Hypermemory vs. Turbocache review

cleeve

Illustrious
Thought I'd link to this, not alot of reviews on these bottom feeding cards.

Didn't turn out like I expected, the X300 HM bests the 6200 TC in EVERYTHING except 3dMark05...
The X300 takes 3dMark03, Far Cry, Half Life, *AND* DOOM3!!!

Wouldn't have guessed that...

<A HREF="http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?head=15&page=2957" target="_new">http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?head=15&page=2957</A>

________________
<b>Geforce <font color=red>6800 Ultra</b></font color=red>
<b>AthlonXP <font color=red>~3300+</b></font color=red> <i>(Barton 2500+ o/c 412 FSB @ 2266 Mhz)</i>
<b>3dMark05: <font color=red>5,275</b>
 

scottchen

Splendid
Jun 3, 2003
5,791
0
25,780
These b@stards just took shared memory and gave it a fancy name, and charge outrageous price for it. Much rather take the versions with 64mb or 128mb onboard ram.
 

cleeve

Illustrious
Yeah it suxxors, but remember... you'd rather have a HM X300 than Intel Extreme graphics...

You'd have to revert to 800x600 to play stuff, but at least you'd have the option. I'd never recommend it to anyone here unless they were completely destitute, but it has it's place. And it's probably better than an FX 5200 or Radeon 9250...

________________
<b>Geforce <font color=red>6800 Ultra</b></font color=red>
<b>AthlonXP <font color=red>~3300+</b></font color=red> <i>(Barton 2500+ o/c 412 FSB @ 2266 Mhz)</i>
<b>3dMark05: <font color=red>5,275</b>
 
Great 2D cards! :wink:

Funny those results clash a bit with this statement not too long ago bythe InQ;

<A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22249" target="_new">ATI X300SE HM falls behind 6200 TC</A>

Seems like they got that wrong, whereas it's suprising that the X300SE takes D3!?!


- You need a licence to buy a gun, but they'll sell anyone a stamp <i>(or internet account)</i> ! - <A HREF="http://www.redgreen.com/" target="_new"><font color=green>RED </font color=green> <font color=red> GREEN</font color=red></A> GA to SK :evil:
 

TRENDING THREADS