Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

X800 XL for $120 - good deal?

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • ATI
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 15, 2006 12:32:51 AM

I've found a new deal for a refurbished X800 XL at ATI's website. I thought this would be a good deal, but does anyone know if there's some catch or something like that? Because the price is pretty low for a manufacturer's price. Thanks for any help.

Link: http://shop.ati.com/product.asp?sku=2984012

My system specs:

Intel P4 2.6 GHz w/ HT + 800 MHz FSB (Northbridge core)
ATI AIW 9600
1 GB PC3200 RAM
Audigy 2 ZS

Keep in mind that I'm bound to the AGP interface right now.

More about : x800 120 good deal

June 15, 2006 12:38:23 AM

Hell, yes!

The X800 XL is one of the top 5 or so cards you can get for the AGP interface. 90% of the performance of a $280 7800GS for less than half the price.

For $120 how can you lose? It's refurb, but if they honor the warranty that's no big deal.
June 15, 2006 1:38:18 AM

Quote:
90% of the performance of a $280 7800GS for less than half the price.


You dont know what the hell you're talking about.
Related resources
June 15, 2006 2:02:44 AM

Beacause I wont be back for a bit, and I dont want to leave a post hanging like that, Cleeve, your starting to show a tendancy of letting things fly out of your mouth when you know you're not completely sure about them. It's not a big deal, it's cool to get excited about graphics cards, but try not to exagerate.

An X800XL, even after overclocking, is still slower than the 12pp GTO I had(slow :roll: ). There's plenty of reviews to be read on this. Overclocked X800XL's garner about 5,500 points in 05, and many dont hit that. I'd like to hear how you came up with the "90% of the performance" figure.

....also, I'm pretty sure 7800GS's are priced around the $260 something-ish mark now.
June 15, 2006 2:17:25 AM

I stand by it.

The 7800 GS is on par for speed with the X850 XT, and the X800 XL is pretty much 90% as fast as a X850 XT.

At worst it's what, 80% as fast?

That 10% discrepancy shouldn't be enough for you to get yourself into a snit like that, you cantankerous wanker. I know you have to defend your purchase, but jeez... :p 

Regardless of your ranting, the X800 XL is still a great AGP deal for $120.

P.S. the cheapest 7800 GS' I can find is $280 on newegg. You don't know what the hell you're talking about! :roll:
June 15, 2006 2:22:49 AM

Quote:
Hell, yes!

The X800 XL is one of the top 5 or so cards you can get for the AGP interface. 90% of the performance of a $280 7800GS for less than half the price.

For $120 how can you lose? It's refurb, but if they honor the warranty that's no big deal.


Sweet. Only thing that sucks is that they don't actually have it in stock yet - it's for pre-order, with no estimated arrival date LOL :roll: but I'm fine with that as long as it comes eventually.
June 15, 2006 2:25:25 AM

Quote:
Beacause I wont be back for a bit, and I dont want to leave a post hanging like that, Cleeve, your starting to show a tendancy of letting things fly out of your mouth when you know you're not completely sure about them. It's not a big deal, it's cool to get excited about graphics cards, but try not to exagerate.

An X800XL, even after overclocking, is still slower than the 12pp GTO I had(slow :roll: ). There's plenty of reviews to be read on this. Overclocked X800XL's garner about 5,500 points in 05, and many dont hit that. I'd like to hear how you came up with the "90% of the performance" figure.

....also, I'm pretty sure 7800GS's are priced around the $260 something-ish mark now.


So... do you think it'd be better to go for an X800 GTO then? Cause I don't feel like spending $280 for a 7800 GS... What's your suggestion GW?
June 15, 2006 2:32:20 AM

Quote:
That 10% discrepancy shouldn't be enough for you to get yourself into a snit like that, you cantankerous wanker.

It kinda sucks that you had to start calling me names, but I predicted that you would do it actually. It has a lot to say about the strength of your argument, your maturity, etc.

