are relevant here.

As I questioned him about why the GeForce FX cards seem to perform rather poorly in games with lots of DirectX 9 pixel shaders, Mr. Kirk repeatedly told me not to fixate on issues of color precision and datatypes. He admitted the NV3x chips are very “sensitive” to optimizations, but explained that color precision isn’t the issue so much as instruction ordering is. He explained that a better compiler in the GeForce FX driver, translating DirectX API calls into NV3x instructions, could vastly improve performance, and that just such improvements are in store in the 50-series drivers from NVIDIA. When I asked him if he was confident that NVIDIA could wring good performance from the NV3x chips in general cases, without the need for application-specific optimizations, he answered affirmatively, although he conspicuously stopped short of swearing off the need for app-specific work.

I left the conversation with the distinct impression that I needed to test NVIDIA’s 50-series drivers. As a result, I’ve tested the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra with NVIDIA’s 51.75 drivers, which are at present a press-only release. I prefer to test with public release drivers, but I’ve made an exception here.

Also, I’ve included results for several benchmarks that we know are somehow compromised by application-specific optimizations that reduce image quality for performance. Both ATI and NVIDIA seem to have taken steps to reduce the texture filtering loads on their chips in Unreal Tournament 2003. NVIDIA’s legal team apparently scared FutureMark into allowing optimizations in 3DMark03, including wholesale shader replacements, that FutureMark originally disallowed. Other publications have raised questions about image quality compromises in newer NVIDIA drivers when running AquaMark3. The list goes on. Please know we are aware of these issues, and we have included benchmark results because we had to test something. At the very least, you can compare the 9800 XT to the 9800 Pro 256MB, knowing the two are most likely going about their tasks in entirely similar ways in a given test.

Because of the short time we’ve had with Radeon 9800 XT, we’ve limited our testing to situations where $499 video cards excel: situations with high fill-rate demands, lots of edge and texture AA, and lots of pixel shaders. In many cases, that means we’ve limited our testing to 1600×1200 resolution in 32-bit color, with and without 4X edge antialiasing and 8X anisotropic texture filtering. In other cases, with newer games or more complex scenes, lower resolutions sufficed.


Our testing methods
As ever, we did our best to deliver clean benchmark numbers. Tests were run at least twice, and the results were averaged.

Our test system was configured like so:

Processor AMD Athlon FX-51 2. 2GHz
Motherboard MSI 9130
North bridge K8T800
South bridge VT8237
Chipset drivers 4-in-1 v.4.49
AGP 4.42
BIOS revision 1.0
Memory size 1GB (2 DIMMs)
Memory type Infineon PC2700 registered ECC DDR SDRAM at 400MHz
Hard drive Seagate Barracuda V 120GB SATA 150
Audio VT8237/ALC201A
OS Microsoft Windows XP Professional
OS updates Service Pack 1, DirectX 9. 0b

We used ATI’s CATALYST 3.7 drivers (version 7.93) on the ATI cards, which is a full release driver that’s been through Microsoft’s WHQL certification. The NVIDIA 51.75 drivers are a beta release not available to the public.

Thanks to Corsair for providing us with memory for our testing. If you’re looking to tweak out your system to the max and maybe overclock it a little, Corsair’s RAM is definitely worth considering.

The test systems’ Windows desktops were set at 1152×864 in 32-bit color at an 85Hz screen refresh rate. Vertical refresh sync (vsync) was disabled for all tests.

We used the following versions of our test applications:

  • FutureMark 3DMark03 Build 330
  • Quake III Arena v1.31 with trdemo1.dm_67
  • Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory with demo0000.dm_82
  • Serious Sam SE v1.07 with Demo0003
  • Unreal Tournament 2003 with trtest1.dem
  • Splinter Cell v1.2 with TRKalinatekDemo.bin
  • X2 rolling demo
  • Gun Metal benchmark v1. 20
  • ShaderMark 2.0
  • AquaMark3
  • rthdribl 1.2

All the tests we employed are publicly available and reproducible. If you have questions about our methods, hit our forums to talk with us about them.


