backtop


Print 67 comment(s) - last by Pirks.. on Oct 10 at 2:30 PM


Sapphire Radeon X1650 Pro AGP

Sapphire Radeon X1300XT AGP
Budget and mid-range AGP products ready for Vista

Sapphire today announced two new AGP-based graphics cards. The newly announced graphics cards include the Radeon X1650 Pro AGP and X1300XT AGP. These new cards are similar to previously released Radeon X1600 Pro and X1600XT for PCI Express. Sapphire’s Radeon X1650 Pro AGP features 12 pixel shaders and a core clock of 590 MHz. Radeon X1650 Pro cards are equipped with 256MB of GDDR3 video memory connected via 128-bit memory bus. Memory is clocked at 690 MHz. Other notable features include dual-link DVI and TV-out.

The Radeon X1300XT arrives in two flavors equipped with 256MB of GDDR3 or 512MB of DDR2 video memory. Models equipped with 256MB of video memory are clocked at 500 MHz while 512MB models are clocked at 400 MHz. As with the Radeon X1650 Pro AGP, the X1300XT AGP has 12 pixel shaders as well. However, the Radeon X1300XT AGP has a lower core clock of 500 MHz. Features such as dual-link DVI and TV-out are available as well.

Availability and pricing is unknown at the moment, though expect the Radeon X1650 Pro AGP to be priced south of $150 while the Radeon X1300XT AGP should be priced south of $100.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Meh
By ixelion on 10/6/2006 4:13:25 PM , Rating: 4
Whats with the low end AGP cards, i'm still using the 6800 AGP and these are hardly viable upgrade options.




RE: Meh
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 4:50:59 PM , Rating: 2
you can upgrade to 7800GS AGP but that's it, looks like after that you'll have to go PCIe, which will be much more appealing route by next year's end when there will me much more PCIe x1 cards available (that's just my wishful thinking but heck why not?)

but your 7800GS will serve you great for just any game including even Crysis till next year's end, and even more so if you overclock it or buy a factory overclocked 7800GS AGP.


RE: Meh
By Discord on 10/6/2006 6:10:53 PM , Rating: 3
The 7600GT destroys the 7800GSs while being more cost and energy efficient. It's going to be about the best you can do on the AGP platform unless 7900GSs come out. Good luck on finding one though.


RE: Meh
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 6:40:57 PM , Rating: 2
your note about 7600GT _PCIe_ has no relation to our discussion of best _AGP_ cards


RE: Meh
By Discord on 10/6/2006 6:52:18 PM , Rating: 2
Im talkin 7600GT AGP and it is available (if you're lucky enough to pounce on it fast enough) in the US. Hopefully Newegg will receive another big shipment soon.


RE: Meh
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 7:13:28 PM , Rating: 2
oops, found it! you're right, it's not on newegg but probably could be purchased on ebay or something.

btw oveclocked 7800GS KO from eVGA kills 7600GT and $h1ts on its corpse easily ;) check out any benches on the net. good luck.


RE: Meh
By Discord on 10/6/2006 7:25:16 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah a max OCed 7800gs can defeat a max OCed 7600gt but it is very close. I can get my 7600GT to almost 610/1800 (much more comfortable running it at 600/1750 though). Considering it cost half the price of a 7800GS KO, I think I got the better deal. To each his own. They were on NewEgg BTW, it's where I got mine. Must not be expecting any soon.


RE: Meh
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 7:47:57 PM , Rating: 2
I guess this pricing structure is pretty outdated, since newegg sells BFG 7800GS AGP currently for $210 after MIR (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82... and froogle lists 7600GT AGP priced around $200... so if you get either of them and overclock yourself 7800GS will always stay slightly ahead for extra TEN BUCKS. reason is - you don't buy factory overclocked stuff and overclock yourself. THEN this "double the price" difference you mentioned automagically evaporates ;)


RE: Meh
By poohbear on 10/7/2006 12:54:51 PM , Rating: 2
which is a ripoff considering they're selling the 7900gto for ~$260?.:/


RE: Meh
By Pirks on 10/7/2006 2:29:34 PM , Rating: 2
c'mon, gto is so new, it's like 1 day old news - it changes everything again, but nobody knew about it before yesterday!