Since you've proven to be such a great source of mis-information as of late :roll: I'm just going to giggle about all of this, for some reason I thought in the past that you knew more about graphics cards, but every time you open your mouth lately, it makes stand back and realize that you indeed know very little.
June 15, 2006 2:35:21 AM

Sorry you had to get caught up with GW's quest for pissyness and the eternal worship of the 7800 GS.

Have a look at some benches on the net of the X800 XL yourself. Do some google searching, you'll see the X800 XL performs very closely to the X850 XT. Check tom's interactive charts and other benchmarks.

The X800 GTO and X800 PRO are good AGP cards under $150 if you can find 'em as well, they all perform pretty closely. but I'd put the X800 XL ahead of the GTO for sure, and the X800/X850 PRO would be on par with the X800 XL.
June 15, 2006 2:41:50 AM

Quote:

It kinda sucks that you had to start calling me names, but I predicted that you would do it actually.


Congrats! A self fulfilling prophecy. What, are the words 'cantankerous wanker' (accompanied by a smiley, no less) too disrespectful for you?

Maybe 'not knowing what the hell I'm talking about' is a little disrespectful for me, GW. Just because it's not a name doesn't mean you can slip it under the radar and it won't count.
Sorry if I refused to let it slip by this time, but I've gotten tired of pretending it's OK so as not to get you worked up.

Maybe you can post some more about how everyone here is an Ati lover, we're all wrong to think the 7800 GS is a bad deal for the money, and how our recommendations are so flawed that we don't know 'what the hell we are talking about'.

Sorry, I got tired of your negative BS constantly being fired in my direction. My bad.
June 15, 2006 2:56:02 AM

Quote:

Maybe you can post some more about how everyone here is an Ati lover

You can count on it.
Quote:
we're all wrong to think the 7800 GS is a bad deal for the money

It is a bad deal for the money...when compared to PCI=E cards. How much is an AGP X850XTPE going for right now?

I bought what I believed was the best AGP card available, I wasnt concerned about the price(although I wasnt happy about it).

Quote:
Sorry, I got tired of your negative BS constantly being fired in my direction. My bad.

You've earned every bit of it, by repeating the same old crap in every post you make. If it was accurate crap, I wouldnt have a problem with it.

Peace out.
June 15, 2006 3:13:18 AM

Quote:
You can count on it.


Yeah, I probably can. It's great that you're keeping all of us impartial guys honest, GW, it really is.


Quote:
a bad deal for the money...when compared to PCI=E cards. How much is an AGP X850XTPE going for right now?
[/i]

I dunno, but an AGP X800 XL appears to be going for $130ish... that's what the guy in this thread said.


Quote:
I bought what I believed was the best AGP card available, I wasnt concerned about the price(although I wasnt happy about it).


Good for you. I never questioned your personal decision to get one, you knew what you were buying. That doesn't make it more cost effective right now than an X800 XL though.


Quote:
You've earned every bit of it, by repeating the same old crap in every post you make. If it was accurate crap, I wouldnt have a problem with it.


You know, I'll agree it's debatable.
But because it's your opinion GW - that don't make it the gospel truth. You're not right because you say you are.

The funny part is, from what I can see it's you whose not quite accurate on this one.

I've just taken another look at a whack of benches and they pretty much support my statement that the X800 XL is 90% as good as the 7800 GS. So find me some data that says I'm wrong, because from where I'm standing it looks like you're making a whole lot of noise about my accuracy problem while being wrong about it yourself.

If I'm wrong I'll happily recant, GW. Being wrong about something is nothing to apologize for, the only thing to be embarrased about is when you're too stubborn to admit it when you're wrong in the first place.

Quote:
Peace out.


And to you.
a b U Graphics card
June 15, 2006 3:21:58 AM

Just to let you know, I bought a X800XTpe and a X800 pro refurbed from ATI. Mine came with a 3 year warranty, but the cards have been flawless. Hurry up and order because I'm about to pull the trigger myself and it would be a shame if I got the last one instead of you. 8O
June 15, 2006 3:22:57 AM

Sorry to have made this thread an arguing scene, but whatever's going on between you guys is your business, not mine.

