which card is faster?

[AmongthechosenX]

From what I can tell, the X700 looks faster with more processing units inside it.

Opinions? I cant find any reviews comparing them directly, or even remotely.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

X700 Pro will have better pixel and texel fill rates, but the X1650 Pro wins in vertex operations and has significantly faster shader operations. Combine that with nearly double the memory bandwidth and I'd go with the X1650.

 

[AstroManLuca]

The closest comparison I could find was an old version of Tom's Hardware's VGA charts from 2005.

http://www.tomshardware.com/ch.../compare,628.html?prod[1749]=on?[1759]=on

This is a comparison of the X700 Pro 256MB and the X1600 Pro 256MB, so the numbers won't be exactly the same but they will be close. Overall it looks like the X1600 wins in most areas. When the X700 wins, it only wins by a little.

 

[PingSpike]

I believe the x700pro is roughly equal to a 9800pro.

 

[Golgatha]

Originally posted by: PingSpike
I believe the x700pro is roughly equal to a 9800pro.

The x1650 is SM 3.0 and the x700 pro isn't. A lot of modern games are going to need SM 3.0 to run. Unfortunately both of these cards are on legacy support from ATI, so Catalyst 9.3 is the last driver version to support either one.