512MB Sapphire X1950PRO

can anybody tell what this card is like 512MB Sapphire X1950PRO for performance for lastest pc games does if offer better
performance say then the 256MB XFX GeForce 7800GS XT as i was going to buy this card until i saw 512 sapphire x1950pro.

The 7800 gs is a joke compared to the 1950 pro, especially the 512 mb version (the 256 mb model has a shortage of memory in games like BF2 on high res). There's no point in even wasting anymore time in explaining why the 1950 is better as it's a waste of time. Just google for 1950 pro reviews. You'll find plenty.

I'd advise you to purchase the Asus version as it's cooler is supposedly the best one around :thumbup:

1950 it is. probably the last good ATi graphic card. There is a tech demo somewhere that requires 2 Gig graphic RAM...I suppose by the time Vista is at full run DX10 becomes standart all new games gonna want 1-2 gig graphic ram for max details. to think of that DooM3 wanted 512MB which no card had at the time but workstation cards and now we need either SLI or crossfire to get the best out of the games. For some reason PC technology moves a bit too fast in my opinion with no brake for us to settle down and take a break for a bit.

Ummm... isn't that particular Nvidia model AGP only? ATI dont make a X1000 series AGP card.

If you got AGP save your pennies for a few more months and get yourself a cheap Intel Core 2 Duo, PCI Express Motherboard and cheap Nvidia 8600GT, because Intel have massive pricecuts on the horizon and the 8600GT is going to be Nvidia's mid-range, mass-market card, which will refresh along with some other parts around April.

Dont buy any DirectX9 video cards now, its too late in the day.

Edit: Look mommy, a double post

Actually Ati does make X1000 agp cards. They still have the 1300 and 1600, 1650 lines as agp. You're right about the 7800 gs, that one is agp. If you happen to have made a mistake and meant the 1650 pro with 512 mb then get the 7800. It's far superiour.

However, if you have an agp system it might be fair to assume there's ton's of stuff like a shortage of memory or a slow processor bottlenecking your computer. Instead of upgrading to a intel system in the future (who want's to wait, regardlesss of it being the right thing to do right?) you might wanna think about trying to get a good price for your current setup and get an am2 setup. Their price/quality comparison is good and no doubt far cheaper then any Intel setup now or in the near future.

I personaly disagree with the whole DX10 hype as the current Nvidia cards don't even have a legal pci-e certificate and Vista is still so buggy (especcialy for highend gamers as us) that upgrading to another expensive Windows and the dx10 line videocard within the next year might proof to be a source of annoyence instead of an enrichment of your pc.

till now PCIe hasn't been really faster than APG. not that it's not but they havn't used the full potential yet.

Actually, the G80 does have certfication, your source got their info wrong. Here is a link: http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36929. Buying a DX9 card now, means that come late spring your new purchase is out of date and there will be mid-range DX10 cards from Nvidia and maybe ATI, that completely outperform even current high-end 7x00 and 1000 series from Nvidia and AMD.

All current AMD setups are pretty awful and DO NOT offer a good price - performance ratio against Intel, that is common knowledge. Even the lowest priced C2Duo can outperform a highly priced AMD AM2, there are benchmarks all over the place to prove my point.

that's why I won't get any ATi cards anymore. Never really got into AMD. Not because they are bad but because Intel is the standart that apps are programmed for

Originally posted by GM™@Jan 14 2007, 12:44 PM
Actually, the G80 does have certfication, your source got their info wrong. Here is a link: http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36929. Buying a DX9 card now, means that come late spring your new purchase is out of date and there will be mid-range DX10 cards from Nvidia and maybe ATI, that completely outperform even current high-end 7x00 and 1000 series from Nvidia and AMD.

All current AMD setups are pretty awful and DO NOT offer a good price - performance ratio against Intel, that is common knowledge. Even the lowest priced C2Duo can outperform a highly priced AMD AM2, there are benchmarks all over the place to prove my point.

Hmm, I got the bad info from the same site. Never saw the correcton on that one. Thanks for showing anyway :thumbup:

I wasn't talking about using a expensive AM2 processor but it's basic cheap line. A 3800x2 costs around 110 euros boxed and although it's not as powerfull as a core2duo it's basic model circulates around 190 euros for the E6300. In that light the price/quality comparison is ok, perhaps even better then a more expensive Intel setup.

If someone is on a budget of lets say 600 euro's he'd be able to get better memory (6400 instead of lower) which would increase his performance more then just spending his money on just a better processor. He'd run into a bottlenck soon but that's just speculation anyway. I think a Amd setup for those on a budget isn't such a bad thing, one of the biggest errors we make in giving hardwareadvice is assuming everyone has the same budget we do. That isn't so and advicing some people on another setup then the highest and most expensive might be the wiser and more apropriate thing to do.