Anyways, I guess the X800 XL would be a good deal for the price at least (by what you 2 have said). I think I'll go with it after all.
a b U Graphics card
June 15, 2006 3:34:35 AM

I went to checkout and the standard shipping is $15! That's lame. Still a very good deal for AGP X800XL, but we are talking $135 not $120.
June 15, 2006 3:35:30 AM

Quote:
Sorry to have made this thread an arguing scene, but whatever's going on between you guys is your business, not mine.


Cleeve gave me genital herpe's last time I "submitted" to him, hence my pissyness in this thread :roll:
June 15, 2006 3:36:09 AM

.....and it burns when I pee :oops: 
June 15, 2006 3:38:20 AM

.......and Paul doesnt need anymore graphics cards :roll:
June 15, 2006 3:39:04 AM

Quote:

You've earned every bit of it, by repeating the same old crap in every post you make. If it was accurate crap, I wouldnt have a problem with it.


Alright, let's see how accurate I am. here's a review that pits the 7800 GS against the X800 XL on the same rig:

http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/bfg7...

Let's look at the 1024x768 benches first...

1024x768 0xAA 0xAF

Doom3:
7800GS: 122fps
X800 XL: 100fps
Performance delta: X800XL 82%

COD2:
7800GS: 39fps
X800 XL: 38fps
Performance delta: X800XL 97%

Far Cry:
7800GS: 95fps
X800 XL: 97fps
Performance delta: X800XL 102%

Splinter Cell:
7800GS: 59fps
X800 XL: 70fps
Performance delta: X800XL 119%

Average: 100%


Look at that, at 1024x768 the X800 XL is 100% as fast, on average, as the 7800 GS.

"But Wait" cries GW, "That resolution is too low!"

OK, that was the best case scenario, now let's look at the worst case scenario: 1600x res 4xAA 8xAF

1600x resolution 4xAA 8xAF

Doom3:
7800GS: 47fps
X800 XL: 27fps
Performance delta: X800XL 57%

COD2:
7800GS: 22fps
X800 XL: 14fps
Performance delta: X800XL 64%

Far Cry:
7800GS: 47fps
X800 XL: 42fps
Performance delta: X800XL 89%

Splinter Cell:
7800GS: 29fps
X800 XL: 31fps
Performance delta: X800XL 107%

Average: 79%


There! Most advantageous scenario for the 7800 GS.
All that stink for a measly 10%. Nice job GW. You're the forum hero, setting me straiught like that. I don't know what the hell I'm talking about, that much is obvious...

But look, some of those 1600X 4xAA 4xAF framerates are too low to be playable!!!!
Say, let's average the two to see what sort of reasonable expectation we can have comparing the X800 XL and 7800 GS...

What's the average of 79% and 100%, GW?

About 90%, wouldn't you say?




I don't expect an apology from you, you're too proud to ever admit you're wrong, but it's nice to know I can at least back up my own advice.

Peace out.
June 15, 2006 3:40:05 AM

Quote:

Cleeve gave me genital herpe's last time I "submitted" to him, hence my pissyness in this thread :roll:


Don't roll your eyes. you loved every second! :p 
June 15, 2006 4:30:25 AM

Sure...let's compare a bunch of default clock speeds.....even the nooblyness of noobs overclock their cards here......how unfortunate that you apparently dont :roll:
June 15, 2006 4:33:22 AM

Most reviews show the results of overclocking, and those are that of which I live by when judging the performance of any given card :roll:
June 15, 2006 4:34:41 AM

.....let me add another :roll: , just for :roll: sake of it...
























:roll:
June 15, 2006 4:40:52 AM

Find an X800XL that will give you 90% of my 3dmark05 score :roll: .....they dont even hit 6K unless their on water :roll:
June 15, 2006 5:10:34 AM

3dmark scores? Are you kidding? :D 

your 'eye rolling' emoticons are no match for my facts, sir.