Benchmark results
We’ll start with some older games and move toward some newer games and benchmarks as we go.

Quake III Arena

Serious Sam SE

The Radeon 9800 XT is, as expected, consistently just a bit faster than the Radeon 9800 Pro 256MB. However, in these older games, the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra is generally faster still. Only with edge and texture AA cranked up in Q3A does the Radeon 9800 XT outrun the 5900 Ultra.


Unreal Tournament 2003

Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory

These games are a bit newer, and the Radeon 9800 XT performs relatively better in them. The 5900 Ultra is fastest in Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory, but only with edge and texture AA disabled.


Splinter Cell

This Xbox port runs best on NVIDIA hardware, but the 9800 XT closes the gap a bit. When we look at the frame rates graphed over time, the cards perform very similarly overall. The 5900 Ultra does have one performance dip, just a little ways into the scene, that the ATI cards don’t experience.



With all the controversy over 3DMark, I won’t say too much about these results. Make of them what you will. However, the synthetic fill rate tests do seem to be showing us about what we’d expect there. The Radeon cards have a big advantage in single-textured fill rate, but the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra has a similar advantage in multi-textured fill rate.



The Radeon 9800 XT’s additional MHz just moves ATI ahead of NVIDIA in AquaMark3. With 4X antialiasing and 8X anisotropic filtering, however, even the 9800 Pro pulls past the 5900 Ultra.

Gun Metal

X2 Demo

Gun Metal and the X2 demo are based on newer game engines. Like Splinter Cell, Gun Metal is an Xbox port that runs well on NVIDIA hardware. The X2 demo is a little odd. It has some great visuals, but the game gets choppy at high resolutions instead of slowing down gracefully as it approaches fill-rate limits.


Real-time high-dynamic-range lighting effects

This nifty little app shows off the promise of DirectX 9 about as well as anything I’ve seen. Unfortunately, GeForce FX cards don’t seem to run it quite right. On FX cards, some colors are “off,” and math errors are visible in the lighting effects. Also, FX cards produce visible banding in color gradients.

HDR lighting on my lowly Radeon 9500 Pro..

…and on the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra with 51.75 drivers The screenshots above are but one example. Here is an uncompressed version of the Radeon 9500 Pro screenie, and here is the uncompressed version of the same scene rendered by a GeForce FX 5900 Ultra. Perhaps this is just a case of an application incompatibility, but if not, it seems that differences in color precision are not always difficult to spot.

Incidentally, the Radeon 9800 XT shows a nice performance gain over the Radeon 9800 Pro in this application.


ShaderMark 2.0
This new version of ShaderMark is an interesting animal. It’s a DirectX 9 benchmark that makes extensive use of Pixel Shader 2.0, and its various shaders are written in Microsoft’s High-Level Shading Language. The registered version of ShaderMark 2.0, which we’re using, can provide “partial precision” hints to tell NV3x cards to use 16 bits of precision per color channel in pixel shader calculations instead of 32. (ATI R3x0 chips always use 24 bits per color channel.) This program also includes some special “2.0+” shaders with extra features for the NV3x GPUs.

Also, because this is a brand-new version of ShaderMark, nobody’s driver is optimized for it yet, so we shouldn’t be seeing any funny business with shader replacements or the like. This version does include an “anti-detect” mode to defeat app-specific driver optimizations, but we found it didn’t change scores.

Some of the shaders would not run on the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra, especially the more complex ones that make multiple passes. As I understand it, part of the problem is the GeForce FX’s lack of support for floating-point texture formats. Anyhow, you’ll see some blank scores below as a result.

When it can complete the tests, the 5900 Ultra is much slower than the Radeon 9800 Pro and 9800 XT. Partial precision hinting helps in many cases, but not enough to allow the 5900 Ultra to reach more than about 60% of the 9800 XT’s performance. This performance delta between GeForce FX and Radeon cards is reminiscent of what we saw in Half-Life 2 not long ago. Even with the 51.75 drivers, the general pixel shader performance of the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra doesn’t look good.

The 9800 XT, by contrast, just improves on a good thing.


