How does Aero glass look on Ati Radeon 9550?

Does it look or perform similar to the midrange or high end graphic card? I
read somewhere that low end graphic card like Ati Radeon 9550 256mb will not
show aero that well and that midrange video card is best for aero. Is this
really true?

Hello GT,

I have a Radeon 9600 series card and it is absolutely fine with Aero glass.
Mine is a GeCube Radeon 9550, 256MB, AGP 8x, although Vista detects it as
9600 series. It works out of the box with the drivers included on the Vista
DVD. No problems whatsoever. I use the DVI connection to an LCD monitor.

--
Jane, not plain 64 bit enabled :-)
Batteries not included. Braincell on vacation ;-)
"GT" <GT@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:9468B077-F1E9-4786-B1D8-4291AD48CD5A@microsoft.com...
> Does it look or perform similar to the midrange or high end graphic card?
> I
> read somewhere that low end graphic card like Ati Radeon 9550 256mb will
> not
> show aero that well and that midrange video card is best for aero. Is this
> really true?

Hello Gt
I use a Radeon 1600 pci/e works great no problems, drivers are fine

"GT" wrote:

> Does it look or perform similar to the midrange or high end graphic card? I
> read somewhere that low end graphic card like Ati Radeon 9550 256mb will not
> show aero that well and that midrange video card is best for aero. Is this
> really true?

Do i need to install Old version of .NET Framework so that Catalyst 7.2
Display Driver for Windows Vista will install. I think before .NET Framework
is needed in order for the catalyst display driver to install.




"Jane C" wrote:

> Hello GT,
>
> I have a Radeon 9600 series card and it is absolutely fine with Aero glass.
> Mine is a GeCube Radeon 9550, 256MB, AGP 8x, although Vista detects it as
> 9600 series. It works out of the box with the drivers included on the Vista
> DVD. No problems whatsoever. I use the DVI connection to an LCD monitor.
>
> --
> Jane, not plain 64 bit enabled :-)
> Batteries not included. Braincell on vacation ;-)
> "GT" <GT@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:9468B077-F1E9-4786-B1D8-4291AD48CD5A@microsoft.com...
> > Does it look or perform similar to the midrange or high end graphic card?
> > I
> > read somewhere that low end graphic card like Ati Radeon 9550 256mb will
> > not
> > show aero that well and that midrange video card is best for aero. Is this
> > really true?
>

"GT" wrote:

> Does it look or perform similar to the midrange or high end graphic card? I
> read somewhere that low end graphic card like Ati Radeon 9550 256mb will not
> show aero that well and that midrange video card is best for aero. Is this
> really true?

I'm just trying to figure out all this stuff. ) Is a Ati Radeon 9550 card
better than an Ati Radeon x1400 256MB? Thanks

I bought a 9550 specifically for Aero, and it works and looks great. I have
Vista RC-1, and didn't know you had to specify the "aero" theme under display
options. Once I enabled it, I had the aero functionality (i.e. glass look,
flip-3d, etc.). At the time I installed it (pre RTM Vista), I had problems
using Catalyst. It was recommned to use the native drivers in Vista. Things
may be different now.

"GT" wrote:

> Does it look or perform similar to the midrange or high end graphic card? I
> read somewhere that low end graphic card like Ati Radeon 9550 256mb will not
> show aero that well and that midrange video card is best for aero. Is this
> really true?

"GT" wrote:

> Does it look or perform similar to the midrange or high end graphic card? I
> read somewhere that low end graphic card like Ati Radeon 9550 256mb will not
> show aero that well and that midrange video card is best for aero. Is this
> really true?


I'm just trying to figure out all this stuff. ) Is a Ati Radeon 9550 card
better than an Ati Radeon x1400 256MB? Thanks