The only way your posts make any sense is if every time you use an 'eyes roll' emoticon, it means you're saying 'I'm sorry'.

Apologies accepted, you ol' salty dog. Don't get all emotional on me, now... :p 
June 15, 2006 5:44:45 AM

Easy up fellas, come on now.

Regardless of the preformance deficit, @ $120, an X800XL is a pretty nice deal. As much as I'd love to see AGP die by just twisting a dagger into its heart, the prices are something nobody should love.

I wouldnt go off comparing 3Dmark scores as my primary arguement.
Lord knows the X800XL is old technology, and the 7800GS is overpriced.
Take your pick its the lesser of two evils here.

GW's right, R430's dont scale very well, but this one's pretty cheap.


Then again,Cleeve, the 7800GS has good headroom, downside again...$$$
So lets try to find some common ground and something decent.

BTW: GW, your almost tempting me into buying that card just to see how close I can come to your score without water. :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
June 15, 2006 2:39:43 PM

Quote:
Then again,Cleeve, the 7800GS has good headroom, downside again...$$$


I never said the 7800 GS was a bad card, all I did was compare the X800 XL's relative performance to it. Never even debated it here, just got the brunt of GW's snit because he assumed something that wasn't quite right, it turns out.


Quote:
An X800XL, even after overclocking, is still slower than the 12pp GTO I had...

I'd like to hear how you came up with the "90% of the performance" figure.


Interesting.
'even after overclocking' implies that a fair comparison could be made without overclocking... hell, the implication is that the X800 XL would be at a disadvantage at stock speeds.

Then, I do exactly what GW asks and show that, indeed, 90% is a very reasonable number, and I get this:


Quote:
Sure...let's compare a bunch of default clock speeds.....even the nooblyness of noobs overclock their cards here......how unfortunate that you apparently dont


He changes his story pretty quick. First he implied that no overclocking is fair game, then when he's wrong he plays it like it's so obvious that only overclocked cards count.

And he points out 3dMarks... I make recommendations for gaming, not for the best 3dMarks. Any straw he can grab I guess, after he makes himself look so foolish.


Quote:
...how unfortunate that you apparently dont


What's unfortunate is that you're too proud to admit your mistake, 'ol buddy.
But that was easy to predict, like I said before, I always knew you're not the kind of person who can admit he's wrong. :p 
June 15, 2006 3:17:41 PM

Quote:
Hell, yes!

The X800 XL is one of the top 5 or so cards you can get for the AGP interface. 90% of the performance of a $280 7800GS for less than half the price.

For $120 how can you lose? It's refurb, but if they honor the warranty that's no big deal.
Is that 16 or 12 pipeline?
June 15, 2006 3:24:42 PM

X800 XL is the full 16 pipelines, but at a low core speed of 400 Mhz.

Not very overclockable cards unfortunately, but a great AGP card to tie you over to PCIe for cheap if you're so inclined.
June 15, 2006 3:41:10 PM

Ok thanks but cleeve does the x700 perform half as good as the x800xl? Cause it has have the fragment pipes,texture pipes and raster ops but the same amount of vertex pipes and same core clock.
June 15, 2006 3:56:15 PM

Depends on the resolution & eye candy, the X700 will have a big performance drop at higher res & with AA & AF enabled because of it's 128-bit memory interface.

At low resolutions without AA the X700 PRO will probably perform around 80% as fast as an X800 XL, maybe even closer (that's just a guesstimate, relax GW). But at higher resolutions with AA it'll probably run out of steam quickly and be much slower than the X800 XL.

Like I said, that's a guesstimate, you'd have to check the benchmarks. But it should give you an general idea of relative performance.
June 15, 2006 4:03:24 PM

Ok thanks then well should it perform at 640x480 in cod2 with no aa no af ?
June 15, 2006 4:10:15 PM

COD2? That's a tough game to run, but an X700 should be able to handle it pretty easily 640x480 with no aa/af

But if you're thinking of getting an X700, there are much better cards out there for under $100... in PCI express anyway.

