Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

your opinion please

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Geforce
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 10, 2006 3:53:31 PM

i have a geforce 6600. an was looking to up grade. can you tell me your opinion on these 2 cards an there name brand. thank you

7600

6800

More about : opinion

November 10, 2006 4:17:32 PM

Do NOT get the 6800XT. It's a crippled piece of sh*t. Also, I wouldn't buy from circuit city. If you live in the States, you can find much better deals in that price range from sites like newegg.com.
November 10, 2006 7:19:01 PM

Agreed. The 6800XT deserves a complete extermination from any site on the market today.
Related resources
November 10, 2006 7:24:56 PM

Quote:
Agreed. The 6800XT deserves a complete extermination from any site on the market today.

That's all it deserves? 8O

Anyway,
the 6800XT should never be mentioned, EVER. WORST CARD IN THE HISTORY OF MANKIND.

The 7600 is a much better choice,
a b U Graphics card
November 10, 2006 7:57:31 PM

the 76gt.

though prozac really likes the 68xt :x :D 
November 10, 2006 8:00:46 PM

Hands down, the 7600 FTW!
a b U Graphics card
November 10, 2006 8:03:31 PM

anyway the 76gt all the way.
November 10, 2006 8:05:37 PM

Quote:
though prozac really likes the 68xt :x :D 

Shut up. You love, you have them in Quad-SLI, that's how much you love it.

:lol: 
November 10, 2006 8:18:37 PM

The 6800XT is a downgrade IMO, since i would be ashamed to say i owned one of them. The 6800 makes it sound better but it is that bad that it is only an equal to a 6600GT. Get the 7600 easily and don't look back.
a b U Graphics card
November 10, 2006 8:31:48 PM

Not directed at you prozac, but to all you 6800XT haters. Remember, those things come with so many different clock speeds that some of them are not all that bad. If they have 600-700 MHZ effective DDR, they are horrible. The ones with the 1.0GHz ram are not all that bad. Then in PCI-e there are the rare ones that have a high core clock too.

Example, check out this 425/1000 clocked 6800XT in Digit-lifes charts.
http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/digest3d/0906/itogi...

In farcry, it absolutelty spanks a refence 7600GS 40fps vs 28fps. It even beats the high clocked 7600GS and the killer clocked GDDR3 7300GT. Matter of fact, it's only 9 fps under the 7600GT. http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/digest3d/0906/itogi...

That's just one game, but if you look over all their charts, that 6800XT isn't all that bad for an 8-pipe card. http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/digest3d/index.html It does sometimes lose to a 400/800 7600GS though.

I suspect that the 350/1000 clocked 6800XT in his link would very often beat the reference 7600GS in his other link. SOme newer games like Fear and COD2 the 7600GS would be better, but honestly both are too weak for their test settings even at 10x7 no AA.

Sure, neither is close to a 7600GT, but they sure are not priced in the $130's in AGP. He would be better off with a X850 pro, 7600GT, or waiting on a X1950 pro if his system specs are solid. But anyway, I felt the strange need to defend the high clocked 6800XT's or at least place the 7600GS down in it's league.
a b U Graphics card
November 10, 2006 8:36:56 PM

Quote:
Shut up. You love, you have them in Quad-SLI, that's how much you love it.


i have the gt,s using one now but am going to have to
go back to sli cause f.s.x makes one of my 68gt,s play like an xt :cry: 
November 10, 2006 8:42:45 PM

Agreed, there are some out there that aren't that bad. If the OP can go above the $130-150 range then the 7600GT for sure, or (whenever it comes out) the X1950pro, depending on his specs.
November 10, 2006 9:31:15 PM

Quote:
though prozac really likes the 68xt :x :D 

Shut up. You love, you have them in Quad-SLI, that's how much you love it.

