A challenge to all your ATI fanboys out there making bold claims about the x1650XT.

[Eric_Cartman]

i have seen a few ati fanboys out there making claims that the x1650xt "owns" the 7600gt

specifically Zubasa, tkpenalty, and Formula350

all three have made bold claims about the x1650xt performance, but none have been able to produce a single shred of evidence

however, newtechie has produced 3dmark06 scores of a 7600gt breaking the 4100 mark

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1036399

yet none of you have managed to produce anything that even suggests the x1650xt is capable of that kind of score

a quick orb search turns up one x1650xt score over 4100, specifically 4124, but according to the title is it actually crossfired x1650xt, so it takes two of them to get that score:eek:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1233000

however a quick search of the orb turns up sli'd 7600gts scoring almost 9200 when paired with a great processor, but we have Formula350 saying he doesn't believe the 4100 that a single one is capable of scoring

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1267338

so i put out a challenge to you, show me the x1650xt significantly outscoring that 4100, or shut up because you are wrong and it is insulting to just keep saying someone else is wrong and not produce any evidence to back up your claim

[overclocker]

i have seen a few ati fanboys out there making claims that the x1650xt "owns" the 7600gt

specifically Zubasa, tkpenalty, and Formula350

all three have made bold claims about the x1650xt performance, but none have been able to produce a single shred of evidence

however, newtechie has produced 3dmark06 scores of a 7600gt breaking the 4100 mark

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1036399

yet none of you have managed to produce anything that even suggests the x1650xt is capable of that kind of score

a quick orb search turns up one x1650xt score over 4100, specifically 4124, but according to the title is it actually crossfired x1650xt, so it takes two of them to get that score:eek:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1233000

however a quick search of the orb turns up sli'd 7600gts scoring almost 9200 when paired with a great processor, but we have Formula350 saying he doesn't believe the 4100 that a single one is capable of scoring

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1267338

so i put out a challenge to you, show me the x1650xt significantly outscoring that 4100, or shut up because you are wrong and it is insulting to just keep saying someone else is wrong and not produce any evidence to back up your claim

haha yea right 2 x1650xt only getting 4100 in 06 i get 4600 with 2 x1600xt in 06 so its all false!

[Eric_Cartman]

haha yea right 2 x1650xt only getting 4100 in 06 i get 4600 with 2 x1600xt in 06 so its all false!

prove it

[overclocker]

hope this link works http://service.futuremark.com/orb/projectdetails.jsp?projectType=14

[Eric_Cartman]

no it doesn't work, save it and give a compare URL

[Formula350]

lol well, first off, I'm in no way a fanboy. If I had the money, I'd get an 8800 in a HEARTBEAT. I traded for my 1950 Pro, I didn't even buy it.

But fine, it can beat a 1650XT in 06 on default. Look what happens when the AA and AF are turned on.
http://www.trustedreviews.com/graphics/review/2007/03/14/Connect3D-X1650XT/p5
"In terms of raw performance the X1650 XT is a very worthy competitor to the 7600 GT and given its better texture filtering, its ability to process both HDR and AA simultaneously, and it's better connectivity options, I'd say it's the better choice of the two."

Only 200pnts behind it here w/o AA on.
http://www.adrenaline.com.br/hardware/placa_de_video/radeon_x1650xt/1/

100pnts behind. Notice the game below though, the GT getting smoked.
http://www.techspot.com/review/31-radeon-x1650xt-vs-geforce-7600gt/page2.html

Even steven again.
http://firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_radeon_x1650_xt_preview/page4.asp


Now maybe you know why everyone takes 06 benches with a grain of salt. It's a synthetic bench. Real world is where it matters. This is all I'm contributing to your silly pissing match lol

[overclocker]

ok i just took a pic i thought it would be easyer.

[Eric_Cartman]

lol well, first off, I'm in no way a fanboy. If I had the money, I'd get an 8800 in a HEARTBEAT. I traded for my 1950 Pro, I didn't even buy it.