But if you're AGP, the X700 is par for the course I guess. The 6600 is pretty good too, as long as it's the 128-bit version.
June 15, 2006 4:14:30 PM

Ok thanks and yes i am stuck to agp for now.
June 15, 2006 4:45:25 PM

Unless the link changed, that's a pre-order deal.

For all you Canucks, ATI's selling it for 139.00 CAD, pre-order.
June 15, 2006 5:01:45 PM

Quote:
Find an X800XL that will give you 90% of my 3dmark05 score :roll: .....they dont even hit 6K unless their on water :roll:


I'm not taking sides in this fight, but 3mark scores are completely irrelevant. I don't know anyone that plays 3dmark. There's a reason that sites are dropping 3dmark from their benchmark testbed.

The answer to the question the guy asked was it depends on the CPU you have and the games you play and how long youre' planning to hang onto your current rig.

that said, Silentkiller, given your current processor is a bit long in the tooth, I'd go with the cheaper solution. 120.00 for the XL is a great price and it will play most (if not all) current games with a fair amount of eye candy (if not all) turned on.

I'd take the $140.00 saved and put it towards your next rig.

If an upgrade is coming down the pipe in the next year, then I'd consider holding off on upgrading graphics until then.

But I"m cheap. I don't get spending tons an graphics card that you can't move into your next system, especially when your current CPU is relatively slow compared to mainstream CPUS (though it varies by what benchmark you choose).

So my recommendation is either get the XL or don't make any changes.

Of course if you're going to upgrade your processor too, then maybe the Nvidia makes more sense.
June 15, 2006 5:25:26 PM

Interesting discussion. However, some people read a lot into 3Dmark scores. After all, they are only "synthetic' and not read-world. Imho, x800 series card is much better than any x700 no contest. After all, the x800 has a 256 bit memory path. I would run to buy a new x800XL 16 pipe, 256 bit video card for only $120! Heck, comparisons/reviews between the x700 show it to lag behind 6600GTs in most benchmarks. What is an x1600Pro but an x700Pro with 4 extra pipes and SM3.0 compliant. Ok and has DDR2 .....

How anyone can discard overclocking is a mystery. Overclocking (or just having the ability to overclock) adds to the value and versatility of a GPU. It is how all the thrid party vendors out there differenciate themselves from thier rivals. Makes video card reviews interesting to read.
June 15, 2006 5:33:17 PM

The problem is this scnerio is that there is no guaranteed overclock.
That 7800GS might not make 15mhz over core, while the X800XL might make 50-75, who knows.

BTW: The X1600 is not a 12 pipeline card....
June 15, 2006 6:09:30 PM

Quote:
How anyone can discard overclocking is a mystery.


True, overclocking should always be a factor for those so inclined. And price, and availability...

But how anyone could discard STOCK performance is a bigger mystery to me... that's what you get, that's your guaranteed performance.

Most of the newbs who ask for advice on this board aren't overclockers, and I'd bet the majority of people who buy a discrete VGA card will never, ever overclock it.
June 15, 2006 7:07:14 PM

OMG... I recently checked the clock speed of my 9600 (just out of curiosity) and found that the clock speed is 398 MHz (on mine)! And I tried OCing it a bit and managed to get to nearly 420! That's over the X800 XL clock LOL... I know there's the memory clock, memory, interface, pipelines and pixel shaders to take into account too, but that speed really blew me away, considering it's an old, low low-end card.

*EDIT*

LOL I just check the memory speed and found it to be at 324 MHz (x2 of course)... not to mention 4 pipelines... pretty pathetic in comparison but whatever.
June 15, 2006 7:26:43 PM

:?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:

A 9600 is suppose to have high(er) clocks. It replaced the 9500pro which was an 8x1 card with lower frequencies. So in order to compensate, the 9600 series was pushed to make up for the fact that its only a 4x1 GPU.

