Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is it worth changing from ATI X850 XT to X1950 pro (AGP)?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 4, 2007 8:52:41 AM

I current have an ATI His Turbo Ice cool X850 XT AGP and am considering changing to X1950 pro AGP viewing on a Samsung 23" LCD TV @ 1360*768 native resolution. 3.2 GHZ P 4 with 1GB RAM.

I have read the comparisons of the 2 graphics processing units and there doesn't seem to be much of a difference between the 2 cards the X1950 pro marginally better. Moreover my monitor does not do higher resolutions the native resolution mentioned above.

What are your opinions about me changing my graphics card?
Will doubling my RAM to 2GB make a big difference to gaming performance?

Thanks in advance.
March 4, 2007 9:03:42 AM

depends....what games do you play???

in games like oblivion it doesnt make that big a difference, then stuff like half life u can see about 20-30 fps increase (with 4xAA and 8xAF). So for gaming with the graphics detailed notched up, it can make a pretty big difference. Also it supports pixel shader 3... if your into games that use that technology.

look at the tables here: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/graphics/charts.html?mode...

Its a very good card non the less....I have one, runs almost every game without a problem :) 

however, there are those that will ask you to wait and get a dx10 card instead...so its your choice really (keeping in mind that ur system is AGP and an agp dx10 card may take a while to be released..who knows).
March 4, 2007 10:07:51 AM

Thanks a lot for that useful link.

I have already finished playing games like Half life 2 Episode 1 (played flawlessly at around 60 Fps with 4x AA with the present card), FEAR (had to turn off a few settings for playable FPS), and I already have Oblivion for the Xbox 360. I am looking at how my card would perform for future games like STALKER and Unreal Tournament 2007.

Anyways might have to think twice as about changing soon as I have an Xbox 360 as well for gaming. May not be worth the change for just around 20-30 FPS difference in games, some games even less. Pushing up AA does not make a huge difference. Only thing I miss is pixel shader 3.0.

Maybe wait till Direct X 10 AGP cards come out.
Related resources
March 4, 2007 10:18:21 AM

I would go with the memory upgrade first.You will see a difference in system performance as well as in some of the newer games which require a substantial amount of system ram as well as video ram.I would consider buying the x1950pro as it has all the latest features and full support for the new shader models and opengl as well.Goodluck.

Dahak

AMD X2-4400+@2.6 S-939
EVGA NF4 SLI MB
2X EVGA 7950GT KO IN SLI
2X 512MB CRUCIAL BALLISTIX DDR500
WD300GIG HD
ACER 22IN WIDESCREEN LCD 1600X1200
THERMALTAKE TOUGHPOWER 850WATT PSU
COOLERMASTER MINI R120
3DMARK05 13,442
March 4, 2007 10:51:07 AM

Quote:
I am looking at how my card would perform for future games like STALKER and Unreal Tournament 2007.

Don't upgrade then. A X1950Pro could struggle big time in those games. I would say hold off, and maybe get a PCI-E system.
a b U Graphics card
March 4, 2007 11:55:30 AM

The X1950 is a nice card, but in your case I would just wait a while longer and change to PCIe and go for a 10X card. That will make a much bigger difference for future gaming, and you'll be more satisfied with the performance increase.
March 4, 2007 12:50:10 PM

One BIG thing to remember is that your x850 is only a SM2.0, (Shader Model), card.

So, if you look at any new games, look CAREFULLY at the "requirements" for that game. If it says it requires a SM3.0 card, you x850 WILL NOT run that game.