RE: Meh
By Discord on 10/9/2006 12:15:52 PM , Rating: 2
I was comparin to the KO edition you mentioned earlier which was around $330 while I purchased my 7600GT for $170. Yes you could purchase a BFG for $230 ((price changed again?)was 250 when I bought) and overclock to a very slight lead but there are so many other reasons to get the 7600. It's smaller, quieter, uses less juice and it smells better (Mmmmm, lemony fresh pine...). But like I said before, to each his own. It's all outdated now that there's a 7900 model for sale. Might have to return and upgrade me beloved 7600GT.


RE: Meh
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 7:16:15 PM , Rating: 2
and I'm talking about FASTEST AVAILABLE AGP CARD IN NORTH AMERICA - a very specific definition. this is NOT gainward and NOT 7600GT.

however if you say that performance per buck 7600GT is better which is VERY DIFFERENT from my definition above - I won't argue, you're probably right on that one.


What's AGP?
By bob661 on 10/6/2006 3:01:17 PM , Rating: 1
??




RE: What's AGP?
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 3:07:02 PM , Rating: 2
it's a way to upgrade graphics card without paying $$$ for those stupid useless PCIe x1 slots on a new PCIe mobo


RE: What's AGP?
By Spivonious on 10/6/2006 3:49:10 PM , Rating: 3
Speaking of PCI-E x1, what can go in those slots? I've never seen any cards for sale that will.


RE: What's AGP?
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 4:41:35 PM , Rating: 2
ask bob661, he SURELY knows the answer, hehehe :))

speaking seriosly - yeah, there are no cards besides one or two overpriced NICs, but they MAY be available in SOME time in future, so as long as you keep the number of useless PCIe x1 slots to a minimum on your mobo and PCI slots to a maximum (currently it's just four but it's still better than puny THREE PCI slots on most of new PCIe mobos) you'll be alright... as long as you don't need precisely FIVE PCI slots - then you're #ucked, but! you can still pay additional $30-50 for a coolness factor (just like stupid ipod teens do ;) and get a PCIe x1 NIC which you can put instead of one of your PCI NICs which is sort of acceptable - and probably by next year's fall there will be more PCIe x1 cards so bying 4 PCI 2 PCIe x1 mobo is a compromise one has to make right now... unfortunately.


RE: What's AGP?
By DigitalFreak on 10/6/2006 5:30:54 PM , Rating: 2
There are also a number of USB & Firewire PCI-E 1x cards as well.


RE: What's AGP?
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 6:32:44 PM , Rating: 2
indeed there are. however, with this stuff being commonly included on the mobos these days I'd classify it as irrelevant, although technically you are right.

my arguments become obsolete not before cheap PCIe x1 NIC's and Creative X-Fi's will appear on my local store shelves. I'll give it another two years. after that PCIe mobos will 100% qualify for upgrade, but not right now... unless one wants to run GPU above single 7800GS and doesn't live in Europe where Gainward 7900GT AGP cards are available, and even with these cards it's tricky to justify their purchase - after all faster AND cheaper genuine 7900GT PCIe renders any AGP upgrade obsolete, given careful choice of a new PCIe mobo of course.

I guess I should update my statements from "PCIe x1 is absolutely useless" to "PCIe x1 is absolutely useless for _me_ right now but if _you_ have many PCIe x1 NICs and firewire/usb cards then, well, it's sorta different" :-)


RE: What's AGP?
By Wwhat on 10/7/2006 9:49:22 AM , Rating: 2
RE: What's AGP?
By glennpratt on 10/7/2006 2:34:31 PM , Rating: 2
There is also TV tuner cards, RAID controllers, Wireless cards... Vbox is making a Dual Tuner HDTV card that x1.