But fine, it can beat a 1650XT in 06 on default. Look what happens when the AA and AF are turned on.
http://www.trustedreviews.com/graphics/review/2007/03/14/Connect3D-X1650XT/p5


Only 200pnts behind it here w/o AA on.
http://www.adrenaline.com.br/hardware/placa_de_video/radeon_x1650xt/1/

100pnts behind. Notice the game below though, the GT getting smoked.
http://www.techspot.com/review/31-radeon-x1650xt-vs-geforce-7600gt/page2.html

Even steven again.
http://firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_radeon_x1650_xt_preview/page4.asp


Now maybe you know why everyone takes 06 benches with a grain of salt. It's a synthetic bench. Real world is where it matters. This is all I'm contributing to your silly pissing match lol

yes, the x1650xt can match the very stock 7600gt, too bad the 7600gt overclocks like crazy and the x1650xt can't overclock worth a damn(according to newtechie), i said they trade blows back and forth before, however i want proof to back up the claims that the x1650xt is actually substantially better and worth paying a price premium for

i'll take some quotes from your own source:

It is quite clear that the X1650 XT is a good match for the reference 7600 GT but it consistently falls behind the over-clocked version.

The X1650 XT isn't really fast enough to run HDR and AA together, unless you drop resolutions heavily...

ok i just took a pic i thought it would be easyer.

easier, but still not useful, we can't confirm resolution etc from a picture like that

[overclocker]

argh lol how do you do it your way then ?

[Eric_Cartman]

create an account on futuremarks site and save the results, there will be a compare url for the results, give us that

[Jimmy 2004]

I found this:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1233000

Don't have a clue which is better myself, just thought I'd contribute to the debate :)

[pt]

ther 7600gt is between a x1650xt and the x1800gto

[overclocker]

ok maybe this link will work http://service.futuremark.com/orb/projectdetails.jsp?projectType=14

[Eric_Cartman]

nope, that is not a compare url

look at some of the ones already posted here, notice at the top section of the page it says the compare url, give us that

[Eric_Cartman]

http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2864&p=1

there is some more x1650xt info, like i already said, the cards trade blows back and forth

the x1650xt certainly doesn't perform any significant amount better than the 7600gt in general at stock like some have claimed

and the x1650xt does cost more than the 7600gt, at least in america it does, i would expect that price premium to mean it would perform better, it doesn't

[overclocker]

yo i think i got the right link this time :) http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1334010

[mrbudgie]

heres what my x1600xt's in crossfire get

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showpost.php?p=201518&postcount=449

[Solaris17]

ok comparisons amazing was thinking of getting a 7600 myself but i dont want this fanboy stuff. in my opinion comparisons asking for proof are good its better for ppl looking for something good to buy however harassment wont stand and dont get me wrong i havent seen much other than fan boyism but i dont want to see any at all......but anyway excellent.

[Eric_Cartman]

i can't tell if you are with me calling them fanboys solaris or not:confused:

x1600xts in crossfire scoring 4600 is nice, and it shows that x1650xts in crossfire are capable of scoring higher than the 4100, however it doesn't really help the original topic at hand

no one has yet to show me a x1650xt scoring over 4100 by a significant amount to warrant the statements that the x1650xt is a lot better than a 7600gt or that the x1650xt "owns" the 7600gt

[Solaris17]

as in one instance of ppl calling ppl fan boys excellent thread but lets keep that to a minimum

[Eric_Cartman]

as in one instance of ppl calling ppl fan boys excellent thread but lets keep that to a minimum

ah, so calling them fanboys is bad, but calling them out and asking for proof to back up their claims is good

Got ya:toast:

[mrbudgie]

my x1600xt's in crossfire get 5597 so the x1650xt's in crossfire should pack a much better puch

[Eric_Cartman]

ok, enough

i don't care what your x1600xt's score in 3dmark06, i don't care that x1650xts "should" score higher

the fact still is that the only score i could find for x1650xt's in crossfire was 4100, but you are all seem to think that is my point, it isn't, so get off it

i only put it on there because that was the only score for x1650xts that even came close to 4100 in the orb

the fact of the matter is that crossfire in general is very picky, just having a poor motherboard can drastically affect performance, and frankly any motherboard that doesn't have a 3200 chipset usually sucks in terms of crossfire performance

if you aren't going to contribute anything to the thread that shows a x1650xt drastically outperforms a 7600gt, i don't want to hear it

all your x1600xt scores are useless and just taking up space, this isn't a discussion about x1600xts

