X700 256MB compared to a 9800 Pro 128MB

[edmundoab]

Hello fellas

As I could not advise my friend well enough on this decision
I wonder if u guys could help out

He saw an add that has a X700 AGP 256MB for sale, 128-bit mem interface but has 400Mhz Core with 500Mhz RAM

in contrast with the 9800 Pro AGP 128MB 256-bit mem interface and no core and mem speed stated
but I believe it should be the suggested ATI Spec

if both retail cards were the same price,
which would be a better buy?

 

[edmundoab]

bump, any suggestions?

 

[n7]

Meh, i'd take the 9800 Pro.

I have this feeling that 128-bit will majorly cripple the X700, & the 256 MB it has is a waste.

 

[videoclone]

In this case take the 9800Pro .. BUT if it was a X700Pro with GDDR3 then go for that and overclock.

A Geforce 6600GT would be the best but if its not an option then 9800Pro

6600GT>X700Pro>9800Pro(256bit)>X700

Just remember the X700Pro is on a 0.13nm core compared with the 9800Pro on a 0.15nm core and its Default core is 425Mhz ... but with only 128bit memory it does have a hard time at higher rez but still woops the 9800Pro .. But not the X700 just avoid that

At the end of the day the X700 X700Pro and 9800Pro are all crap when compared to the Geforce 6600GT .. In the latest anandtech Review the 6600GT is even wooping the X1600XT

Now that shows how good it is... and one of the reason's why ATI released the X800GT - GTO - GT02 ( 256bit )

 

[edmundoab]

ahh makes alot of sense now,
yeah I felt the 128 bit does damage somewhat

and I did suggest the 9800 pro
but thanks for reconfirming it

I'll see if he would wanna fork out more money for the X700 Pro 128MB
but it comes with 800 Mhz of RAM


maybe a little out of budget, who knows =)

 

[videoclone]

Stick with the 9800Pro if the price is right.

I have a friend with a Geforce4ti4200 and he gets twice as many frames in almost all games then my friend with a 6600GT all because he hase a faster CPU

Athlon64 3200+ 939 with Geforce4ti4200 = 40-75 FPS in Counter-Strike Source
VS
AthlonXP 2700+ Geforce 6600GT = 9-35 FPS in Counter-Strike Source
VS

That second friend saw this and upgraded his CPU to the same A64 3200+ and now he gets 60-130 FPS in Counter-Strike Source

CPU also helps games allot not just a videocard upgrade.

 

[edmundoab]

yeah agree with that,
however I doubt he is going for the A64 just yet
sticking with the Barton 2500+

 

[JPB]

http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=96&card2=31

 

[edmundoab]

thanks for the helpful link

but this is contradicting with the previous 2 people who mentioned about X700 < 9800 Pro
? any explaination to the 3dMark score higher then 9800 Pro?

 

[JPB]

Probably the fill rate from the higher core and GDDR3....You could probably score that same score with a 9800 Pro overclocked

Here is another helpful link...

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:eTz...m/chare/video.htm+x850+pro+specs&hl=en

 

[edmundoab]

and best thing is, the mem speed is only 350 Mhz while the one I saw on sale is like 500Mhz
of course, its gotta be some taiwanese board maker and not sapphire or something that I've heard off

 

[1Dark1Sharigan1]

Originally posted by: edmundoab
and best thing is, the mem speed is only 350 Mhz while the one I saw on sale is like 500Mhz
of course, its gotta be some taiwanese board maker and not sapphire or something that I've heard off

A Taiwanese board maker? You mean like Powercolor, Asus or MSI? Sapphire is based in Hong Kong I believe . . .

 

[1Dark1Sharigan1]

yeah a 9800 Pro should definitely do better with AA due to it's higher mem bandwidth over the X700. When comparing 128MB vs. 256MB bandwidth wins over framebuffer size in general . . .

 

[edmundoab]

Not even close to that of Asus and Powercolor standards

I think its called

GrandMars, heard of it?