x1600pro

Joined
Feb 14, 2006
Messages
2
Hey guys, I was just wondering what you think of the x1600pro. im going to be replacing my x800xl soon, an i cna get the 1600pro for about 240. its a 512mb card so thats pretty apealing to me. But in comparison, some people are telling me to hold onto my 800xl with only 256mb. any input is gretly appreciated, thanks guys.
 
briancampisi said:
Hey guys, I was just wondering what you think of the x1600pro. im going to be replacing my x800xl soon, an i cna get the 1600pro for about 240. its a 512mb card so thats pretty apealing to me. But in comparison, some people are telling me to hold onto my 800xl with only 256mb. any input is gretly appreciated, thanks guys.
thats a horrible price for a 1600pro. the 512 of ram is useless on that level of card. the 1600pro and 1600xt are slower than a 6600gt in most games. the card you have now will blow away a 1600pro and a 1600xt so dont waste your money.
 
It'd only make sense if you planned to add a 2nd 1600 in x-fire, then it'd be a pretty good setup...But not worth the money really. Your x800xl will be about the same speed, so it'd be a sidways upgrade at best unless you were only playing FEAR, then you might see some small performance upgrades...Stick with your xl and save for an x1900, hopefully a non xt (ala the all in wonder) will be coming out in the $300 range sometime soon.
 
x1600 are low end cards, x800xl was mid range/high end. The only reason why you would want to upgrade to x1600 from x800xl is if you are going to do crossfire. otherwise your x800xl will outperform x1600 in most games, but you will get higher IQ, sms3.0, AVIVO and better shader performance with x1600. But the card ain't powerful enough to outperform your current one. if you want a performance bump get a x1800xl which can be found at $350 new, plus $240 for x1600pro is horrible price, they go for $150.
 
the 1600xt should perform on par with the x800xl and beat it in very shader intensive stuff. An x800xt or x850xt would easily beat a 1600xt, however. The 512mb cards are more than the regular x1600's, and would be a good x-fire setup with the extra ram, but still not worth the money imo.
 
bobzdar said:
the 1600xt should perform on par with the x800xl and beat it in very shader intensive stuff. An x800xt or x850xt would easily beat a 1600xt, however. The 512mb cards are more than the regular x1600's, and would be a good x-fire setup with the extra ram, but still not worth the money imo.
the x800xl beats the x1600xt in every benchmark i have seen. 512 does nothing for a card at that level. hell even 256 is not really needed on a card like an x1600pro. overall the 6600gt still beats those cards.
 
the x1600xt is actually a good bit faster than a 6600gt. However, stick with the x800xl. If your x800xl is dead go with a x850xt for $199, perf cant be beat for the price. If you like NV go with a 6800gs for about $180
 
arabdon1203 said:
the x1600xt is actually a good bit faster than a 6600gt. However, stick with the x800xl. If your x800xl is dead go with a x850xt for $199, perf cant be beat for the price. If you like NV go with a 6800gs for about $180
no its not. bf2 is the only game where the x1600xt has a much better performance. the 6600gt actually beats the x1600xt in MOST games even with aa and af. http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/radeon-x1600.html
 
arabdon1203 said:
Those were with old ass launch drivers, the 5.10s which had official (afaik) x1600 support didnt come out for a while later. Here's a much better example: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/games-2005.html It got completely murdered in bf2, cod2, fear, and splinter cell. The other games were near even, or the 6600gt when.
fair enough. the only benchmarks i had looked at were kinda old. that guy does need to stick with his x800xl.
 
Back
Top