Now some games coming out support both SM2.0 & 3.0. However there are a few that ONLY support 3.0. So, just a word to the wise.
March 4, 2007 12:54:28 PM

Quote:
I am looking at how my card would perform for future games like STALKER and Unreal Tournament 2007.
Stalker comes out in March, while UT3* is going to be one of the first titles to support Direct X10.
March 4, 2007 1:52:20 PM

Quote:
However there are a few that ONLY support pixel shader 3.0


I thought all new games in the market right now support pixel shader 2.0 as well as 3.0

If you do know, do you mind listing the games which support only pixel shader 3.0?
March 4, 2007 2:37:35 PM

The new Splinter Cell, and I believe Rainbow Six Vegas does too.
March 4, 2007 3:20:35 PM

The X850XT still packs plenty of punch. Unless you're craving for SM3.0 support, keep it until the next serious upgrade, maybe next year.
March 4, 2007 4:29:21 PM

Quote:
I am looking at how my card would perform for future games like STALKER and Unreal Tournament 2007.

Don't upgrade then. A X1950Pro could struggle big time in those games. I would say hold off, and maybe get a PCI-E system.

same as prozac, just get a new system, which is the better option.
March 4, 2007 4:49:08 PM

Quote:
The new Splinter Cell, and I believe Rainbow Six Vegas does too.


Yep, those are the 2 games I was thinking about. So while they are few, there are games that are ONLY SM3.0 compliant and thus WILL NOT play on a SM2.0 video card.
March 4, 2007 5:16:19 PM

For 1360x768, the x850xt should do just fine. Heck even a 7600gs can handle that. Too bad ATI always screws its customer. No SM 3.0 in the x850xt. I bought one of those when it was fresh, for good dollars too.
March 5, 2007 2:50:28 AM

Quote:
For 1360x768, the x850xt should do just fine. Heck even a 7600gs can handle that.I bought one of those when it was fresh, for good dollars too.


That exactly what I thought.

I too bought it when the AGP version just came to the market. Spend 720 Australian dollars on it, more than double the price of the current X1950 pro AGP.
March 5, 2007 4:51:00 PM

Quote:
Too bad ATI always screws its customer. No SM 3.0 in the x850xt. I bought one of those when it was fresh, for good dollars too.


How exactly did that screw you? The X850 XT is still a great card for AGPers.

Only two SM 3.0 titles out, and the X800 series has been around for what, three years?

I certainly wouldn't recommend an upgrade for the new Splinter Cell, which is buggy as hell. If you're a big Rainbow Six fan with an X850 XT then a SM 3.0 card would be nice, but you're no more 'screwed' than if you bought one of the Nvidia FX series cards they're still selling at retail...
March 5, 2007 5:29:18 PM

Woo hoo, the ATI partisans are here!!!

the x850xt didn't do sm3.0 while its equivalent nvidia card sure did like the 6800 ultra, all the while they charged more for their x850xt. Suffer the fools that buy ATI, like me.

The bigger fools are the ones that can't admit the truth.
March 5, 2007 6:12:49 PM

Quote:
Suffer the fools that buy ATI, like me.


You seem to have conveniently forgotten about next-gen titles like Oblivion, where an X800 XT will eat a 6800 Ultra alive...

What are you arguing, that three years of excellent gaming performance is negated by the new splinter cell title?

How long do you expect your video card purchases to play cutting edge titles? 4 years or more?

Give me a break. That's a hard sell, even for an Nvidiot... :roll:
March 5, 2007 8:20:24 PM

Being the expert that you are, I think you'd do yourself a favor and look at this one

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/07/10/can_your_rig_run...

From the looks of it the 6800 Ultra is hardly being eaten alive.

The issue is not whether these old cards will do great with a the latest title, the issue is whether ATI keeps its value going forward. ATI not having SM 3.0 has shown itself lacking. There are other less demanding titles that make great use of SM 3.0 and this is just one case where the nVidia cards just age better, i.e. keep their value better over time.

A four year old card can still have a place and do a good job for certain things, just not the latetest titles on with super high settings. It is one thing to make a decent showing, and quite a another when it fails flat out because it is missing some feature or functionality. The corner cutting ATI does on features and functionality becomes exceedingly obvious once their performance edge is leapfrogged by the next generation ATI or nVidia cards, and hence they age badly, and in turn screw their customers.
March 5, 2007 9:27:00 PM

LOL. those benches prove my point. Being the expert that I am, I'll explain it to you... you have to know how to read the benches to actually get worthwhile conclusions from them... The lowest common denominator in Oblivion is foliage.