The Radeon 9800 XT can’t claim unambiguously the title of “fastest PC graphics card.” In many older games and in some newer ones, the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra still achieves better benchmark scores. However, the Radeon 9800 XT excels at the things one wants from a $499 graphics card. With edge and texture antialiasing turned up, it generally outperforms the 5900 Ultra, and ATI tends not to sacrifice image quality at the altar of benchmark performance with as much relish as NVIDIA. (I wish we had more time to explore that issue in this review, but the patterns are well established by now.) Most importantly, the Radeon 9800 XT provides superior performance and compatibility in true DirectX 9 applications without the need for application specific optimizations or freshly updated drivers.

ATI Radeon 9800 XT
September 2003

The same can’t be said for NVIDIA’s GeForce FX products, and that fact causes us significant concern about future game compatibility and performance. Even the new 51.75 drivers from NVIDIA, with an updated compiler, couldn’t make the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra competitive with ATI products in ShaderMark or the high-dynamic-range demo we tested. One gets the impression NVIDIA needs a well-stocked sweatshop full of driver software developers working 24×7 in order to keep the GeForce FX competitive in various games and benchmarks as they are released. ATI’s hardware, by contrast, just seems to work right. Whatever the reason for this disparity, ATI cards seem to provide a much smoother user experience, especially for power users and cutting-edge gamers who are always downloading the latest and greatest games and demos.

Because of these concerns, and because the Radeon 9800 XT delivers kick-ass overall performance, we are doing something we don’t always do around here: busting out an Editor’s Choice award. The Radeon 9800 XT does well on its own merits, but in this case, we also want folks to know there’s a clearly superior choice between the two $499 graphic card exotics. Five hundred bucks is a lot of cash to lay out on an AGP card, so making the right call is important if you plan to do so. No, the 9800 XT isn’t wildly faster than the Radeon 9800 Pro 256MB that it replaces, but it does perform better at the same price. These cards aren’t good values by any stretch—buy a Radeon 9600 Pro if it’s value you want—but the Radeon 9800 XT is our graphics exotic of choice.  

Radeon 9800 XT

Ground ZERO

Latest Rumor

Rumor Archive

mesg. board 



2015 KickAss



9800 XT mini-review

ATI recently
released the updated Radeon 9600 and 9800 XT models, and I thought it
might be a good idea to compare the new 9800 XT to the original 9800 Pro
to see if the upgrade was worth the money.  The 9800 XT in many ways
is really just an overclocked 9800 Pro.  The default speeds on the
9800 Pro are 378MHz on the engine and 338 on the memory.  The XT
improves this by adding a huge copper heat sink that covers the front and
back of the card, with speeds boosted to 412MHz on the engine and 365MHz
on the memory.

The two cards look quite different, and
the XT weighs about twice as much due to the massive copper heat sink.
Unlike the NVidia 5900/5950, the XT only takes up one slot in your computer


The setup I tested on included:

Asus A7N8X Deluxe

— AMD 2500+ Barton with Thermalright 800 HS
(running at 2GHz)

— 2 x 512MB PC3200 DDR in dual bank mode

— 2 x 76GB U320 15K rpm hard drives 

— Catalyst 3.10 drivers and DX9.0b

— Windows 2000 w/ SP4


I started with good old 3D Mark 2001se to
take a look at DX 7 performance.

The results here don’t look too great for the
XT, with insignificant increases over the Pro model. So how about 3D Mark

Now that’s a bit better, with about a 10%
performance boost across resolutions. This is what I expect from an
overclocked video card.

Next we move on to CodeCreatures, which
really pushes the polys on the screen.

Here we see some really substantial
improvements over the Pro version, boosting the fps at 1280 from 35fps to
over 45fps, which is more than 20%.

But what about games? I thought I’d take a
look at UT 2003 to see if there was a difference between the two cards.

The answer is no.  The differences aren’t
worth an ice cube at the North Pole.

How about overclocking the card above the
manufacturer’s specs? ATI offers an «overdrive» feature with the
Catalyst 3.10 drivers, so I compared that to manual overclocking with
Powerstrip using 3D Mark 2003. You’ll want to compare the bars of the same
color with each other at the 3 resolutions. 

