Good question. I always see them listed as being launched together.

On paper the difference really only which market they were intended for, but in practice it could be a lot murkier. My primary concerns would the ram chips on board, the width of the memory bus, and driver compatibility. All things being equal Rage XL can outperform Rage Pro (and theoretically has a higher clock ceiling on the core thanks to the die shrink) but a crippled bus and slow ram can derail things in a hurry.

I only know the XL from being the onboard vga controller on my SE7525RP2. Judging by its performance, I guess it stands for Xtra Limited.

I am always flummoxed by the positive sentiment linguistically exuded unto the Rage series on this forum.

The thing cannot even manage Unreal properly.

/ducks for cover…

st31276a wrote on 2025-12-25, 10:02:

I only know the XL from being the onboard vga controller on my SE7525RP2. Judging by its performance, I guess it stands for Xtra […]
Show full quote

I only know the XL from being the onboard vga controller on my SE7525RP2. Judging by its performance, I guess it stands for Xtra Limited.

I am always flummoxed by the positive sentiment linguistically exuded unto the Rage series on this forum.

The thing cannot even manage Unreal properly.

/ducks for cover…

I think vintage parts that gave borderline functionality with large time investment 30 years ago get more attention in a sunk cost fallacy / stockholm syndrome sort of way. I think that’s why Socket 7 & Rage gets so much attention today. You could almost do so many things. Almost. With a bunch of work. And the fact that rage cards are cheap and new rage xl cards are still getting made today also helps. It’s an affordable entry point into retro computing. Unlike voodoo 2 or systems with scsi drives. Much smaller audience there.

But I started this thread because I had never seen a Rage XC chip until recently, was legit curious, and wanted to add the info to the Vogon Wiki because I missed 109-62800-00 card in my part number survey and that looks like the only card that uses the Rage XC.

Ah stockholm makes sense…

My trauma was caused by a ViRGE GX2 AGP in those days. I do not miss it, but I must say today I really enjoy the voodoo2 I never had back then.

I reckon these chips are basically the same; implementation details with regards to memory and core clocks will probably make the greatest difference in performance.

I completely understand why a rage connoiseur would want to figure this out, it is a totally legit question.

Rage XL has better DVD acceleration over Rage XC on paper.

I have seen zero Rage XC-s in my life, only Rage Pro, Rage Pro Turbo, Rage LT Pro, Rage XL.

st31276a wrote on 2025-12-25, 10:02:

I only know the XL from being the onboard vga controller on my SE7525RP2. Judging by its performance, I guess it stands for Xtra […]
Show full quote

I only know the XL from being the onboard vga controller on my SE7525RP2. Judging by its performance, I guess it stands for Xtra Limited.

I am always flummoxed by the positive sentiment linguistically exuded unto the Rage series on this forum.

The thing cannot even manage Unreal properly.

/ducks for cover…

Yes it can, i have used it, but most of the time its tiny bit faster at D3D renderer, than OpenGL. Unreal has D3D / OpenGL and i have used both.

You inspire me to raise my schooling levels with regards to these cards.

I found this read interesting - https://www.vintage3d.org/rageXL.php

marxveix wrote on 2025-12-25, 16:59:

Rage XL has better DVD acceleration over Rage XC on paper.

I have seen zero Rage XC-s in my life, only Rage Pro, Rage Pro Turbo, Rage LT Pro, Rage XL.

I hadn't either until I saw a 109-62800-00 part number that wasn't in the wiki-- https://www.vogonswiki.com/index.php/ATI#Rage_XL

The seller was able to make it affordable, so I'll let you know what I find when it arrives next week--

douglar wrote on 2025-12-25, 22:35:

I hadn't either until I saw a 109-62800-00 part number that wasn't in the wiki-- https://www.vogonswiki.com/index.php/ATI#Rage_ […]
Show full quote

marxveix wrote on 2025-12-25, 16:59:

Rage XL has better DVD acceleration over Rage XC on paper.

I have seen zero Rage XC-s in my life, only Rage Pro, Rage Pro Turbo, Rage LT Pro, Rage XL.

I hadn't either until I saw a 109-62800-00 part number that wasn't in the wiki-- https://www.vogonswiki.com/index.php/ATI#Rage_XL

The seller was able to make it affordable, so I'll let you know what I find when it arrives next week--

The attachment Untitled.png is no longer available

B22 should have better compability than B41.

I was wrong about DVD, just looked again and i see that RageXL has DFP,
but keep in mind that ATI advertises DVD support more with AGP cards.

http://www.yjfy.com/A/ATI/videochipset/ATI_RAGE_XL_XC.htm

st31276a wrote on 2025-12-25, 10:02:

I only know the XL from being the onboard vga controller on my SE7525RP2. Judging by its performance, I guess it stands for Xtra […]
Show full quote

I only know the XL from being the onboard vga controller on my SE7525RP2. Judging by its performance, I guess it stands for Xtra Limited.

I am always flummoxed by the positive sentiment linguistically exuded unto the Rage series on this forum.

The thing cannot even manage Unreal properly.

/ducks for cover…

No rose tinted glasses here, but yes it can manage Unreal.
It's not the fastest card in the world but it managed it reasonably well given it's price/performance segment.

https://theretroweb.com/expansioncards/s/ati-rage-xc

HWInfo32 reports:
XC = 66.5Mhz Core, 49.9Mhz SDRAM
XL = 84Mhz Core, 63Mhz SDRAM
Pro = 75Mhz Core, 75Mhz SDRAM

Edit: https://vintage3d.org/rageXL.php#sthash.5ZgGhane.dpbs
I am not aware of any software showing proper clocks of the Rage XL. From the datasheet, we know the standard clocks were supposed to be 83 MHz core and 125 MHz memory on the 64-bit cards. The ratio moved from 3:4 to 2:3, giving the XL chips more breathing room in the local memory bandwidth department. 32-bit cards could go even higher to 143 MHz memory clock, compensating a bit of the harsh bandwidth reduction. Fortunately, what ATi drivers do is write memory frequency to the registry.
So I’ll have to check that out

PC Mark 1999 on a K6-III 400 @ 800x600x16bit
XC = 939 (32 bit bus, 4MB SDRAM)
XL = 1164 (32 bit bus, 8MB SDRAM)
Pro = 1175 (64 bit bus, 8MB SDRAM)

XC with the 474e id code and AGP: 3dcif should work or at least, that i think so.
Why more slower clocks, how fast are memory chips if the code is visible there?

The chips are 7ns, so they probably run a good deal faster than the 49mhz reported by HWinfo. Perhaps 100Mhz with a 32bit bus looks like 49Mhz to HWinfo?

douglar wrote on 2025-12-30, 12:01:

The chips are 7ns, so they probably run a good deal faster than the 49mhz reported by HWinfo. Perhaps 100Mhz with a 32bit bus looks like 49Mhz to HWinfo?

Rage XL has same 7ns memory, sometimes they come with 6ns. I dont know the way to clock the core, memory you can clock up more easly.

I doubt you can overclock the memory separately. Most probably the chip clock will also be adjusted by the same relative amount.
Is it possible the XC was a lower-grade XL, maybe with flat panel output disabled?

Putas wrote on 2025-12-31, 11:05:

I doubt you can overclock the memory separately. Most probably the chip clock will also be adjusted by the same relative amount.
Is it possible the XC was a lower-grade XL, maybe with flat panel output disabled?

XC had no DFP or it was disabled, but clocks are slower also, Memory clocks can be changed with software,
but 32bit bus limit is a limit, that i dont like for some of the Rage XL / XC cards. Thats good if core goes up.