Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

x700 comparable to?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 29, 2005 3:19:07 PM

need to find out if the (gigabyte) x700 pro 128mb (don't ask me how that happened since gigabyte website only says there is a 256 mb pro version and no 128mb version) is comparable to anything in the new ATI lineup. would it beat any product in the X1xx series?

Thanks
Ara

More about : x700 comparable

November 29, 2005 3:32:28 PM

The X700 pro is roughly equivalent to the vanilla X1300. Out of the two, I'd pick the X1300 for the features...

The 6600GT is better than both as far as raw performance goes, and is the card to get in the price range.
a b U Graphics card
November 30, 2005 1:57:46 AM

Quote:
The X700 pro is roughly equivalent to the vanilla X1300.


I disagree, it's more like the inverse, the X700 vanilla is the equivalent of the X1300PRO;

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-x1300.html

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/xfx-gf6600-ddr2.html


If anything the X700Pro is closer to the vanilla X1600 IMO (the X1600XT clobers it though), but I do agree with where you put the GF6600GT for the X700P. But be sure to check the AA+AF rewsults, like in BF2 where the X700P outperforms the GF6600GT throughout the resolutions;

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-x1600_3.html

And if you check further on in HL2 similar results where the lead shifts with AA+AF. However overall the GT will win.

Anywhoo I'd put it closest to a plain X1600 in the new generation, or more acurately somewhere between the X1300PRO and the plain X1600 but closer to the latter.
Related resources
November 30, 2005 2:14:23 PM

Indeed, memory has failed me. I stand corrected.

I wonder how the vanilla X1300 Performs...
December 1, 2005 2:29:36 PM

That's not so bad... it's competitor would be the 6200, no?

I thought the vanilla X1300's were cheap.
a b U Graphics card
December 1, 2005 8:43:49 PM

It's not too bad performance wise, but it is priced way above a 6200 (USA anyway). Street prices put the X1300 and GF6600 both at about $100 for us(same as a X700pro), which is only a few dollars under the higher clocked X1300 pro. Maybe if there were 128MB models they would be cheaper, but I have only seen 256MB ones for sale. If it were priced = to a 6200, that would be a nice budget card.
a b U Graphics card
December 1, 2005 11:53:10 PM

You can even find the occasional 6600GT for $99 - Neweg recently had a PCIe card for that after rebate.
a b U Graphics card
December 2, 2005 12:27:35 AM

That would be a no brainer buy for the price then.
a b U Graphics card
December 2, 2005 12:30:23 AM

Hey Cleeve, I don't really follow these budget cards, but I was just thinking. X300 was meant to compete with GF6200 right? So X1300 would be meant for GF7200, which so far NV is just using the 6600 line to fill this spot. Anyway, maybe I am off, but that just seemed to stop and make me think for a bit.
!