:lol: 

Prozac, question for you. What if you got a 6800XT for free? Completely brand new, never used. What would you do with it?
a b U Graphics card
November 10, 2006 9:36:18 PM

Sell it to a n00b who doesn't know any better, take that money, then... hookers! :twisted:
November 10, 2006 9:56:09 PM

Don't forget booze. :lol: 
a b U Graphics card
November 10, 2006 10:00:34 PM

I always got booze, but paying hookers with free money is like not paying for it at all! :twisted:
a b U Graphics card
November 10, 2006 10:04:56 PM

some hookers can give you the gift that keeps on givin. :lol: 
a b U Graphics card
November 10, 2006 10:12:09 PM

It's called a souvenir STD, and some leper john's can give them an extra tip. :twisted:
a b U Graphics card
November 10, 2006 10:21:52 PM



ha im gettin it :) 
November 10, 2006 10:48:10 PM

Quote:
Not directed at you prozac, but to all you 6800XT haters. Remember, those things come with so many different clock speeds that some of them are not all that bad. If they have 600-700 MHZ effective DDR, they are horrible. The ones with the 1.0GHz ram are not all that bad. Then in PCI-e there are the rare ones that have a high core clock too.

That's true.

However, way too much people think that XT = good (based on ATI) and make it a 6800, people think it's great.

Anyway, sure it's a decent card, but we all hate it (I know you hate it too Paul :twisted: ), so let's never mention 6800XT.
November 10, 2006 11:16:08 PM

Many people here seem to be ignoring reality. The reality is, if you're not buying a mid-to-high end video card, you're not going to crank up the eyecandy on modern and future games, it's only a short term look that will change in a few months.

Therefore, it's pointless to look at benchmarks that accentuate the features of the high end cards, rather than looking in a more conservative way at whether a card can play a given game at playable framerate and presuming it can, what degree of eyecandy is allowed, NOT what the FPS is with maxed out settings- it simply isn't reasonable to consider as this is the whole point of the more expensive video cards. Even more significant is too few benchmarks cite minimum framerates rather than average- what do you care if you get 50 FPS on simple scenes if 30 monsters frag you at 18 FPS?

The best bang for the buck tends to be the higher-end and reused cores from last generation cards, not the newest low-mid end stuff like an X1650. Nobody buys a video card just to want to replace it 3 months later.

In short, the best value and usable card is one that can sustain higher framerates at what it can support, not one that barely manages to support newer feature sets- at this price-point.

Your best bang for the buck is to use Google Checkout (while buy.com is still using it) to buy this 6800XT at $105 AR/delivered,
http://www.buy.com/prod/XFX_GeForce_6800_XTREME_256MB_A...
unlock 4 more pipes then o'c it.
The other more risky alternative is a refurb'd X800GTO, also w/extra pipes unlocked from Newegg.

It really isn't a good value to spend any more than the above two cards cost, you can get a board/CPU combo supporting PCI Express for $100 and sell off your current parts for a few dozen bucks if it comes to that.
a b U Graphics card
November 10, 2006 11:27:21 PM

wilson dont get the 68xt for around 100$
get the 76gt for around the same price.
November 10, 2006 11:59:42 PM

Quote:
wilson dont get the 68xt for around 100$
get the 76gt for around the same price.


Is there a 7600GT AGP for about the same price? Normally 7600GT is $180 and up, it'd be a bad deal to pay the extra $80 or so just to stick with AGP.
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2006 12:10:13 AM

the link the op provided lists an agp 76gs for 180$ at circuitcity.
November 11, 2006 12:19:21 AM

Quote:
the link the op provided lists an agp 76gs for 180$ at circuitcity.


Exactly - not a GT and not the same price
November 11, 2006 12:54:08 AM

Quote:
the link the op provided lists an agp 76gs for 180$ at circuitcity.


Ok but I take those links to be examples only, since Circuit City is conducting business in a free market where one can choose to shop elsewhere.
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2006 1:08:19 AM

if the op can shop at c.c. i would asume he can shop new egg.
and the x850 for 140$ smokes the 76gs for 180$.

it doesnt have sm3.0 but still is a faster card.

and the 76gt in agp goes for around 180$ or less.
it would be the best bet. it has sm3.0.

not sure about the x1650 or x1950 in agp?
i know they have sm3.0 but not sure on price.
they are under 200$ though.
November 11, 2006 3:37:11 AM

Quote:
if the op can shop at c.c. i would asume he can shop new egg.
and the x850 for 140$ smokes the 76gs for 180$.