Even at the 1280x768 resolution - probably a bit too high for all the cards in question for this game - the X850 Xt gets 19 fps (virge of playable in Oblivion) while the 6800 Ultra gets 12 fps (not really playable). The X850 XT has over a 60% adavantage over the 6800 Ultra!

You lower the res to 1024x768 where the cards can play, the 6800 Ultra gets maybe 19 fps and the X850 XT gets 30. The X850 XT is a way better Oblivion card, obviously. Eats the 6800 Ultra alive...

Regardless, your anti-ATI stance falls apart when you look at AGP (which this thread is about) or even PCIe sub-$200 offerings from both camps. From what i can tell, in AGP Ati has the most forward-looking offering at this point. In sub-$200 PCIe it's the same story, nobody has a Dx10 part.

Everyone's offering SM 3.0 Dx9 cards unless you have $300 to spend in PCIe, in which case the 8800 is the obvious choice anyway.

But we're talking AGP here, so what possible good is your brand hornblowing?

Or are you arguing that an X1950 PRO will age worse than a 7600 GT because their identical SM 3.0 support is 'worse? :lol: 

Actually, wouldn't the X1950 PRO be a better long-term prospect, seeing as how Nvidia 'screwed' their customers out of HDR with AA in the 7x00 generation?

Not that i think Nvidia screwed anyone out of anything mind you - I'm just illustrating how shallow and fanboyish s4fun's argument is. Nobody is 'screwing' anybody...

fanboys... *sigh* :roll:
March 5, 2007 11:03:33 PM

As far I can tell the x850xt got a big fat 0 on the SM 3.0 test at whatever the resolution. BTW I don't play Oblivion, so I don't know what the big deal it is about foliage and forest. Must be some treehuggers wet dream or something. The 60% advantage in one test case surely does NOT justify it as being superior in all aspects, as to claim eating anything alive.

As for going forward, granted the ATI has fastest the AGP solution at this time in the x1950 pro at $225, as for the x1950 pro being a good replacement for a x850xt at 1360x768, it is a waste of money. If SM 3.0 is the problem the cost effective solution would be a dx 9.0 board for $100(US) price point, and yes something along the lines of 7600gt would be a better fit, allowing funds to be saved for a new build down the line. And ATI still doesn't have fixed aspect ratio scaling in ATi's drivers that lets you fill the screen correctly at lower resolutions which lets your older cards, or as cards get older and titles more demanding, run decent frame rates by trading off on resolution. Not to mention it hurts less to toss out a 7600gt for pci-e board of your desire later because it costs a heck of lot less to start with. If you can't use the x1950 pro at close to its fullest, it will be just money wasted.

BTW, I can testify to the x1950 pro agp, since I am an idiot (wanting to replace the good old 6600gt - because my 22" LCD has a native res of 1680x1050), and went thru two of those already, having had to RMA them because of VRM overheating and such. The headache of getting that stupid thing stable, like dialing up the AGP voltage, replacing PSUs, disabling fast writes, tweaking the agp aperture size, test and retest only to find that the VRM are cooking. I do finally got the third one working, but it was real pain in the ass, just like it was when I had to get the x850xt working which I got setup on another system which I just leave well enough alone, because ATI is just such a pain to mess with. ATI screws their customers again and again. BTW Cat 6.9, 6.10, 6.11, 7.1, all worked like crap for the x1950 pro, i.e. unstable. Finally 7.2 seemed to show some signs of stability, or perhaps it just hasn't got enough run time yet to show ATI's big mess of a hack job for drivers. And that damned dot.crap.net 2.0 requirement that ATI insists on. For all the effort and money, and not getting most of out of it, and to replace a servicable x850xt, that just doesn't see all that worthwhile.