The overdrive did virtually nothing to the
benchmark scores, whereas pushing the speeds to 424 core and 390 memory did
offer a very slight improvement.   I played Desert Combat at these
settings, and the system spontaneously rebooted after about 30 minutes.
Dropping the memory speed to 380 fixed this overclocking-related problem.

Conclusions: ATI
is making some great video cards now, but they’ve about reached the end for
this particular chip line. I thought having the memory running 50MHz faster
than the pro would make more of a difference than it did. I’ll be interested
to see how the next line of ATI’s video cards perform. Bottom line, if you
have a good video card now, don’t buy an XT.

9800 XT Pros 

  • Looks cool
  • 256MB memory
  • Fastest card available
  • Overclocks a little more
  • Good at high resolutions

Radeon 9800 XT Cons 

  • More expensive than other video cards
  • Weighs a ton
  • Not a lot faster than the 9800 Pro
    under many conditions


Radeon 9800 XT:

Approximately $475US retail

:  4. 4 out of 5 smiley faces (88%).

🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂 +  

Recommended only if you
have the dough, and don’t already have an ATI 9700/9800, or NVidia


Copyright, January 3rd, 2004 KickAss


ATI Radeon 9800 XT — 23 secret facts, review, specifications, reviews.

Top specifications and features

  • Passmark score
  • GPU base clock
  • RAM
  • Memory Bandwidth
  • Effective memory speed


ATI Radeon 9800 XT test score:
Best score:


ATI Radeon 9800 XT:
Best score:


ATI Radeon 9800 XT:
Best score:

General Information

ATI Radeon 9800 XT:
Best score:

ATI Radeon 9800 XT features:
Best score:


ATI Radeon 9 graphics card800 XT based on Rage 9 architecture has 117 million transistors, tech. process 150 nm. The frequency of the graphics core is 412 MHz. In terms of memory, 0.3 GB is installed here. DDR1, clocked at 365 MHz and with a maximum throughput of 23.36 Gb/s. The texture size is 3.296 GTexels/s.

In tests, the video card ATI Radeon 9800 XT showed itself as follows — according to the Passmark benchmark, the model scored 55 points. At the same time, the maximum number of points for today is 260261 points.
DirectX version — 9. OpenGL version — 2.

In terms of compatibility, the video card is connected via the AGP 8x interface. Regarding cooling, the heat dissipation requirements here are 60 watts.
In our tests, the video card scores 4470 points.

Why ATI Radeon 9800 XT is better than others

  • Thermal Dissipation (TDP) 60 W. This parameter is lower than 74% of products
  • Passmark score 55 . This parameter is lower than 35% of products
  • GPU base clock frequency 412 MHz. This parameter is lower than that of 86% of goods
  • RAM 0. 3 GB. This parameter is lower than 42% of products
  • Memory bandwidth 23.36 GB/s. This parameter is lower than 78% of products
  • Effective memory speed 730 MHz. This parameter is lower than 35% of products
  • GPU memory frequency 365 MHz. This parameter is lower than 84% of products
  • Technological process 150 nm. This parameter is higher than that of 96% of goods

Review ATI Radeon 9800 XT



general information



Tests in benchmarks

ATI Radeon 9800 XT Review Highlights

GPU base clock

The graphics processing unit (GPU) has a high clock speed.


max 2459

Average: 1124.9 MHz


GPU memory frequency

This is an important aspect calculating memory bandwidth


max 16000

Average: 1468 MHz



0. 3GB

max 128

Average: 4.6 GB


Texture size

A certain number of textured pixels are displayed on the screen every second.
Show all

3.296 GTexels/s

max 756.8

Average: 145.4 GTexels/s

756.8 GTexels/s

Architecture name

Rage 9

GPU Name


Memory bandwidth

This is the speed at which the device stores or reads information.


