Visiontek releases X1300 256MB PCI
Anh Tuan Huynh
September 2, 2006 3:45 AM
comment(s) - last by
No we didn't forget the "e", it is actually PCI
released the first PCI graphics card since the NVIDIA GeForce FX5200 and ATI Radeon 9250 was available in PCI
. The new
VisionTek Radeon X1300 256MB PCI
provides users that lack AGP or PCI Express expansion capabilities with a new upgrade path. Based on the ATI Radeon X1300 graphics processor, the VisionTek Radeon X1300 256MB PCI features four pixel shaders and two vertex shaders. It also features a 450 MHz core and 533 MHz memory clock.
Features such as ATI’s AVIVO video processing is also supported with the VisionTek Radeon X1300 256MB PCI. Output capabilities of the VisionTek Radeon X1300 256MB PCI include VGA d-sub, dual-link DVI-I and TV-out. Component HDTV, S-Video and composite video out capabilities are supported, though a separate cable or adapter is required. VisionTek does not bundle the required TV-out adapters or cables.
The VisionTek Radeon X1300 256MB PCI is available immediately from online and bricks and mortar retailers for $129.99.
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
9/2/2006 3:15:29 PM
Well the issue here isn't the memory size (which I agree is typically misleading - and intentionally so - to/for the consumer), but the memory interface. Anybody here know of a discreet comparison between two otherwise identical cards with the same total memory, but for which one has - say, a 128bit memory interface but for which the othe has 256? Tom's hardware seems to think that it's this statistic which is more telling than the memory size per se (though of course clock rate and memory type have substantial and concretely observable effects), but I've yet to see an incisive comparrison of their individual effects.
Just out of curiosity, of course.
know that the prinicpal determinant of 3D rendering quality is whether or not your motherboard uses all solid state capacitors. (kidding! kidding!)
9/2/2006 5:02:46 PM
memory bandwidth matters a lot, and doubling the width is probably more effective than doubling the mhz due to relaxed timings.
the best comparison i can think of is 7600GS and 6800GS. both have similar fillrate numbers (being 12 pipes, and 400 mhz and 425 mhz respectively.) and the GS has 100 mhz faster memory. but it's memory is also 256 bit. so, it gets 25% more bandwidth from the clocks, and 100% more bandwidth from the width. so it is 32 GB/sec compared to 12 GB/sec. and so the 7600GS performs about as well at a 6600GT, which the GS kills.
"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot
"Prepare to be Punished": Microsoft is Killing OneDrive With Cuts, Blames Users
November 3, 2015, 8:23 PM
Apple's New "Magic" Peripheral Line Packs High Tech, High Prices
October 13, 2015, 9:39 PM
Samsung Adds 2 TB 850 EVO, PRO SSDs for $800, $1000
July 7, 2015, 4:23 PM
Seagate Senior Researcher: Heat Can Kill Data on Stored SSDs
May 13, 2015, 2:49 PM
How to Recover Most Apps After Your NVIDIA Driver Crashes in Windows 10
March 30, 2015, 12:54 PM
Tinkerer Gets Old School Mac Plus Running on the Modern Web
March 24, 2015, 6:41 PM
Latest Blog Posts
Sceptre Airs 27", 120 Hz. 1080p Monitor/HDTV w/ 5 ms Response Time for $220
Dec 3, 2014, 10:32 PM
Costco Gives Employees Thanksgiving Off; Wal-Mart Leads "Black Thursday" Charge
Oct 29, 2014, 9:57 PM
"Bear Selfies" Fad Could Turn Deadly, Warn Nevada Wildlife Officials
Oct 28, 2014, 12:00 PM
The Surface Mini That Was Never Released Gets "Hands On" Treatment
Sep 26, 2014, 8:22 AM
ISIS Imposes Ban on Teaching Evolution in Iraq
Sep 17, 2014, 5:22 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information