And to run AA at high resolutions for the newest releases and titles, the x1950 pro isn't even adequate. AA is not really viable at anything below the $300 price point. If HDR and AA together is deal-breaker than you just got to cough up the good money real expensive board, like a pair of the 8800 or a pair of 1950xtx, but that is not where the budget gamers want to venture and well beyond the scope of the discussion.
March 5, 2007 11:11:56 PM

yes yes
March 5, 2007 11:32:52 PM

Quote:
The 60% advantage in one test case surely does NOT justify it as being superior in all aspects, as to claim eating anything alive.


Let me explain it to you, because you admittedly know nothing about the game: foliage scenes are a huge portion of the game. So if the 6800 ultra is unplayable in a huge portion if the game, and the X850 XT is playable... 'eating it alive' is pretty appropriate in that light, huh?


Quote:
as for the x1950 pro being a good replacement for a x850xt at 1360x768, it is a waste of money. If SM 3.0 is the problem the cost effective solution would be a dx 9.0 board for $100(US) price point, and yes something along the lines of 7600gt would be a better fit, allowing funds to be saved for a new build down the line.


Yes and no.
Yes, the X1950 XT might be a waste of money... the X850 XT will last a while yet... but no, the 7600 GT wouldn't be a good alternative.
Why? because it's a parralel upgrade.

The OP said " I am looking at how my card would perform for future games like STALKER and Unreal Tournament 2007. " We have no evidence to suggest these wtitles will require SM 3.0, in fact the 7600 GT might even perform slower than the X850 XT. So at the very least the OP should wait until these titles are released... they'll probably support SM 2.0.

Quote:
Not to mention it hurts less to toss out a 7600gt for pci-e board of your desire later because it costs a heck of lot less to start with. If you can't use the x1950 pro at close to its fullest, it will be just money wasted.


We're talking AGP here, not PCIe... and especially in AGP, an X1950 PRO will keep it's value longer than a 7600 because of the rarity of good AGP cards. But the point is moot, I'm not even arguing the X1950 PRO is a good buy for the OP. I think he should hold on to his X850 XT until STALKER and UT2007 come out. Then he'll know better how the new cards perform, and I guarantee today's cards will be cheaper.

Sorry to hear about your troubles, I've used three X1950 PRO AGP cards with no trouble. maybe you have an insufficient PSU or something.

Quote:
And to run AA at high resolutions for the newest releases and titles, the x1950 pro isn't even adequate.


My experience has been otherwise. I've seen AA & HDR used to good effect in a couple games already with X1950 PRO class cards, Far Cry and Oblivion are two of them. An X1950 PRO will do it, I've tested it and it seems fine to me...
March 6, 2007 12:46:19 AM

Quote:
LOL. those benches prove my point. Being the expert that I am, I'll explain it to you... you have to know how to read the benches to actually get worthwhile conclusions from them... The lowest common denominator in Oblivion is foliage.

Even at the 1280x768 resolution - probably a bit too high for all the cards in question for this game - the X850 Xt gets 19 fps (virge of playable in Oblivion) while the 6800 Ultra gets 12 fps (not really playable). The X850 XT has over a 60% adavantage over the 6800 Ultra!

You lower the res to 1024x768 where the cards can play, the 6800 Ultra gets maybe 19 fps and the X850 XT gets 30. The X850 XT is a way better Oblivion card, obviously. Eats the 6800 Ultra alive...

Regardless, your anti-ATI stance falls apart when you look at AGP (which this thread is about) or even PCIe sub-$200 offerings from both camps. From what i can tell, in AGP Ati has the most forward-looking offering at this point. In sub-$200 PCIe it's the same story, nobody has a Dx10 part.

Everyone's offering SM 3.0 Dx9 cards unless you have $300 to spend in PCIe, in which case the 8800 is the obvious choice anyway.