RE: What's AGP?
By LowRez on 10/7/2006 2:17:38 AM , Rating: 2
I have a theater 550 in on of my pci-e 1x


512 x1300?
By Hypernova on 10/6/2006 5:00:58 PM , Rating: 2
Any game that uses 512 would easily overwhelm such a weak GPU so what's the point?




RE: 512 x1300?
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 6:43:18 PM , Rating: 2
the point is just like in many other similar businesses - to make a profit capitalizing on human stupidity :))


RE: 512 x1300?
By AzureKevin on 10/6/2006 8:28:39 PM , Rating: 3
It's not "stupidity" so much as it is "ignorance". Many people aren't like us and don't have the time to read up and learn everything about computer hardware. Companies are smart to try to make a profit off of these people.


RE: 512 x1300?
By danrien on 10/6/2006 6:55:53 PM , Rating: 2
well, it will allow you to run like 2 monitors! and one windows desktop!!


RE: 512 x1300?
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 7:50:36 PM , Rating: 2
yeah, and where can one buy a GPU that does NOT allow one to run like two monitors, eh? :)) just a rhetorical question of course ;)


RE: 512 x1300?
By Wwhat on 10/7/2006 9:51:44 AM , Rating: 2
I imagine it would save the GPU that's already struggling from swapping out textures to regular RAM.
Frankly I think they should simply stop making DDR2 graphics cards, it's silly and embarrassing.


RE: 512 x1300?
By johnsonx on 10/7/2006 12:02:33 PM , Rating: 2
Keep in mind though that the X1300XT isn't actually an X1300 at all - it's a rebadged X1600Pro. I have an AGP X1600Pro myself, and it's not such a weak GPU. It pretty much runs anything I want to run at 1280x1024.

That said, I don't know about the value of 512Mb of RAM on such a card. I think though that games that use lots of large textures can make use of large amounts of GPU memory even if you're not running at the extreme resolutions w/AA that would cripple a mid-range GPU.

(I think I'd still rather have 25Mb of faster ram though!)


RE: 512 x1300?
By Wwhat on 10/7/2006 2:22:40 PM , Rating: 2
the 512MB version uses DDR2 RAM which is rather slow.


Gainward BLISS 7800 GS+ 512MB AGP Silent
By DS Delaroca on 10/6/2006 4:43:43 PM , Rating: 2
its there any info for this card to ever come out here in the states?, it sounds like a great Video card for us AGP users, because in my case, i dont want upgrade my mobo until this mess with the Core 2 duo chipsets its settle down and a new really good chipset from Nvidia,ATI or Intel comes out, that is the one that will work with the Duo or Quad for sure, without any bios flashing or having to get a new mobo six moths later to suport the Quad, also besides the point that AMD may have something good or better than intel next year.




By Pirks on 10/6/2006 4:57:17 PM , Rating: 1
it won't appear in the states, so go PCIe, or if you don't like Intel chipset mess just stay with AMD. performance-per-buck-wise you won't lose anything but the stupid core logo, trust me on that :))


RE: Gainward BLISS 7800 GS+ 512MB AGP Silent
By Wwhat on 10/7/2006 10:00:05 AM , Rating: 2
You get upset by BIOS flashes? why? if you really are so inept then surely you can find someone to do it for you.
You can flash from USB sticks, flashramcards or even MP3 players now btw, you don't even need a floppy.

It's almost always so that a new motherboard needs a flash after a while to fix bugs, only after a year or two they have a final BIOS, so I guess you plan to wait for a new chipset then for the release of a new mobo then another year until the BIOS is final, that's a lonf wait in the world of computers though.


