ATI x1650 vs. x1950

djvabc · Post by **djvabc** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 8:12 pm

I'm in the market for a new card for my D975XBX2 board. The PC will primarily be used for Photoshop and home video editing, but when it comes to games it will be used for some newer flight sims. I have focused on these two because I can get a nice discount. The price difference is about $70.

Any inputs would be appreciated.
Thanks!

cyberneticimplant · Post by **cyberneticimplant** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:03 pm

I personally think it is worth paying a little extra for the X1950Pro if you run games. Especially if you plan to run Flight Simulator X.

hainer36 · Post by **hainer36** » Sun Feb 11, 2007 10:47 pm

there would be no compairison between the 2, the extra 70 bucks is well worth it, go with the X1950

Post by **Apoptosis** » Mon Feb 12, 2007 6:14 am

I'd go with the 8800GTS 320M card for under $299

djvabc · Post by **djvabc** » Mon Feb 12, 2007 10:09 am

Thanks for the inputs so far.

Apoptosis, thanks a lot for introducing a new card in the mix!

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814195024
Neweggs sells this ATI x1950 for $389 so it's a great deal at $220. Is the nVidia card that much better?

BTW, every time I see your handle my tongue gets twisted!

cyberneticimplant · Post by **cyberneticimplant** » Mon Feb 12, 2007 7:50 pm

Are you referring to this X1950XTX?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814195025

For $220, that's an AMAZING deal.

Toebot · Post by **Toebot** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 11:34 am

I have a X1650XT and I can't wholeheartedly recommend it as a gaming card, even a light gaming card. Since I'm limited to 1280 resolution it does an adequate job, but newer games really take a hit when all the eye candy is turned on. I'd say the card is more at home in a HTPC, it's quiet and doesn't require allot of power.

dgood · Post by **dgood** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:28 pm

the x1950 is a better card tahn teh x1650 but you'll see a good card in the x1650 still I have an x1600xt and Its running almost all games on medium-high settings hell we maxed out counterstirke source at resolutions higher than 1600x1200 and still had decently playable framerates. so only the newest games would it not be great for in comparison.

Azndude51 · Post by **Azndude51** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:14 pm

What resolution will you be gaming with?

djvabc · Post by **djvabc** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:33 pm

The higher end board is the X1950 XTX.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814195024

I'm not sure what resolutions I'll be running on games, but it will be with Combat Flight Sim3.

Thanks for the inputs.

R3N3G4D3 · Post by **R3N3G4D3** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 6:02 pm

I agree with Apoptosis, 8800GTS 320MB is a DX10 card, X1950 isn't. Combine that with the fact that it's $100 cheaper and that alone makes it worth buying. The 8800GTS 320MB review from a few days ago really shows its power: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/459/1/

InsolenceAndHeresy · Post by **InsolenceAndHeresy** » Fri Feb 16, 2007 6:26 pm

But if you're planning on a switch to Vista anytime soon, nVidia's got hella problems with Vista drivers, so hold off a bit.

Jejking · Post by **Jejking** » Sun Feb 18, 2007 1:59 pm

I think you should grab a ATi X1950GT/ X1950Pro, it is powerful enough for the games of today and not so powerhungry as a nVidia 8800. You should make the shift when DX10 is mainstream

snowking03 · Post by **snowking03** » Sun Feb 18, 2007 2:45 pm

Jejking wrote:I think you should grab a ATi X1950GT/ X1950Pro, it is powerful enough for the games of today and not so powerhungry as a nVidia 8800. You should make the shift when DX10 is mainstream

Yes, but buying another card when dx10 goes mainstream is ridiculous, I see it as upgrading now rather than in a year or so.

It's just a superior card in all respects.

InsolenceAndHeresy · Post by **InsolenceAndHeresy** » Sun Feb 18, 2007 3:35 pm

DX10 isn't going mainstream anytime soon. AAAANNNYYYY TTIMMMEEEEE SOOOOON.

Vrbas · Post by **Vrbas** » Mon May 28, 2007 12:02 am

i agree w/ heresy. DX10 is having some stability issues, as is Vista. It's gonna be months at the earliest before they can stabilize both of them to the point where they are "mainstream". Even then they aren't going to "forget" previous operating systems and DX versions.

Plus, the operating systems like XP aren't going to become obsolete just b/c of Vista. At least not this early. Just b/c Vista is brand new doesn't necessarily make XP old. I've also heard of many stability issues with Vista, even trying to run current games (if you ask me, i think XP is more stable than Vista, not that windows is that stable to begin w/, but still). So i wouldn't worry about them "leaving us behind" (by "us" i mean those that have decent rigs but may not be up to par w/ all this brand new technology) and looking on the side of a new PC game box only to read "Requires DX10/Vista", it's gonna be a while.

brites · Post by **brites** » Mon May 28, 2007 6:09 am

If you are planing to use FSX then none of these would do the work... if palying with good game defs... by the way... FSX is trully a frame sucker because a QX+GTX with almost MAX definitions does in average 25-27 frames... but for now the 1950pro is the choice