But we're talking AGP here, so what possible good is your brand hornblowing?

Or are you arguing that an X1950 PRO will age worse than a 7600 GT because their identical SM 3.0 support is 'worse? :lol: 

Actually, wouldn't the X1950 PRO be a better long-term prospect, seeing as how Nvidia 'screwed' their customers out of HDR with AA in the 7x00 generation?

Not that i think Nvidia screwed anyone out of anything mind you - I'm just illustrating how shallow and fanboyish s4fun's argument is. Nobody is 'screwing' anybody...

fanboys... *sigh* :roll:


Bro, lets leave those "dead" cards in the past. Who really needs to know what card performed best in the past? Now, we dont use them and things have changed alot. I dont think anybody wants to use those cards now, wouldnt get them neither! 2004 cards are obsolete in this gaming days.

Oh yeah, is not that Im an NVIDIA fan boy, but stop calling people nvidiots because right now NVIDIA is performing better and AMD is delaying so much their R600 that people is getting tired of this. Even when the benchies show R600 performs better, its taking them forever and the card is like a school bus size card.
March 6, 2007 1:29:27 AM

Bro, a card's not dead if the OP is asking about it, has one, and is currently using it...

I'll call out an Nvidiot if the shoe fits. Yes, Nvidia is doing better right now, and the 8800 is an amazing piece of machinery. best bang for the buck if you have $300 or more to spend, no questions.

But read the post before rebutting dude, you don't seem to know what's being argued.

S4fun began sullying a thread by accusing Ati of 'screwing it's customers over' because two generations ago a card didn't have SM 3.0? For three years the X850 XT has been an excellent card and still has more to offer, IMHO. The X850 XT... or 6800 Ultra, for that matter... are still some of the best AGP cards money can buy, even if they aren't the newest stuff out there.

If some goofball had come in here accusing Nvidia of 'screwing it's customers over' because the 6800 couldn't do HDR & AA at the same time, i'd be arguing the other side and defending Nvidia. I don't have to accept fanboy flag waving from either side because you feel it's justified because the R600 is late.

Hell, it is late. And Nvidia owns the upper end right now, and they deserve to. But that's not what I've taken issue with, and if you read the thread you'd know that. :) 
March 6, 2007 10:22:13 AM

It is quiet lame that UBI Soft did not include Pixel Shader 2.0 support for Splinter Cell Double Agent and Rainbow Six Vegas. Even though I haven't played these games on PC, I have heard a lot about how buggy these games are and that UBI Soft is stopping support soon for these games with no further patches.

I mean how many people in this world have graphics cards that support Pixel Shader 3.0? You talking about the high end Geforce 6 like 6800 ultra (I've heard low end Geforce 6 defaults to pixel shader 2) Geforce 7 and 8 & ATI X1000 series that means those games support graphics cards build only in the last 2 1/2 years.

I would say UBI Soft really screwed up with these games and this is holding me back from upgrading my graphics card as support for PC games seems to be declining year by year compared to the next generation console ports. Splinter Cell on the Xbox 360 is really good, close to being flawless, same with Oblivion.
March 6, 2007 1:50:52 PM

Who made you thought police, judge, and jury of what gets said? Damn self-righteous fool can't even see your own pro ATI bias, and goes around calling people nVidiots.
March 6, 2007 1:59:09 PM

lol. You sounds like you're getting a little worked up there, buddy. :wink:

Fanboys. They undeservedly diss one company, and then it's everyone else that has the bias... :roll:
March 6, 2007 2:10:56 PM

Quote:
I would say UBI Soft really screwed up with these games and this is holding me back from upgrading my graphics card as support for PC games seems to be declining year by year compared to the next generation console ports. Splinter Cell on the Xbox 360 is really good, close to being flawless, same with Oblivion.