Why do you keep mentioning a 7600GS for $180?
can't we just agree nobody should pay that much for a 7600GS and move on already?

Quote:
it doesnt have sm3.0 but still is a faster card.

and the 76gt in agp goes for around 180$ or less.
it would be the best bet. it has sm3.0.


X850 isn't a bad card at all, but we're getting back to the same issue of how much to pay for a dead-end video card platform (AGP) when the cards themselves cost more. Further, we don't actually know that it "smokes" anything, because a video card can't run without the other system parts being a factor.

Essentially we're back at square one, not having the information necessary to make a good informed decision. Info such as current system specs, total budget (including that for a PSU replacement if needed), amount of time to use this card before replacing the whole AGP platform, games played now or in future, etc, etc.
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2006 3:42:03 AM

Quote:
Why do you keep mentioning a 7600GS for $180?


thats what the op listed. scroll up and look.
its the very first post.
November 11, 2006 4:43:26 AM

i found this one at mwave.com.
the new question is. will this work with my widescreen lcd monitor. the highest it goes is 1440x900. an this one says #

Resolution & Refresh
# 240 Hz Max Refresh Rate
# 2048 x 1536 x 32bit x 85 Hz Max Analog
# 2560 x 1600 / 1600 x 1200 @ 60Hz Max Digital
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2006 11:41:10 AM

should work fine.
November 11, 2006 11:59:56 AM

Forget the 6800XT. It is a hated card on these forums. The 7600GS is better, but the one that you found is overpriced (I'd expect it to be, coming from CC). For $123 (with a $20 MIR), you can get this eVGA GF7600GT, which will smoke the other cards that you mentioned.
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2006 12:06:48 PM

hey ducky hows it goin.
btw he is on an agp setup.

oh and watch out cause ( I )will come in start
November 11, 2006 6:17:50 PM

Quote:
the link the op provided lists an agp 76gs for 180$ at circuitcity.


Exactly - not a GT and not the same price

Yes, but for nearly the same price he can get a 7600GT from newegg. BTW if he wants to keep it a bit on the cheap, and wants sm3.0 support, the X1650pro would be better than the 7600GS IMO.
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2006 7:22:05 PM

Quote:
the X1650pro would be better than the 7600GS IMO


i agree.
November 12, 2006 4:47:49 AM

Quote:
Why do you keep mentioning a 7600GS for $180?


thats what the op listed. scroll up and look.
its the very first post.

Duh?

You seem to think you need to keep comparing what was linked with something from another store. That's not appropriate, if you're going to link something from another store then the OTHER alternatives should as well be from another store.
November 12, 2006 4:50:25 AM

Quote:
the X1650pro would be better than the 7600GS IMO


i agree.

X1650 is not a good choice, it barely does anything well. You lose performance at aging games (relative to older products at same current market cost) but don't get enough performance at modern games, let alone the next generation of them. At least with an older generation card you can play aging games great, or with more $ the modern ones, but it's just a product with no real purpose but to make you want to upgrade again.

At least the 7600GS can be o'c good, will then easily outperform the X1650Pro if it has good memory on it (not all do, some have very low rated chips so be sure to read the card specs). I mention overclocking because it's pretty important if one is trying to use such a card looking forward, and towards that end, you're better off buying a lower-end product in any given GPU family (like 7600GS) than the higher clocked product in another family (like X1650), providing the memory wasn't crippled with slow chips.

SM3 support is a non-issue on this class of card, you don't get the peformance necessary to keep minimal framerates high enough if there's much use of it. Any benchmark you see that cites an improvement has to consider whether the minimal framerate, not average, is high enough to actually play the game- nobody is going to want to buy a new card, and then have stuttering because they refuse to turn down eyecandy. They'll buy a different card or turn down the eyecandy instead.
November 12, 2006 6:42:51 AM

What he should do (it seems you're saying this also) is upgrade to a PCI-E motherboard. I completely agree.