RE: Gainward BLISS 7800 GS+ 512MB AGP Silent
By DS Delaroca on 10/7/2006 3:37:32 PM , Rating: 2
its not that im upset by bios flashes, or that im inept at doing one, i have three computers that i built my self, one with a AXP2500+ OC to 2.4,a S939 A64X23800+ 8x PCI-E also OC to 2.4,and my old but kick ass P4 NorthWood 3.0 oc to 3.5, and all of my builts on ASUS MB's, wich if you OC at all a bios flash is a must for this MB's to work the bugs out, since i skip the prescott fiasco all together,i want to built a C2D but the best bang for the buck for OC at the moment its the intel 965 and Nvidia Nforce4 chipsets, but as far as i know these are old chipsets that are been made to work with the C2D by a bios flash, not built from the ground up to be a C2D or Quad chipsets, but that may change in three months i hope, cause im a CHEAP.


By JeffDM on 10/8/2006 4:04:18 PM , Rating: 2
Was that all one long run-on sentence?


By LaughinAtYa on 10/6/2006 7:56:30 PM , Rating: 2
Radeon X1950 Pro AGP
Diamond version - Original press release on Diamond's site hastily pulled, still up here though -
http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?relea...

...and one by VisionTek
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid...

Only a rumour, mind...<heh, heh>





By Chadder007 on 10/6/2006 10:53:52 PM , Rating: 2
If they would come out with this....it would be a VERY smart marketing move considering the large amount of users still with AGP.


By JeffDM on 10/8/2006 4:11:24 PM , Rating: 2
I was really surprised how quickly the graphics card makers tried to dump AGP. As opposed to hard drives where you still find PATA drives released the same day (or earlier), and SATA was a standard introduced in 2003. Eith PCIe, a standard two years newer than SATA, it didn't take them a year reducing AGP 8x to a bastard step-cousin. There are plenty of systems with CPUs powerful enough to handle more recent games, but it's the graphics power that holds them back.


By Pirks on 10/10/2006 2:30:37 PM , Rating: 2
the only reason they jumped onto PCIe was SLI. if SLI were _that_ fashionable buzz for some SLI SATA hard drives where SLIing them actually DOUBLES hdd speed - then all PATA hdds and dvds would've been dumped a LONG time ago, just like AGP is now. it's the money, if there's not much to be made from upgrade from LPT/COM ports to USB or getting rid of PS/2 or floppy or PATA DVD or whatever - nobody does anything then. but once there's SLI and BIG BUCKS written together - woohoo see the companies rebuild their production/design even faster than Apple did with PPC-Intel, gosh I wish they dumped COM/LPT _that_ fast!


the video cards
By S3anister on 10/6/2006 2:50:11 PM , Rating: 3
in the pictures look like the PCI-E versions, not AGP...




RE: the video cards
By judasmachine on 10/6/2006 2:56:32 PM , Rating: 2
I do believe those are PCI-E.


RE: the video cards
By Anh Huynh on 10/6/2006 3:04:11 PM , Rating: 2
Those are the only pictures Sapphire had up on its site for the cards :-\


AGP 7900GT!
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 2:54:02 PM , Rating: 2
I can always dream about it, can't I?




RE: AGP 7900GT!
By CKTurbo128 on 10/6/2006 3:33:35 PM , Rating: 2
It already exists:

http://www.mvktech.net/content/view/3368/39/
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?cati...
http://www.pureoverclock.com/story.php?id=665

Although it's labeled a 7800 GS, it's actually a 7900 GT on AGP, 24 pipes and 512 MB.


RE: AGP 7900GT!
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 3:50:40 PM , Rating: 3
not available in north america

next!


I think the info is off...
By Discord on 10/6/2006 6:05:39 PM , Rating: 2
The 1650pros are suppose to have 600/800 core/mem clock. I think you meant 790 MHz GDDR2.




RE: I think the info is off...
By Anh Huynh on 10/6/2006 6:52:22 PM , Rating: 2
That's what the Sapphire PR listed the specs as. Manufacturers are free to set their own clocks if i recall. And those specs might only be true for the PCI-E variants.