Yes, it's an unfortunate call by Ubisoft and I'm really at a loss to explain it. They're severly limiting their market by eliminating anyone with a Geforce FX or Radeon X800 derivitive card... those cards are still being sold in retail. And for what? Because they didn't want to make a switch to disable an HDR option?

There must be more to it, but it's still a strange call on their part. They've gotten alot of bad press because of it, hopefully they've learned something. It will especially make them look bad if next-gen titles like Crysis and UT3 support legacy SM 2.0 cards, and I'll bet they will.
March 6, 2007 6:31:13 PM

Can you explain to us why is it that it seems you are an apologist and defender of the corporations for likes of Ubisoft, nVidia, ATI, et al.? These corporations are all looking to screw the customers in the name of capitalism, and you are want to shut the customers from making any sort complaints? Even if some of them are more biased pro or con, it is well in the interest of the community that folks can fight back and bash the companies that uses and abuses their customers as beta testers. They all screw their customers, and the good folks being screwed shouldn't have to go quietly into the night, and they should be able to make all the noise they want. Let them fanboys be fanboys, their are plenty on both sides right? Why get down in the mud with them and end like one of them?
March 6, 2007 6:43:03 PM

Well they can't be looking to screw the customer too much because they live by the customer's confidence in their products. So either people don't know what's good for them or the industry isn't doing such a bad job as you're thinking.
March 6, 2007 6:46:44 PM

Quote:
These corporations are all looking to screw the customers in the name of capitalism, and you are want to shut the customers from making any sort complaints? They all screw their customers, and the good folks being screwed shouldn't have to go quietly into the night.


Well it seems like we have some fundamentally different opinions as I don't necessarily agree that Ati, Nvidia, or anybody else is out to 'screw' people.

Joe forum member wants to bitch about the R600 being late? Go to town, have fun, it is late. You don't have to go quietly into the night about anything, bitch all you want.

On the other hand, I have a right to a counterpoint. And if you want to claim that Ati is 'screwing over customers' because the X850 XT - a 3 year old architecture - doesn't support SM 3.0, which is still unecessary in 99% of games? I disagree with that, pretty strongly in fact, and I'm going to say so.

You see? With free speech, nobody has to go quietly into the night... :) 
March 6, 2007 6:52:06 PM

There's a better way to deal with a valid complaint than just standing on a soapbox whining "I've been cheated!"
March 6, 2007 7:31:00 PM

for the SM 3.0 folks, Vanguard SoH requires SM 3.0 as well. the lis tis growing...

for the peeps who complain about "defending" companies, while true, they exist to take our dollars, it makes no sense to release a product "because people will buy it" and have it be junk. if you bought the junk and they released new and improved junk, what are the chances of you becoming a repeat customer?
On another line of thought, should I complain and whine to ATI because my X1900 doesnt support DX10? it was the best at what it did for when it was released. as tech improves, new requirements are set. live with what you got and if it becomes obsolete for what you are doing with it, then I guess it is time for an upgrade.
March 6, 2007 7:33:36 PM

i'm just wondering if your cpu is going to hold back the 1950pro? doesn't it need horsepwr to back it up?

anyway my thought :) 
March 6, 2007 7:40:01 PM

Quote:
i'm just wondering if your cpu is going to hold back the 1950pro? doesn't it need horsepwr to back it up?

anyway my thought :) 


That was exactly what i was thinking. Wont the cpu bottleneck that processor?

Also the 1950xt is coming out in agp form very soon.

Either way I would wait till either u have enough money to build a c2d system(pcixpress) or a good dx10 agp solution comes out.


I just picked up a 8800gts 320 for 250...
March 6, 2007 7:59:34 PM

Who let you decide that 99% of the games don't need SM 3.0? Who needs HDR and AA? Who need more than 800x600? Need is not the criteria for making such calls. But fact remain ATI didn't implement SM 3.0, and they priced their x850xt more than the 6800 ultra way back when. People got screwed as long as they felt they got screwed. What makes you so special to police the words they use?[/quote]
March 6, 2007 8:52:35 PM

Quote:

That was exactly what i was thinking. Wont the cpu bottleneck that processor?


