x1950gt 256 or hd3650 512

[viksa]

Hello

I am going to buy a graphic card and I can't choose between sapphire x1950gt 256mbddr3 and sapphire HD3650 512mbddr3. Both of them are same price. I am not a great gamer but I want to know which of these two graphic cards will perform better on my 22'' Samsung monitor. PC configuration is: Hewlett Packard dx7300 with CPU E4500 2.2Ghz, 2Mb DDR2. Is there any better graphic card in price range of this two.

Thank You in advance.

 

[JDocs]

Surely you mean 2Gb I mean 2Mb is not that much more than my old P4's L2 cache...

 

[viksa]

Of course 2Gb DDR2. Thanks.

 

[4745454b]

When the 2600XT came out, it wasn't really faster then the x1950pro. Now that games are being coded for the USA instead of separate shaders, the 2600XT/3650 is the better card. Toss in the extra memory, and the 3650 is a better buy.

Older games might run a bit faster on the x1950pro, but I don't think I'd get it.

I just looked at your post again, get the 3650 for sure. The x1950GT is/was junk.

 

[viksa]

Thanks that was helpful.

 

[mactronix]

Thanks that was helpful.

I agree that the card for you is the 3650. But come on 4745454b calling a 1950GT junk is a bit strong. It was only just off top level for its generation and with a bit of an OC it would swap blows with the 1950 pro, of course the real 1950 pro was better but it was a decent alternative.
Mactronix

 

[4745454b]

I know the x1900GT was bad. When I bought my x1800XT I was looked at the x1900 series first. The x1900xt was out of my price range, but the x1900GT wasn't. I could be wrong about this, but I think the x1800XL and the x1900GT performed about the same. Considering that the x1800XL was quite a bit cheaper, it was a no brainer which was the better card.

I realize that the x1900GT and the x1950GT are different cards, but I view them as similar. I'm sure when the x1950GT came out, there were cheaper options that would perform just as good.

 

[darthvaderkenneth]

can a x1950 pro play assassins creed or do u hav to use a 2600xt?

 

[marvelous211]

There are some games where 3650 is similar to 1950gt performance but then there are other games that is considerably worse.

I would go for 1950gt instead. It's not like you can play a dx10 game with 3650. 3650 might have slightly better IQ though. Neither card will play that resolution at high settings. 1950gt would have better chance though because of 256bit memory bus.

 

[DarthPiggie]

I must concur with marvelous

 

[mactronix]

Hello

I am going to buy a graphic card and I can't choose between sapphire x1950gt 256mbddr3 and sapphire HD3650 512mbddr3. Both of them are same price. I am not a great gamer but I want to know which of these two graphic cards will perform better on my 22'' Samsung monitor. PC configuration is: Hewlett Packard dx7300 with CPU E4500 2.2Ghz, 2Mb DDR2. Is there any better graphic card in price range of this two.

Thank You in advance.

Just came across this on a differant thread, dont know what your budget is but its v/good for the money.
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-160-AS&groupid=701&catid=56&subcat=1008
Mactronix

 

[4745454b]

Marvelous, how do you figure? When the 3650/2600XT first came out, it was just behind the x1950pro. The x1950pro is faster then the 3650, so at best, the 3650/2600XT ties the x1950gt. Considering how games are programed now, I would think the 3650 is the better deal.

 

[marvelous211]

1950gt is good as 1950 pro. Slightly lower clock speeds easily clocked to 1950 pro speeds however.

In shader intensive games 2600xt was slightly slower than 1950pro. 1950pro usually creamed a 2600xt in AA. 8600gts is better than 2600xt and 1950pro was a little better than 8600gts. In games that are not as shader intensive, 1950 pro usually creamed 2600xt by big margin.

At a resolution of 1680x1050 though it also comes down to bandwidth where 2600xt or 3650 with 128bit bus would do considerably worse over 1950.