-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Which would be better value?
- Thread starter muon
- Start date
2600XT is the right choice b/w those two cards
The cheapest x1950pro i can find is here at ocuk and its £78 delivered. Thats 53% more expensive than the 2600xt. It just doesnt have the same bang for buck. This card nor the x1950pro would be a long term card in which case, longevity doesnt come into the picture. Even considering that, the lifetime of an x1950pro is not going to be that much longer than a 8600gt or 2600xt.
However, the 8600gt is only 10% more expensive, and seems to perform better in games.
Last edited:
Really, i thought the 2600XT was slightly faster on average.
Its also a better choice for mediacentres, with less CPU utilization.
Thats what the reviews ive seen tend to suggest...
http://www.xsreviews.co.uk/reviews/graphics-cards/sapphire-hd-2600xt/6/
http://www.ocworkbench.com/2007/powercolor/hd2600xt/b3.htm
As for the X1950Pro it is most definitely the best bang for buck card out at the moment & the £17 it costs more than the 8600GT is well worth the extra performance it gives.
i just had a quick look at the graphics cards...£70.49 for a 1950pro and 8600 is same price but i could be wrong.
i didnt suggest 1950 pro for long term but maybe for about a years use...microsoft/nvidia/ati may have sorted the DX10 side of things by then and u can get a better DX10 card.
from what ive seen so far... the DX10 games currently dont offer much visually over DX9 and the performance hit is usually pretty high...and those 2 cards u suggested wouldnt really cut it for DX10 anyway. so i would probably buy a good DX9 card for the time being(and the 1950pro is great) and then get a DX10 card what really can play DX10 games after.
im not saying your choice is wrong...it just isnt the choice i would make so thats why i recommended the 1950pro.
Last edited:
Don't forget that on average the 1950 pro is 40-50% quicker than the 2600xt.
And that is a 256Mb 1950 pro compared with a DDR4 2600xt.
I notice your 2600xt card is the new (slightly slower) ddr3 cards and the 1950 pro of special offer at the moment is a 512Mb card.
If directx 10 bothers you then get the 2600xt (better than the 8600 GT) although you might want to wait a couple of weeks as ATI are about to bring out the 2900 GT which looks to be priced to take on the 8600 cards and should out perform them.
It will also probably mean a price drop on both the 2600xt and 8600 cards will be imminent as well.
Also I would agree that both the 2600xt and 8600Gt will struggle to play any directx 10 games except at low detail/resolutions.
And that is a 256Mb 1950 pro compared with a DDR4 2600xt.
I notice your 2600xt card is the new (slightly slower) ddr3 cards and the 1950 pro of special offer at the moment is a 512Mb card.
If directx 10 bothers you then get the 2600xt (better than the 8600 GT) although you might want to wait a couple of weeks as ATI are about to bring out the 2900 GT which looks to be priced to take on the 8600 cards and should out perform them.
It will also probably mean a price drop on both the 2600xt and 8600 cards will be imminent as well.
Also I would agree that both the 2600xt and 8600Gt will struggle to play any directx 10 games except at low detail/resolutions.
get the 2600xt.. very good card for media and gaming...
i should know because i own 2 of theses cards
the 2600xt plays dx10 games well on high settings...
i should know because i own 2 of theses cards
Last edited:
TWO being the crucial word.................
And as for performance:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/13/the_radeon_2600xt_remixed/page5.html#bioshock
Bioshock, no aa, no af, 1600 x 1200 av 22 fps, min 11 fps Hardly smooth or playable?
Though at 1024 x 768 it gets 29 av and 23 min which I suppose you could just get by with.
FEAR: 1600 x 1200 4 x aa, 8 x af 16 av, 5 min - no chance
My point is, as per my original post (low detail/resolutions), the 2600xt is fine if you want to play at 1024 x 768 and maybe 1280 x 1024 in some games with AA and AF turned off.
And don't forget the original poster is looking at the new, slower 2600xt cards with ddr3 memory compared to yours.
If you don't want anymore that 1280 x 1024 max and prepared to go down to 1024 x 768 in the latest games with no AA or AF then the 2600xt is a good budget buy. If this fact matters, then IMO spend a little more on a faster card. The x1950 pro will make some of those games palyable at 1600 x 1200 and 1280 x 1024 which weren't on the 2600xt.
u trust benchmark sites?? i don't...TWO being the crucial word.................
And as for performance:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/09/13/the_radeon_2600xt_remixed/page5.html#bioshock
Bioshock, no aa, no af, 1600 x 1200 av 22 fps, min 11 fps Hardly smooth or playable?
Though at 1024 x 768 it gets 29 av and 23 min which I suppose you could just get by with.
FEAR: 1600 x 1200 4 x aa, 8 x af 16 av, 5 min - no chance
My point is, as per my original post (low detail/resolutions), the 2600xt is fine if you want to play at 1024 x 768 and maybe 1280 x 1024 in some games with AA and AF turned off.
And don't forget the original poster is looking at the new, slower 2600xt cards with ddr3 memory compared to yours.
If you don't want anymore that 1280 x 1024 max and prepared to go down to 1024 x 768 in the latest games with no AA or AF then the 2600xt is a good budget buy. If this fact matters, then IMO spend a little more on a faster card. The x1950 pro will make some of those games palyable at 1600 x 1200 and 1280 x 1024 which weren't on the 2600xt.
in bioshock at 1680x1050 i get over 35fps. on 1 card
in FEAR at 1680 x 1050 4 x aa, 16 x af, i got over 40fps
in Medal of Honor Airborne at 1680x1050 i get 47fps av , on 1 card
Last edited:
Very true which is why forums are important so people can post real life results. However, you have to start comparisons somewhere and so long as you use a review site to compare cards then it gives valuable information.
The chances are the review site isn't going to have a test rig the same as yours and won't be using the same drivers.
I'm impressed by your fps though. Seems much better in real life than any review I have ever seen of the 2600xt.
I believe the 2900pro is coming out in january along with the 2650xt. Im afraid thats a long time and i need a card to play HL2:E2 and MOH:Airborne. I really dont mind if i have to play Bioshock at medium settings @ 1280x1024 with no AA.
it won't be called 2650xt.., it'll be still called 2600xt. they are just rereleaseing it with the dx10.1, same with 2400..
the 2600xt will run hl2, MOHA, bioshock, fine at high settings......
Last edited:
From most reports I've seen the 2900 pro is coming this month followed by the 2900 GT in October.
http://www.tcmagazine.com/comments.php?shownews=15701
Just one link but you get the idea.......
And if you search this forum I think you will find somebody who has placed a pre order so they must be close if sites are putting pre orders up.
Gibbo - any idea when OCUK will be getting the 2900 pro and GT cards in?
Last edited:
Thanks for that
Which means the reports of the pro cards arriving in Sep are true so I would suspect the gt will come in October.
Looking at US listed pricing, I would expect the GT card to come in at around half that cost so about £70-£90 range as it's meant to steal customers away from the 8600.
Now that ought to be a worthwhile extra cost over the 2600xt and 8600gs.
i wonder which card will run like having 2 2600xt in crossfire. the 2900pro or gt?Thanks for that
Which means the reports of the pro cards arriving in Sep are true so I would suspect the gt will come in October.
Looking at US listed pricing, I would expect the GT card to come in at around half that cost so about £70-£90 range as it's meant to steal customers away from the 8600.
Now that ought to be a worthwhile extra cost over the 2600xt and 8600gs.
You should know. How close is two 2600xt in crossfire to a 2900xt?
The 2900 pro is meant to compete with the 8800 GTS 320Mb so if your crossfire cards is on par to a 8800 GTS 320Mb then it will be the pro card.
I think two 2900 Pro cards in crossfire would give intersting results