Heck no. A P4 3+ Ghz is a nice fit with an X1950 PRO. I even tested one with an Athlon XP 2500+ and it worked well.


Quote:
What makes you so special to police the words they use?


I'm so special because I know what I'm talking about... I'm intimately familiar with graphics card hardware, in addition to game development.

You are, of course, permitted to have your own opinion. I'm just pointing out how wrong it is. Teehee! 8)
March 6, 2007 8:56:22 PM

The X850XT was priced higher than the 6800Ultra because it simply outperformed it just as how the 8800GTX is priced higher than the X1950XTX. Give me a list of games that supported SM3.0 HDR back when the X850XT first arrived on the scene and then give me a list of games that supported it when the X1#00 series arrived.
March 7, 2007 12:22:09 AM

hey I just want to tell you something...

I bough a 9800PRO(AGP) for my old P4 when the 1900XTX was the best card in the market and the 7600gt (AGP) didnt even exist.

I have a 6600 in my P3 system.

I also have a 9200 which died, and also have a working radeon 64mb. I use a 7900gs in my current c2d system.

Let me tell you that I dont need the best of the best even if they were the best 2 years ago because they are not worth the money. If you find them retail (you are lucky if you do) they cost up to the same of a high-end card and if you go to ebay, they pass the $150 mark, so what makes you think "they are some of the best AGP cards money can buy"? you are totally wrong in this statement. I say this only applies if you are freakin millionaire. Otherwise, is like paying $100 for a P4 prescott. I dont think a $160 x850xt PE can beat a $160 7600GT.

Please review what you write before posting it.

Oh yeah, and I forgot to ask, are you trying to say that a x850xt pe is better than a 6800Ultra?
Well, not even looking at the benchmarks, I can say that "both were the greatest cards of each company at the moment" and are still good ones.
I remember that when NVIDIA released the 6800Ultra, the x850xt pe was its competence, so of course it was like saying now a 7900gtx against a x1900xtx. They both had their good side and their bad side and any of them were a great choice at that moment but not now. Not even for that nice agp system that you would love to upgrade.
March 7, 2007 12:27:46 PM

Quote:
Let me tell you that I dont need the best of the best even if they were the best 2 years ago because they are not worth the money.


What the hell are you smoking? When did I ever, ever say that everyone needs 'the best of the best'? Or that people should go out and buy an X850 XT RIGHT NOW? Read the thread dude. The original poster already has one!

Quote:
If you find them retail (you are lucky if you do) they cost up to the same of a high-end card and if you go to ebay, they pass the $150 mark, so what makes you think "they are some of the best AGP cards money can buy"? you are totally wrong in this statement.


*sigh*. Once again, read the thread.

And for the record, the X850 XT will stand toe-to-toe with the 7600 GT and 7800 GS in AGP. The ONLY better card out there is the X1950 PRO. (and the Gainward 7800 GS, Europe only though)
So tell me, how does that not make them one of the best AGP cards money can buy? They are still in the top tier performance-wise, I never suggested people should go out and buy them right now, but once again: the OP already has one. READ THE THREAD. GET THE CONTEXT.


Quote:
Oh yeah, and I forgot to ask, are you trying to say that a x850xt pe is better than a 6800Ultra?


Whaaaat? No! In my books they are on par. Now, where did I even hint at that?


Quote:
Please review what you write before posting it.


