Originally posted by: rogue1979
The 9500 Pro was faster than the 5600 Ultra at stock speeds. However I am wonder how it will fare at overclocked speeds since the 5600 has a .13 micron core vs .15 for the Radeon, and it has faster rated memory chips. I have a Radeon 9500 Pro that hit 350/300, much faster than the 275/270 it comes clocked at, but I am thinking the .13 micron 5600 might hit 450MHz or better.
Is there any reason to believe the 5600/Ultra will be able to hit 400+MHz considering the 5800 Ultra @ 500MHz requires an insane cooling solution? In that sense you could probably get 400MHz+ out of a 9500 Pro should you use cooling that's more agressive than a simple quiet fan and small heat sink.
I dunno, a 5600 Ultra is stated to be clocked at 350MHz while the 9600 is to be around 400MHz, I just don't think nVidia was wise on striking at .13 as quickly as they did.
I don't have much doubt that a 9500 Pro will be superior to a 5600 Ultra when there are cases where the 9500 Pro can keep up with a GF FX 5800 in some cases, especially so once you crank up the resoluion and/or FSAA. In terms of AF, you only need to crank that up to bring the FX to it's knees, with the 9500 Pro keeping up with a 5800 even at 1024x764.
the 9500/9700/9800 might be on a .15 micron process, but do not forget that they are on a very mature .15 process.