You can't compare the two at all, I dont care how far your push your card.
June 15, 2006 9:03:50 PM

Quote:
OMG... I recently checked the clock speed of my 9600 (just out of curiosity) and found that the clock speed is 398 MHz (on mine)! And I tried OCing it a bit and managed to get to nearly 420! That's over the X800 XL clock LOL... I know there's the memory clock, memory, interface, pipelines and pixel shaders to take into account too, but that speed really blew me away, considering it's an old, low low-end card.



I never thought the x800 series was considered an "old" card....yet. Based on the results you displayed Cleeve the x800XL is still avery potent and useful card. 16 pipes is 16 pipes, no matter the clock speed. Very efficient design.
June 15, 2006 9:31:21 PM

I haven't taken the time to read all of the posts on this thread but I wanted to respond to SiletKiller5's original question.

I think that an X800XL for $120 is a good deal. On Newegg.com the Sapphire X800GTO for AGP is going for $165 or so before a rebate. That GTO is essentially the same as an XL except that it has 12 pipes instead of 16.

I think that an X800XL would work very well with your system as well. I have an X800GTO unlocked to X800XL specs in my system with a Pentium 4 Northwood 2.8GHz overclocked to 3.5GHz. I am pretty satisfied with the performance for now. I think that an X800XL is a relatively cheap way of prolonging the life of your system.
June 15, 2006 10:07:21 PM

Quote:

BTW: The X1600 is not a 12 pipeline card....


Most places and people I know list the X1600Pro with 12 pixel pipelines.
example Saphire press release January 20, 2006:
Quote:
The Sapphire RADEON X1600Pro AGP features 12 Pixel pipelines, it is equipped with 256MB of DDR2 memory and runs at 500MHz (core) and 400MHz (memory).


Your turn.

What do you call it then?
June 15, 2006 10:38:35 PM

Quote:
OMG... I recently checked the clock speed of my 9600 (just out of curiosity) and found that the clock speed is 398 MHz (on mine)! And I tried OCing it a bit and managed to get to nearly 420! That's over the X800 XL clock LOL... I know there's the memory clock, memory, interface, pipelines and pixel shaders to take into account too, but that speed really blew me away, considering it's an old, low low-end card.



I never thought the x800 series was considered an "old" card....yet. Based on the results you displayed Cleeve the x800XL is still avery potent and useful card. 16 pipes is 16 pipes, no matter the clock speed. Very efficient design.

He wasnt talking about a x800 he was talking about the 9600.

Quote:
True, overclocking should always be a factor for those so inclined. And price, and availability...

But how anyone could discard STOCK performance is a bigger mystery to me... that's what you get, that's your guaranteed performance.


Word.
Gw, your the one that attacked him and now your hiding because he backed up his info with real stats. And you said HE was too immature to appoligize. :roll: :roll:
June 15, 2006 10:55:13 PM

Quote:

BTW: The X1600 is not a 12 pipeline card....


Most places and people I know list the X1600Pro with 12 pixel pipelines.
example Saphire press release January 20, 2006:
Quote:
The Sapphire RADEON X1600Pro AGP features 12 Pixel pipelines, it is equipped with 256MB of DDR2 memory and runs at 500MHz (core) and 400MHz (memory).


Your turn.

What do you call it then?

Cleeve's explanation of the X1600 under AGP cards on the Short List might help to clear this up.
June 15, 2006 11:05:07 PM

@ Mach5

The X1600 is a 4 pipeline card with 12 SHADER units....so technically a 4x3 and not a 12x1 card. 4 PP & 12SU....any questions?

EDIT: From ATI.

Look 4 lines down....12 SU's....not PP's

http://www.ati.com/products/RadeonX1600/specs.html


Sapphire used a great play on words for the launch...thats all.
June 15, 2006 11:22:16 PM

It you want to nit-pick fine. Be the handful of those calling it that. If the x1600 is such an odd duck. Any other place where pepole might read bout this descrepency? Most card specs list pixel and shader interchangeably.
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!