[mrbudgie]

Your about as friendly as a fart in a space suit i see, like you said its a discusion so why moan when people "Discus" lol :banghead:

[pt]

Your about as friendly as a fart in a space suit i see, like you said its a discusion so why moan when people "Discus" lol :banghead:

can't stop laughing on that one :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[Formula350]

Your about as friendly as a fart in a space suit i see, like you said its a discusion so why moan when people "Discus" lol :banghead:

hahah He's just living up to this Forum Name. I'm sure he's just putting on a show to get some peoples panties in a bunch ;P

(I said I wouldn't reply, but this isn't contributing to the topic! :toast:)

[overclocker]

o and by the way who cares is the x1650xt or the 7600 is faster i know i dont unless your buying one lets not start flaming here play nice guys :)

[Eric_Cartman]

o and by the way who cares is the x1650xt or the 7600 is faster i know i dont unless your buying one lets not start flaming here play nice guys :)

i care because i don't like being called a liar by people that can't back up their BS claims

[overclocker]

ok here this is what i found i really dont care witch of the two is faster but it looks like the 1650xt is a bit faster (not a lot faster a bit) http://www.techspot.com/review/31-radeon-x1650xt-vs-geforce-7600gt/page3.html

[psychomage343]

that's not a valid claim in that last link, those games have always run better on ati cards, and that's a known fact. here is my 2 cents, for one i've owned both cards, 2 x1650xt's in crossfire, and 2 7600gt's in sli, each i've tried in the past in single card and cross/sli and i've notice their performance increases. i would have to say on the level the 7600gt especially the oc version eats an x1650xt for breakfast, the performance is just better, not to mention that sli seems to run a bit better for me, i'll see if i can dig up some old benchies, i can't believe i didn't forsee this day coming, i had all the benches lol

[overclocker]

that's not a valid claim in that last link, those games have always run better on ati cards, and that's a known fact. here is my 2 cents, for one i've owned both cards, 2 x1650xt's in crossfire, and 2 7600gt's in sli, each i've tried in the past in single card and cross/sli and i've notice their performance increases. i would have to say on the level the 7600gt especially the oc version eats an x1650xt for breakfast, the performance is just better, not to mention that sli seems to run a bit better for me, i'll see if i can dig up some old benchies, i can't believe i didn't forsee this day coming, i had all the benches lol

are you running the x1650xts on a 3200 chipset ? if not thats y the 7600 sli kills them

[Eric_Cartman]

Your about as friendly as a fart in a space suit i see, like you said its a discusion so why moan when people "Discus" lol :banghead:

i don't remember saying this was a discussion, where did i say that?

i do remember saying this was not a discussion about x1600xts

ok here this is what i found i really dont care witch of the two is faster but it looks like the 1650xt is a bit faster (not a lot faster a bit) http://www.techspot.com/review/31-radeon-x1650xt-vs-geforce-7600gt/page3.html

fomula350 already posted that, that seems to be the only thing anyone can find, and it really only shows that the cards are pretty equal at stock, it doesn't touch on the overclocking potential of either card, or how they perform when overclocked

[raymerjacques]

i have seen a few ati fanboys out there making claims that the x1650xt "owns" the 7600gt

specifically Zubasa, tkpenalty, and Formula350

all three have made bold claims about the x1650xt performance, but none have been able to produce a single shred of evidence

however, newtechie has produced 3dmark06 scores of a 7600gt breaking the 4100 mark

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1036399

yet none of you have managed to produce anything that even suggests the x1650xt is capable of that kind of score

a quick orb search turns up one x1650xt score over 4100, specifically 4124, but according to the title is it actually crossfired x1650xt, so it takes two of them to get that score:eek:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1233000

however a quick search of the orb turns up sli'd 7600gts scoring almost 9200 when paired with a great processor, but we have Formula350 saying he doesn't believe the 4100 that a single one is capable of scoring

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1267338

so i put out a challenge to you, show me the x1650xt significantly outscoring that 4100, or shut up because you are wrong and it is insulting to just keep saying someone else is wrong and not produce any evidence to back up your claim

well, either way, with ATI you atleast have a more functional card in windows vista. Hardly anything works with nvidia .... I know, i own both ....