RE: I think the info is off...
By Discord on 10/6/2006 7:14:17 PM , Rating: 2
Probably a misprint on their part then, 700MHz GDDR3 doesn't make sense, unless it is actually 1400MHz memory. That would make this a pretty interesting product. Unfortunatly 400 and 500 MHz GDDR3 memory for the 1300 series doesn't make any sense at all so I doubt the 1650 is accurate.
Well I just checked their website and it says 450 core and 1300 memory for the 1650 pro PCIe version. They are really all over the place!


FANTASTIC
By lemonadesoda on 10/7/2006 7:40:45 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Other notable features include dual-link DVI and TV-out
The dual-link DVI will let me run a 30" Cinema display without having to buy a very very expensive FireGL X3.

Or run 2 x 1600x1200 displays both in DVI out. 2 x DVI out is very very rare on AGP.

Thanks Sapphire, but I'd still prefer an 1650XT version (or 1800GT) so that I could due purpose my workstation to after-work-gaming-machine.

Anyone know of benchmarks comparing X800 to X1650Pro to X1800GT?




Vista Ready ??
By Tedtalker1 on 10/6/06, Rating: -1
RE: Vista Ready ??
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 3:07:56 PM , Rating: 1
Funny how some idiots still persist Vista requires DX10


RE: Vista Ready ??
By armagedon on 10/6/2006 4:21:42 PM , Rating: 3
why do you have to treat the guy as an idiot just because he made a mistake ? You should be more sensible as there's a lot a stuff like all of us you don't know sh* about.


RE: Vista Ready ??
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 4:45:23 PM , Rating: 5
yeah I was too harsh, my apologies then. I just encountered third such comment in one day, and was a bit irritated by amount of people making such, uh, inappropriate comments, I mean it's a tech board so please go flood your nonsense into some general public forum where others also don't know $h1t about it... but anyway I shouldnt' have posted that - too bad one can't delete harsh posts here :\


RE: Vista Ready ??
By DigitalFreak on 10/6/2006 5:29:09 PM , Rating: 4
Because if you don't know what you're talking about, you should keep your mouth shut (or your hands off the keyboard). This world would be so much better off if everyone did that.


RE: Vista Ready ??
By armagedon on 10/6/2006 6:19:51 PM , Rating: 4
man i'm sure you're fun guys to be with. You're sure that you know everything and no on else should post here. I guess you are at the wrong place. It's not an expert tech discussion, it's an open forum on mostly technical news for anyone. Where you exchange ideas and LEARN from others while having fun and not being ridiculed.
I do participate on other technicals forums but i appreciate this one for it's freedom and some of the comments really crack me up and are so funny. Just read the next thread for a clue how to do it. But maybe you need to work on your personnality first.


RE: Vista Ready ??
By aGreenAgent on 10/6/2006 6:23:29 PM , Rating: 2
What does it matter what Vista can run? The point isn't that it won't work with Vista, but that Vista is trumpeting the new DX10 model, and companies are putting the Vista logo on a technology that is halfway through the out door.


RE: Vista Ready ??
By Pirks on 10/6/2006 6:36:36 PM , Rating: 2
there's a big difference between "trumpeting" and "requiring" and I like to bash people who don't have a clue about this difference. I know bashing is childish but sometimes I just can't hold off ;)


RE: Vista Ready ??
By Wwhat on 10/7/2006 9:40:33 AM , Rating: 1
I still say that if DX10 games arrive and people cannot play them on their VISTA-ready card they are right to feel duped, and I bet a class action suit would reach the courts too.
In effect DX10 cards are a requirement for vista because if you didn't want to play games you would not use windows but linux would you not.
I also like to point out that microsoft has a pdf for requirements for vista and they have several categories for readyness, I imagine the highest category will actually state a DX10 card is "required".