max 2656

Average: 257.8 GB/s


Effective memory speed

The effective memory clock is calculated from the size and baud rate of the memory. The performance of the device in applications depends on the clock frequency. The higher it is, the better.
Show all


max 19500

Average: 6984.5 MHz



0. 3GB

max 128

Average: 4.6 GB


GDDR Memory Versions

Latest GDDR memory versions provide high data transfer rates for improved overall performance
Show all


Mean: 4.9


Memory bus width

A wide memory bus indicates that it can transfer more information in one cycle. This property affects the performance of the memory as well as the overall performance of the device’s graphics card.
Show all


max 8192

Average: 283.9bit


Heat Dissipation (TDP)

The Heat Dissipation Requirements (TDP) is the maximum amount of energy that can be dissipated by the cooling system. The lower the TDP, the less power will be consumed.
Show all


Average value: 160 W


Technological process

The small size of the semiconductor means it is a new generation chip.

150 nm

Average: 34.7 nm

4 nm

Number of transistors

117 million

max 80000

Average: 7150 million

80000 million



Sales start date

2003-10-01 00:00:00

Mean value:


Used in demanding games, providing enhanced graphics


max 12.2

Mean: 11.4


opengl version

Later versions provide quality game graphics


max 4.6

Average: 4.2




DVI outputs

Allows connection to a display using DVI


Mean: 1.4





AGP 8x

Passmark test score


max 29325

Average: 7628. 6



How much RAM does ATI Radeon 9800 XT have?

ATI Radeon 9800 XT has 0.3 GB.

What version of RAM does the ATI Radeon 9800 XT

ATI Radeon 9800 XT support GDDR1.

What is the architecture of the ATI Radeon 9800 XT

Rage 9 video card.

How ATI Radeon 9800 XT performs in benchmarks

In the Passmark benchmark, the video card scored 55 points.

Which version of DirectX does the ATI Radeon 9800 XT support

DirectX 9.

Does the ATI Radeon 9800 XT DVI support

1 DVI ports.

When was the ATI Radeon 9800 XT released?

2003-10-01 00:00:00.

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super


NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super


NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super


NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super


AMD Steam Deck GPU

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super



NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super



NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super



NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile


AMD Radeon Pro W6800

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile


AMD Radeon RX 6600

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile


NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 8 GB

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile


AMD Radeon RX 6700S

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile


AMD Radeon Pro 5600M

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile


AMD Radeon RX 6500XT

AMD Radeon RX 580 Mobile


NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100


NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile


AMD Radeon RX 5600M

AMD Radeon RX 470 Mobile


NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile


NVIDIA GeForce MX550

AMD FirePro W7170M


NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile


AMD Radeon RX 5300M

leave your feedback

ATI Radeon 9800 XT Specifications

13 412 MHz

Process 150 nm

Power consumption (TDP) 60 W

Maximum memory 256 MB GB

ATI Radeon 9800 XT was released in 2003 and by 2023 it has mediocre performance (better than 19% of all video cards).
The main advantages of this model are: Core frequency: 412 Technological process: 150 Power consumption (TDP): 60 Maximum memory size: 256 MB.

General information


Rage 9





Core clock

0 MHz

Number of transistors

117 million


150 nm

Power Demand (TDP)
the larger the value, the more the requirements for cooling and power consumption increase.

60 W


AGP 8x

Additional power connectors

1x Molex

Video connectors

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video






NVIDIA’s Vulkan technology allows developers to gain low-level access to the GPU to optimize graphics commands (better than the OpenGL and Direct3D APIs).
It is an open, free, cross-platform standard available for all platforms.



Memory type


Maximum memory

Large video memory allows you to run demanding games with a lot of textures,
use high resolution monitors, provide more opportunities for cryptocurrency mining.

0.256 GB

910 place in the rating Memory size

Memory bus width

The larger the video memory bus width, the more data is transferred to the GPU per unit of time and the better performance in demanding games.

256 bit

Memory frequency

A high memory frequency has a positive effect on the speed of a video card with a large amount of data.

730 MHz

Memory bandwidth

The higher the data transfer bandwidth, the more effective amount of RAM the PC can use.

2024 © All rights reserved