[Eric_Cartman]

well, either way, with ATI you atleast have a more functional card in windows vista. Hardly anything works with nvidia .... I know, i own both ....

that really depends on what ati card you actually have, my x300 is barely functional under vista

both companies vista drivers are in the toilet right now

[overclocker]

ok so we have come to the fact that the 7600gt is a faster card wen overclocked .

[raymerjacques]

No, you were comparing the 7600gt and the X1650XT, not the x300.

ATI has more features working in vista, so my point was that even if the 7600gt scores a few extra marks in the benchmark programs ( which i highly doubt will be the case in vista due to nvidia drivers being so shit in vista at the moment. ) I would still take the ATI anyday because it runs smoother in vista. there is no ETA date on when nvidia will be releasing bug fixes for vista, and to be honest not even their nvidia menu is functioning properly at the moment, so chances are good that you will have to wait for a chain of patches for their drivers to be anywhere near as stable as ATI's is at the moment.

Fact is that nvidia started vista support way after ATI did, they waited too long. so your benchmarks actualy mean crap right now, whatever you scored in XP, y7ou will not get the same results in vista, probly not even close, whereas ATI cards will probly get higher FPS in vista, you get my point .... ?

[Eric_Cartman]

you are wrong, look around, even with the missing functions, the performance of the nvidia cards in vista are not really affected

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2096941,00.asp

read that, performance wise the difference with nvidia(and ati) is there when going from XP to Vista and both companies suffer from the problem, not just nvidia

so a faster card in xp will be faster in vista just the same

[Formula350]

i don't remember saying this was a discussion, where did i say that?

i do remember saying this was not a discussion about x1600xts



fomula350 already posted that, that seems to be the only thing anyone can find, and it really only shows that the cards are pretty equal at stock, it doesn't touch on the overclocking potential of either card, or how they perform when overclocked


*sigh* I can't resist. You can't ask for proof on something, expect people to converse, and it not be a discussion.

So far you've got Eric Cartmen pretty well pegged. You're an ass, and not that bright :) Are you fat by any chance, I mean, Big Boned? :slap:

[Formula350]

that's not a valid claim in that last link, those games have always run better on ati cards, and that's a known fact. here is my 2 cents, for one i've owned both cards, 2 x1650xt's in crossfire, and 2 7600gt's in sli, each i've tried in the past in single card and cross/sli and i've notice their performance increases. i would have to say on the level the 7600gt especially the oc version eats an x1650xt for breakfast, the performance is just better, not to mention that sli seems to run a bit better for me, i'll see if i can dig up some old benchies, i can't believe i didn't forsee this day coming, i had all the benches lol


I assume you didn't run Crossfire on your Asus. If so, I'd love to know how you did that, so I can get another 1950 Pro :)

[overclocker]

ok this is kinda getting out of hand here we dont want eny members to get banned.

[GREASEMONKEY]

Kinda like,whats faster,a pinto or a vega?

[raymerjacques]

you are wrong, look around, even with the missing functions, the performance of the nvidia cards in vista are not really affected

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2096941,00.asp

read that, performance wise the difference with nvidia(and ati) is minimual when going from XP to Vista and both companies suffer from the problem

lol, try vista for yourself, don't go read a few benchmarking topics. i already told you i own both, nvidia and ATI cards. i was a big Nvidia fan till vista came along, since vista i have had nothing but problems with nvidia, alot of compatibility issues, alot of video playback issues, FTW, not even the TV settings on their menu is working ....

My ATI is working flawlessly, few minor issues yes, but nothing near the crap i am having with the nvidia card. even my OpenGL is working Great in vista, nvidia are still suffering from major opengl issues ...

