I am currently running a pretty basic system that ive had for a few years
Athlon XP 2800+
500W Power Supply
and its been fine in running pretty much everything i need such as Company of Heroes, CnC3 and HL2. But we had a power cut yesterday while playing a networked COH game.
now the PC hangs whenever i try anything graphical even the Artifact scan on the Omega Drivers. Ive tried rolling back the drivers and have done tests on the system RAM but it always seems to be the Graphics card thats crashing the PC.
So i've begun looking at the possiblilty of an upgrade but i really am on a shoe string budget at the moment so i cant afford to upgrade the whole system to PCI-E.
My dilema is that is it worth going for another X800 which are pretty cheap or should i shell out a bit more for a slightly better card. The July Card guide suggests a X1650 Pro GDDR3 as a good card but the GDDR3 version is much harder to find than the DDR2 version.
Just finished looking through the VGA charts here on Toms. From what it looks like the x800GTO actually comes in a tiny sliver AHEAD of the 1650Pro. They are very closely matched, but the x800GTO comes in slightly ahead more than the 1650Pro. So, if the x800GTO costs less, GO for it!
EDIT: Although, if you can, definitely try to find another video card to test and make sure your video card is really the problem.
Gi with the X1650Pro, as close as they are to each other (I don't trust the VGA charts on this one [a moded GTO is good, the plain would be a lesser card IMO]), the X1650Pro will open up games to you the X800GTO cannot play, and in newer games the X1650's shader layout will help it. The X800GTO will mainly be faster (if at all) in older games.
I currently have a X1650Pro and so far haven't got a game I can't play smoothly. (Note: I usually play at default settings) I have no issues running Oblivion, WoW, and Doom3 on this card. I got the HIS version with the ICEq cooler on it.
i Think the 7600GS would be better IMHO the X1650PRO is too crippled, 4/4/5/12? i mean the 7600GS has 4/12/5/12 and im sure those 12 texture units will more then make up for the low clock speed(which you can always manually OC!) the cost is about the same.
Unless it's a GDDR3 versionof the GF7600GS it's not a good contender, it's too weak, and lacks equivalent features. The X1650Pro may be crippled compared to the GF7600GT, but the GS is not near the GT unless it comes with GDDR3 memory.
I would say that any performance delta would be negligible between your X800 and a X1650Pro, so slight that you couldn't tell. Also the X1650 supports SM3.0. This wouldn't have been such a huge selling feature six months ago, but with the release of games like Rainbow Six Vegas that only support SM3.0, the feature is a must have. I'm not saying that you definitely have to play Rainbow Six, but you will see more new games (that are DX9) supporting just SM3.0. So for me anyway, performance aside (since the difference is pretty much moot), the features are what would settle it for me.
I have an older system then the one in my sig and it's a P4 2.8 Northwood. I upgraded from a Radeon 9800 Pro 128 meg to an X1650 Pro 512 meg and saw a huge impact when playing Oblivion. I get not only shader 3.0 HDR but also higher textures when set to the default high settings.
If you look at the chart in the July 2007 graphics card update, the X1650 Pro is several steps above an X800GTO in performance, so you should see improvement.
I have the same prob. Before i start i live in the Philippines, so cost wise it's unlikely that i would be buying from any internet reseller, we've got tons of shops here in manila. But my problem is that AGPs are almost extinct here, there are still some out there but good ones are VERY HARD TO FIND.
Im Fairly happy with my set-up, until the new Splintercell and Battlefield came out. Now i need to Upgrade my whimpy FX5500.
As for the pipiline and shader count, none of the manufacturer site have them listed
I cant find any review that would help me in deciding. So i hope you guys would help me. At first i was leaning towards the 7300GT-Sonic because of the DDR3 and the power connector which is a 6 pin (that my PSU has in a sepparate rail). But then i found the x1650, and thought that i could be a btter choice since i would be gaining 200Mhz on the core but give up 200Mhz also on the memory, which is a DDR2. The x1650 pro also has it's own power connector but its just a regular MOLEX one, which i could live with if it would perform better than the 7300GT-Sonic.
I think 7300GT will be better choice, mainly because of DDR3 memory and great OC potential. However, in games like Oblivion (many shaders) Radeon is definitely faster, whether 7300GT is overclocked or not.
I agree with Cleeve and Grape here. the GDDR3 X1650 pro is a little better than a 7600GS, and a safer bet than the X800GTO now with so many newer games requiring an Sm3.0 card and not running on the X800's. I actually have that exact GDDR3 X1650 pro I bought when it first came out. It's a solid card but far outclassed by the X1650XT in the testing i have done between the two.
AT those prices (EDIT:about 50 pounds for the X1650 pro), I strongly suggest you spend a bit more on one of these if you can. :
Personally I would rather have the HD2600XT, especially factoring in the savings(£13) . If you like to use FSAA, the X1950GT is more powerful with that enabled for sure. Otherwise without fsaa, the cards will trade blows with a feature advantage to the HD2600.
Anyway, here are some discussions where I supplied links to the HD2600XT hanging with a X1950 pro and 8600GTS and beating the 7900GS and even GT in new games (without fsaa)