They take the 7500, the 8500(64), the 8500LE (128), the 8500(128), GF3Ti200, GF3Ti500, GF4ti4400, GF4Ti4600, and the GF4 MX440 put them all through a bunch of tests and print them out on nice little graphs for you.
Hope that's kinda what you're looking for!
Stupidity should be painful.
Woohoo, 14th person to solve the 4D rubik's cube...ever! http://www.superliminal.com/cube/cube.htm
Watch me solve a regular cube in 24.2 seconds at www.rubiks.dk videolist, Daniel Hayes!
It was very informative Swedishlf, thanks again. Turns out there's not much between the two. The 128MB version does close the gap slightly between the GeForce4 Ti4400 and in one or two tests, actually just beats the GeForce4 Ti4600, but the margin is so small it's nothing to be real proud of.
But my main interest, that being the difference between the 64MB and the 128MB has brought me to the conclusion that unless the 128MB version is only slightly more expensive, then it's not worth the slight performance inrease.
That review is great, linked to it myself a couple of times.
A few things to note though. They use the 6037 official drivers which lack the upadates ICD's that have taken Radeon 8500 OpenGL performance a considerable step forward recently. I wish they'd used either the 6043 or 6052 LAD's.
The other thing is that the 128MB LE comes with 3.3ns RAM instead of the 3.6ns found on the 128MB Retail. These cards hit 300/300MHz straight out of the box, and I'm sure 325/325MHz is pretty easy with a little tinkering. Best 8500 available, in my opinion (although Gigabyte's cards are also pretty lush).