You missing my whole point.

you are argueing among one another about a few fps, one card gets for example 90fps, the other 88fps. Does it really matter ? you can play the game equally smooth on both cards ...

BUT , one card has more functionality in Vista, and this is what really matter right now more than FPS or benchmark scores..... and i am sorry to say that ati is in the lead there, they may still also have issues, but nowhere near as much as nvidia....

[Eric_Cartman]

you are missing the point, people are making huge claims about the x1650xt performing a lot better than the 7600gt without backing them up, no one has yet to manage to back them up

i am not arguing that the 7600gt is better than the x1650xt, when did i ever directly say that?

i am just trying to get the few people making huge claims about the x1650xt's performance(and the 7600gts performance) to either prove it or shut it

i want zubasa to prove that a 2100 on an x1650pro is "BS" and that the x1650pro is capable of a lot more than that
i want tkpenalty to pove that "the X1650XT outperforms the 7600GT 24/7"
i want formula350 to prove that a 7600gt is incapable of scoring 4100 in 3dmark06

[Ketxxx]

i have seen a few ati fanboys out there making claims that the x1650xt "owns" the 7600gt

specifically Zubasa, tkpenalty, and Formula350

all three have made bold claims about the x1650xt performance, but none have been able to produce a single shred of evidence

however, newtechie has produced 3dmark06 scores of a 7600gt breaking the 4100 mark

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1036399

yet none of you have managed to produce anything that even suggests the x1650xt is capable of that kind of score

a quick orb search turns up one x1650xt score over 4100, specifically 4124, but according to the title is it actually crossfired x1650xt, so it takes two of them to get that score:eek:

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1233000

however a quick search of the orb turns up sli'd 7600gts scoring almost 9200 when paired with a great processor, but we have Formula350 saying he doesn't believe the 4100 that a single one is capable of scoring

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=1267338

so i put out a challenge to you, show me the x1650xt significantly outscoring that 4100, or shut up because you are wrong and it is insulting to just keep saying someone else is wrong and not produce any evidence to back up your claim

Do NOT let me catch you attacking other members directly like this again. Perhaps the reason no scores were posted is because scores are so abundant, HERE (http://www.legitreviews.com/article/411/8/) is the first result google come up with.

[raymerjacques]

if you want to know which is better go look here :

http://www.techspot.com/review/31-radeon-x1650xt-vs-geforce-7600gt/

Techspot has a really good reputation for giving fair and accurate results. and as you can see the X1650XT outperforms the 7600gt by quite a bit....

[LiNKiN]

And there ya have it folks, the new Featherwieght Champion of the World......KETXXX!!! BTW, how is your jaw Ket?

[Ketxxx]

Is doing ok now ta linkin :D bit stiff, but apart from that is all good :cool: whats wth the whole featherweight thing? lol

[zekrahminator]

i care because i don't like being called a liar by people that can't back up their BS claims

You sound like someone who isn't properly acquainted with the forum moderators, who's job it is to protect you from garbage like that. PM me with all your complaints, including flaming, BS claims, and insults, and I shall endeavor to ensure that justice will be served.

However, fighting isn't going to solve any problems....it sure didn't for Alecstar. Consider this your warning.

[Eric_Cartman]

Do NOT let me catch you attacking other members directly like this again. Perhaps the reason no scores were posted is because scores are so abundant, HERE (http://www.legitreviews.com/article/411/8/) is the first result google come up with.

whatever, scores weren't posted because the scores to back up their claims don't exist, even the ones you posted don't even come close to backing up any of their claims

i'm calling them out because they are by far the worst ati biased memebers i have seen so far on this site, and they have yet to post anything backing up what they say, which is something they should do with they are directly opposing something else that was already said

You sound like someone who isn't properly acquainted with the forum moderators, who's job it is to protect you from garbage like that. PM me with all your complaints, including flaming, BS claims, and insults, and I shall endeavor to ensure that justice will be served.

However, fighting isn't going to solve any problems....it sure didn't for Alecstar. Consider this your warning.

i'll get on that pm right now

[Ketxxx]

I gave you the first google link and liked direct to the 06 page, if you want to get petty, heres a few snippets to swallow.

