Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Ati X1600 XT Vs. Ati XT 800

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 25, 2010 2:19:19 PM

which of these card are the best for gaming Ati X1600 XT or Ati XT 800 because i'm planning to buy a new graphic card and it has to be ONE of these two
(don't ask why :D )


More about : ati x1600 ati 800

a b U Graphics card
January 25, 2010 2:22:22 PM

I am gonna ask

WHY THE HELL????
January 25, 2010 2:25:52 PM

ALRIGHT if you really want to know, one of my friends dad is selling these cards and i wonder which one is the best... gees not a big deal.
Related resources
January 25, 2010 2:41:28 PM

som1 help?
a b U Graphics card
January 25, 2010 2:44:27 PM

Obviously X1600XT is newer then 800XT and is better
January 25, 2010 3:12:14 PM

Quote:
800XT I would imagine or maybe a draw.

The x1600's were never that great even the xt but it has been a while.

Personally, I don't think any of them are worth anything right now. What are you planning on spending on these pieces of ancient history?


well i just want to know if they can run crysis, but i'm going to buy a better graphic card later ... and one more thing do they have pixel shaders 3.0 or 2.0?

January 25, 2010 3:34:58 PM

Quote:
X1600 3.0, x800 2.0 and neither of them have any hope in hell of running crysis even at 800 x 600 resolution.

In fact they won't be able to run any modern game at anything approaching decent settings.

I have a mobility 3650 which is roughly the same level I would think and it is not much use for gaming.

However, I could be wrong, wait till someone with a better memory than I posts if you want to be sure.


dam do they suck that hard? but the x800 can't it run cod modern warfare 1? or assasin's creed?
January 25, 2010 3:55:56 PM

no way ;) 
a c 106 U Graphics card
a b 4 Gaming
January 25, 2010 4:11:29 PM

The 1600XT is slower than the X800 XT. The thing is, The X800 XT only supports shader model 2.0 and 2.0b while the 1600XT supports SM 3.0. Because of that, some games will not run on the X800 XT, but of course such games wouldn't be too playable on the 1600XT on anything above low quality :D . On games that support both 2.0b and 3.0 (which is very few and you need earlier drivers as 2.0b was removed from latter ones), the X800 XT would be faster. In SM 2.0 mode, the X800XT is considerably faster.
January 25, 2010 4:34:21 PM

megamanx00 said:
The 1600XT is slower than the X800 XT. The thing is, The X800 XT only supports shader model 2.0 and 2.0b while the 1600XT supports SM 3.0. Because of that, some games will not run on the X800 XT, but of course such games wouldn't be too playable on the 1600XT on anything above low quality :D . On games that support both 2.0b and 3.0 (which is very few and you need earlier drivers as 2.0b was removed from latter ones), the X800 XT would be faster. In SM 2.0 mode, the X800XT is considerably faster.


so in this case would you recommend x800 instead of x1600xt?
!