1950XT

[kondor-11]

Hi,

I'm looking to upgrade my system. I'm currently running:

Socket 939 AMD 64 3200 Venice
1 GB Patriot RAM
Winfast/Foxconn NF4UK8AA motherboard
Winfast/Foxconn Geforce 6600GT
160GB WD HD

I want get a new video card and go dual-core, but it looks more cost-effective if you go with AM2, thus I'm probably going to end up upgrading everything, unless I can find a 4800 Toledo for a good price.

My question is about the x1950XT. I've been following TG's "Best video card for the money" articles, and this card is highly recommended for the $250 range. I was wondering though, is this review about the 256 for the 512 cards? Newegg has both, but the 256 can be had for $200 while the 512 is $300. I'm assuming it's the 256 since most of them are around $230-$250.

Also, I'm want to get the best performance I can for about the next year, after that, I'm going to be away from home for 2 years without the PC, so I'm trying to find the best balance of performance/cost for the next year. I guess basically I'm wondering how long it will be before DX10 has significant performance increases over DX9. Will a 1950XT on XP still be able to compete with decent cards a year from now?

Thanks for replies.

 

[Mccaula718]

go with the 320mb 8800gts. I have a x1950xt, it's not a bad card, but for $50 more, you get a lot more performance. Oh and if you do want to stay s939, get an opteron 165/170. You can oc them very high just on stock cooler.

 

[kondor-11]

Thanks for the reply. I had considered going the 8800 GTS route, but if I'm gonna spend more wouldn't it be better to wait for ATI DX10 cards to come in and push the prices down?

Also, I hadn't considered going with an Opteron. How are they performance-wise? For example, how would an OC'd (with stock cooler) 165/170 compare to a 4800 Toledo? I'm sure either would be a big increase over my 3200 but my focus here is for games.

Thanks again.

 

[specialed]

They were talking about the 256 mb version. I upgraded from a X800 GTO2 to the X1950 XT. I can now run all games at high res. with AA and sometimes high AF. The image quality and performance is noticable.

The Sapphire X1950 XT is for $219 with $20 rebate at NEw Egg. I recomend the AC X2 VGA cooler. The card runs a little hot. The X2 can be had for $20.
My temps are 41c idle, and 68c under heavy load with the X2 cooler.

 

[kondor-11]

Okay, thanks. What did it run at with the stock cooler? Did you try any OCing?

Can anyone give me anymore information about the OC'd Opteron's? This sounds like a very good option for me but I want to make sure I can get $180 worth of performance increase over my 3200+

 

[specialed]

I never got to try the X1950 Xt with the stock cooler. But I read elswhere of them hitting 80c with stock cooler. My highest OC was 655/1800.
Memory has little headroom. It's a good holdover card until the new DX10 cards come out. Scored 5146 on 3DMARK 2006.

Here's a review of the Opteron 170.
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/opteron170/


Here's one of the 4800+ ..
http://www.simhq.com/_technology/technology_042a.html

Try googling for more reviews.

 

[specialed]

I never got to try the X1950 Xt with the stock cooler. But I read elswhere of them hitting 80c with stock cooler. My highest OC was 655/1800.
Memory has little headroom. It's a good holdover card until the new DX10 cards come out. Scored 5146 on 3DMARK 2006.

Here's a review of the Opteron 170.
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/opteron170/


Here's one of the 4800+ ..
http://www.simhq.com/_technology/technology_042a.html

Try googling for more reviews.

I used to have a 512mb X1900XT that I had OC'd to 730mhz core and 1660mem 8) I also had the accelero X2 fan on it along with 2 120mm fans mounted under the card and blowing air up into it. Idle at Overclock was 37c and load temps were 56c.


Something sounds funny with your 3Dmark 06 score because I was getting 6,9XX in 3dmark 06. I remember there being a problem with the X1900 and X1950 series defaulting to 2d speeds when running 3dmark 06 and it sounds like that is what yours must have done because that score is really low.


Nah, that's with 655/909 clock. My card is 256 MB. I noticed you listed yours as 512MB. That could be why mine is lower.