"(at stock) 3D Mark still says that 7600 GT is the leader with a 323 point advantage. In terms of actual frame rates it would like be impossible to pick out the difference between the two."

"X1650XT CF results: 5640" Somewhat higher than that 4100pts you claim.
Closest compare: 7600GS SLi: 4195pts

As for your attitude, one single foot out of line and even I will report you, your clearly an obnoxious, rude, patronising character. Or, depending on what happens, I'll deal with you myself as a mod. I've seen a lot of dodgy happenings and I for one intend to make sure those situations do not arise.

[rhythmeister]

that really depends on what ati card you actually have, my x300 is barely functional under vista

both companies vista drivers are in the toilet right now

I think I have to disagree here, I have zero problems running CSS, DoD, Dark messiah of might and magic or Stalker with the recent ati Vista drivers but many people seem to want to strangle Nvidia collectively due to lack of support.

Furthermore, a quote from trusted reviews on the very cards we're "discussing":

"Thankfully for this new Radeon, the competition overclocks just as poorly, as our 7600GT only accepted a 35MHz core frequency injection", that was compared to the x1650xt's 45Mhz overclock!
More words of wisdom backing up the x1650, "...Radeon X1650XT is everything the original X1600XT should have been with performance at least on par, and usually greater than the GeForce 7600GT. The newer more demanding games such as F.E.A.R and X3: Reunion were the X1650XT specialties, as the additional pixel pipelines really came into play in these games". ;)

It appears that the 7600GT is good at getting numbers on benchmarks but in the GAMES that we are buying the cards to play them with the x1650xt seems to be the better choice!

I'm looking forward to my 3700 arriving so I can get around 2.7GHz and try and get near that 4100 point score in my retro mobo, even if I can only run a max res' of 1280x768!

Oh, and I'm not an ati fanboi, I'm a BIG fan of the NForce2 onboard GeForce 4 which allowed me to play CoD, UT2004, Q3 AND 4 (remarkably) etc. I don't think an x300 would even withstand that sort of a beating :respect:

[Eric_Cartman]

I gave you the first google link and liked direct to the 06 page, if you want to get petty, heres a few snippets to swallow.

"(at stock) 3D Mark still says that 7600 GT is the leader with a 323 point advantage. In terms of actual frame rates it would like be impossible to pick out the difference between the two."

"X1650XT CF results: 5640" Somewhat higher than that 4100pts you claim.
Closest compare: 7600GS SLi: 4195pts

As for your attitude, one single foot out of line and even I will report you, your clearly an obnoxious, rude, patronising character. Or, depending on what happens, I'll deal with you myself as a mod. I've seen a lot of dodgy happenings and I for one intend to make sure those situations do not arise.

again the 4100 claim for the crossfired x1650xts were simply the only orb result i could fine for an x1650xt that even came close to that score, i'll admit right now that after seeing some more things that score is low for crossfired x1650xts, but that doesn't really help the discussion any

[rhythmeister]

Wow, this all went a bit mad when I was reading that review and typing that last message! Will Cartman get killed this time instead of Kenny? :D

[Formula350]

It appears that the 7600GT is good at getting numbers on benchmarks but in the GAMES that we are buying the cards to play them with the x1650xt seems to be the better choice!

lol That's exactly what I said, and he just blew it off. I also said thats why people don't pay much mind to 3DMark scores since they're synthetic. Sure looks pretty though lol Wait... I see a similarity brewing here... Has something to do with silicone not being as good as the real thing. (For those who don't follow: Synthetic vs Real Gaming)

Also, I got a 10 Point deduction, from ... whatever it is? Am I winning at the internet and have the high score? And for being 'bad' do you remove points from it to knock me from the High Score list? :O It's OK, I've been playing the Internet since 1994, I have enough points to last me a couple life times. They're still using the old school 3-Character High Score entry system though, I'm CMS is you're curious! lol

[zekrahminator]

I should have locked this thread a LONG time ago. We don't go about calling people fanboys, Eric. It just gets people angry, and getting people angry falls under the category of "trolling".