So hey guy-

Put your money into a Core2Duo chip and a good mobo. Buy the cheapest chip you can find, as quad core is coming out soon and you'll eventually want to upgrade anyway. Just make sure the mobo you choose has a high bus speed and can support quad.
November 12, 2006 4:55:50 PM

At stock, the X1650pro will beat a 7600GS. Overclocking isn't a given, and I don't ususally recomend a card on what it might be able to do. I've heard of 7600GS's being O.C. close to GT speeds, but you shouldn't in any way expect that. I don't know the OCing ablilty of the X1650pro. Perhaps you could provide some links showing the 7600GS to be a better OCer, but I'm talking stock.

I do agree about neither one of those cards being powerful enough to fully utilize sm3.0. IMO anything less than a 7600GT isn't worth it JUST for sm3.0.
November 12, 2006 9:52:59 PM

Yeah, actually after replying to a few posts last night...I found this card...

http://www.pricegrabber.com/p__Sapphire_SAPPHIRE_Radeon...

I'd buy that card before any other single card right now. If you're thinking of going with SLI it's not an option, but for cost/performance I'd run with it. I'm thinkin' of buying it myself.
November 13, 2006 1:51:13 AM

Quote:
Yeah, actually after replying to a few posts last night...I found this card...

http://www.pricegrabber.com/p__Sapphire_SAPPHIRE_Radeon...

I'd buy that card before any other single card right now. If you're thinking of going with SLI it's not an option, but for cost/performance I'd run with it. I'm thinkin' of buying it myself.


Please, let's not get SLI confused with Crossfire.
November 13, 2006 2:56:12 AM

Yes, please let's not... Are you an idiot? It's not an option because it's an ATI card you jerkoff. Quit trolling me and trying to look smart. Crossfire sucks. Everyone knows it. This is a single card solution. Like I frickin' said. You interpreted my words the way you chose to read them. No $hit that SLI doesn't work without nVidia cards.
November 13, 2006 3:20:28 AM

I wont touch on the XF performance, I dont feel like arguing. however my own choice would be the X1650 over the 7600gs.

nice little linkage pauldh. somebodies gotta teach these kids somethin' :lol: 
November 13, 2006 4:32:45 AM

Quote:
Crossfire sux alright. :wink:


Sarcasm? I hope not. A 25% gain at more than double the cost (CF mobo+1 vid card) = no thanks. SLI is better. However for single card setups I think ATI looks better usually for price/perf.

The card I posted earlier was for PCI-E, here's IMO a card that's the best AGP card for about the prices you listed...

http://www.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/masterid...

I also found this STEAL...grab it QUICK...before everyone else sees them...

http://www.pricegrabber.com/user_sales_getprod.php?mast...

Crap, nevermind. They're PCI-E :-P
November 13, 2006 4:52:28 PM

Quote:
Yes, please let's not... Are you an idiot? It's not an option because it's an ATI card you jerkoff. Quit trolling me and trying to look smart. Crossfire sucks. Everyone knows it. This is a single card solution. Like I frickin' said. You interpreted my words the way you chose to read them. No $hit that SLI doesn't work without nVidia cards.


At least I said please. Sorry I misunderstood your post, but that doesn't mean you have to fly off the handle and start childish name calling. You didn't explain why SLI wasn't an option, so I just wanted to clarify that. BTW, I'm not trolling you. That was my first response to anything you've had to say. Grow up or lighten up...either one's fine... :roll:
November 13, 2006 8:50:49 PM

Quote:

Sarcasm? I hope not. A 25% gain at more than double the cost (CF mobo+1 vid card) = no thanks.


See how much of a gain you get with SLI 8800GTX"s? Or 7900's for that matter.

Quote:

SLI is better.


Elaborate on why SLI is better please..... Aside from cost...which between SLI and CF isnt a huge amount. - I'd like to hear more valid reasons.
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!