Please read the thread before replying. :roll:
March 7, 2007 2:22:50 PM

Stick with the x850 xt and wait for the x1950 xt, I have the PCI-X version, and I haven't regretted it. If you’re really looking to upgrade, it would probably be better to wait for AMD to make its moves so that you can get a better Idea of what is going to be the head of the pack for about a year, and what would serve you better in the long run. If you are following the line of thought that SM3.0 is something you need to upgrade too, then that would lead you to the multi core upgrade too, being that soon more games will start supporting more then one core to give you a better gaming performance boost. Most games that use SM3.0 can drop back to SM2.0 (IE: Oblivion), so it's usually not an issue of have to have, but if you're looking for the latest and greatest then wait for a review on the ATI X1950XT AGP version, and then go from there.

As for the others complaining about flaws of different cards, There are always possible problems with hardware, it's just finding the ones you can live with before you get the hardware.
a b U Graphics card
March 7, 2007 2:48:04 PM

Quote:
Oh yeah, and I forgot to ask, are you trying to say that a x850xt pe is better than a 6800Ultra?

I'm a long time 6800U owner and I'll say that. The X850XTpe generally outperformed the 6800U, which should be common knowledge to those who followed the performance crown battles back then. They are close enough and the 6800U could take a game here and there, but the X850XTpe was the overall top card in it's day if you had to pick one. X850XT, X800XTpe, 6800U were a little step behind. Matter of fact, even anaNVtech admitted the X850xtpe was still slightly more powerful than the 7800GS when that came out. Link: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2686&p=9

I still use my 6800U to this day, as well as a X800XTpe. Both great cards worthy of staying in use. All in all, the X800XTpe offers slightly better performance in my games. It easily takes fsaa/bloom in Oblivion. But they are pretty much on par with each other, and with a 7600GT, X1650XT, and 7800GS at stock speeds.
a b U Graphics card
March 7, 2007 2:57:39 PM

:lol:  Oh my word Cleeve, I feel sorry for ya. I've been laughing myself silly at some of the noobish logic being thrown your way up above. I don't have time so you'll have to keep trying to get through.
March 7, 2007 4:40:44 PM

It almost boggles the mind. Too...much...noob...logic...must...not...get...sucked in.
March 7, 2007 5:17:57 PM

Quote:
Suffer the fools that buy ATI, like me.


You seem to have conveniently forgotten about next-gen titles like Oblivion, where an X800 XT will eat a 6800 Ultra alive...

What are you arguing, that three years of excellent gaming performance is negated by the new splinter cell title?

How long do you expect your video card purchases to play cutting edge titles? 4 years or more?

Give me a break. That's a hard sell, even for an Nvidiot... :roll:

L O L ! ! ! !

Absolutely, positively, smash, mouthed, O W N E D . . .
March 7, 2007 5:23:53 PM

Quote:
I'm so special because I know what I'm talking about... I'm intimately familiar with graphics card hardware, in addition to game development.

You are, of course, permitted to have your own opinion. I'm just pointing out how wrong it is. Teehee! 8)
:lol:  That is one of the best replies I've ever read. People need to be told that more often.

:trophy:

I love this forum just for such quality noob ownage.
March 7, 2007 5:38:03 PM

Quote:
You are, of course, permitted to have your own opinion. I'm just pointing out how wrong it is. Teehee! 8)
:lol:  That is one of the best replies I've ever read. People need to be told that more often.

:trophy:

I love this forum just for such quality noob ownage.

Although, unfortunately, opinions cannot be wrong. They can be based on incorrect facts, but as a concept they cannot be "right" or wrong". As long as someone thinks them, they "exist", and that's as far as it goes.
March 7, 2007 5:51:34 PM

Opinions are propositions. No proposition can be thought without being thought as true or false. Therefore opinions are held as true or false.

As opinions, they have little value in terms of truth, but that doesn't imply the person holding this opinion doesn't think it as true or false.

There is no "pure" opinion. Everyone forms propositions based facts they have read or experimented. Wether these propositions are based on enough or insufficient evidence makes it possible to classify them in opinions or truth, but the line between them is rather gray. There is little absolute truth and no absolute opinion. Absolute opinion would be a proposition based on no evidence whatsoever. But this is impossible.
!