RE: Vista Ready ??
By Pirks on 10/7/2006 11:41:12 AM , Rating: 2
man, that's still your bright imagination only - it is NOT vista requiring DX10, it's GAMES requiring DX10. so technically you're wrong. you just lumped together words "vista" and "dx10 game" and then decided that they are equivalent. and if it was not enough you decided that MS somewhere in some mythical "requirements" does "require" dx10 for vista - unfortunately everything you say about this stuff is so far from reality I beginning to wonder why are you saying this in the first place?


RE: Vista Ready ??
By Wwhat on 10/7/2006 2:21:17 PM , Rating: 1
It seems to me it's you who are committed to sticking to your pedantic point too, did you get the pdf and check?
Yes vista works with DX9 cards, and XP works with DX7 cards, but it would be pathetic even for non-game use to use DX7 cards on XP nowadays.
Even if it were true that not even in microsoft's highest category they mentioned a DX10 card as required it's still required enough in practise once DX10 games are out, required to play DX10 games.



RE: Vista Ready ??
By Pirks on 10/7/2006 2:34:20 PM , Rating: 1
see, you just mentioned it yourself! you just said "_GAMES_ will require DX10" - bingo! this is what I was talking about from the beginning. now, there's a little additional point which finally decimates all your beautiful illusions - tell me please HOW MANY YEARS do you think it'll take until first DX10 ONLY game appears that DOES NOT WORK on DX9 hardware?

once you think about this little question and realize the answer - you'll finally laugh at what you've been thinking just 5 mins ago ;)


RE: Vista Ready ??
By Wwhat on 10/8/2006 1:05:32 PM , Rating: 1
The time it takes until games arrive is pretty much unkknown, I don't even know when microsoft released their DX10 information to developers, or how excited and eager they are, or which companies have how many people working on projects.
You know much of the development of games is the actuall modeling and mapping and you could certainly speed that up if you outsourced that to 500 people in india for instance, works for handmade carpets after all, if you could reduce that part of development the time can be reduced to 40% or even 30% of normal.
Then there's the famous rehash policy gamecompanies have, they could just take an old game, add some dx10 stuff and change the look a bit and rehash it as a new game.


RE: Vista Ready ??
By Pirks on 10/10/2006 2:21:12 PM , Rating: 2
which still makes number of DX10 ONLY (without ANY DX9 supoprt) titles precisely zero, for at least next year, which, in its turn, makes your claim "Vista requires DX10" even more ridiculous.

in fact, the situation is this: "there will be some games in near future which will work on both DX9 and DX10 hardware, and this will be THE ONLY thing that even touches DX10 for the next year"

measuring the distance between your claims and the assessmnet of the real situation with DX10 above is the exercise I leave to the readers of this thread.


RE: Vista Ready ??
By johnsonx on 10/6/2006 3:54:49 PM , Rating: 3
Funny how you don't know what you're talking about. At this point Vista Ready signifies two things for a video card:

1) It has driver support for Vista
2) It supports the Aero-Glass GUI

That's it. DX10 doesn't exist yet.


RE: Vista Ready ??
By Wwhat on 10/7/2006 10:03:54 AM , Rating: 2
Sure it doesn't exists, they are developing DX10 games in their minds eye are they? I'm impressed.


RE: Vista Ready ??
By Pirks on 10/7/2006 11:43:38 AM , Rating: 2
once you stop making notions of "game" and "vista" equivalent (please trust me - vista is an OPERATING SYSTEM, and it is _NOT_ a GAME) you'll suddenly realize the truth - just try this for a sec ;)


RE: Vista Ready ??
By Wwhat on 10/8/2006 12:59:55 PM , Rating: 2
Linux is an OS, windows is a game-shell.
(ok that was trolling a bit)


RE: Vista Ready ??
By Pirks on 10/10/2006 2:23:02 PM , Rating: 2
I hear the same shit from dozens of Mac morons beside me - it's actually true for some tasks, but not for everything, fortunately ;)


“So far we have not seen a single Android device that does not infringe on our patents." -- Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki