A challenge to all your ATI fanboys out there making bold claims about the x1650XT.

[rhythmeister]

that really depends on what ati card you actually have, my x300 is barely functional under vista

both companies vista drivers are in the toilet right now

I think I have to disagree here, I have zero problems running CSS, DoD, Dark messiah of might and magic or Stalker with the recent ati Vista drivers but many people seem to want to strangle Nvidia collectively due to lack of support.

Furthermore, a quote from trusted reviews on the very cards we're "discussing":

"Thankfully for this new Radeon, the competition overclocks just as poorly, as our 7600GT only accepted a 35MHz core frequency injection", that was compared to the x1650xt's 45Mhz overclock!
More words of wisdom backing up the x1650, "...Radeon X1650XT is everything the original X1600XT should have been with performance at least on par, and usually greater than the GeForce 7600GT. The newer more demanding games such as F.E.A.R and X3: Reunion were the X1650XT specialties, as the additional pixel pipelines really came into play in these games".

It appears that the 7600GT is good at getting numbers on benchmarks but in the GAMES that we are buying the cards to play them with the x1650xt seems to be the better choice!

I'm looking forward to my 3700 arriving so I can get around 2.7GHz and try and get near that 4100 point score in my retro mobo, even if I can only run a max res' of 1280x768!

Oh, and I'm not an ati fanboi, I'm a BIG fan of the NForce2 onboard GeForce 4 which allowed me to play CoD, UT2004, Q3 AND 4 (remarkably) etc. I don't think an x300 would even withstand that sort of a beating

 

[Eric_Cartman]

I gave you the first google link and liked direct to the 06 page, if you want to get petty, heres a few snippets to swallow.

"(at stock) 3D Mark still says that 7600 GT is the leader with a 323 point advantage. In terms of actual frame rates it would like be impossible to pick out the difference between the two."

"X1650XT CF results: 5640" Somewhat higher than that 4100pts you claim.
Closest compare: 7600GS SLi: 4195pts

As for your attitude, one single foot out of line and even I will report you, your clearly an obnoxious, rude, patronising character. Or, depending on what happens, I'll deal with you myself as a mod. I've seen a lot of dodgy happenings and I for one intend to make sure those situations do not arise.

again the 4100 claim for the crossfired x1650xts were simply the only orb result i could fine for an x1650xt that even came close to that score, i'll admit right now that after seeing some more things that score is low for crossfired x1650xts, but that doesn't really help the discussion any

 

[rhythmeister]

Wow, this all went a bit mad when I was reading that review and typing that last message! Will Cartman get killed this time instead of Kenny?

 

[Formula350]

It appears that the 7600GT is good at getting numbers on benchmarks but in the GAMES that we are buying the cards to play them with the x1650xt seems to be the better choice!

lol That's exactly what I said, and he just blew it off. I also said thats why people don't pay much mind to 3DMark scores since they're synthetic. Sure looks pretty though lol Wait... I see a similarity brewing here... Has something to do with silicone not being as good as the real thing. (For those who don't follow: Synthetic vs Real Gaming)

Also, I got a 10 Point deduction, from ... whatever it is? Am I winning at the internet and have the high score? And for being 'bad' do you remove points from it to knock me from the High Score list? :O It's OK, I've been playing the Internet since 1994, I have enough points to last me a couple life times. They're still using the old school 3-Character High Score entry system though, I'm CMS is you're curious! lol

 

[zekrahminator]

I should have locked this thread a LONG time ago. We don't go about calling people fanboys, Eric. It just gets people angry, and getting people angry falls under the category of "trolling".