*GASP* X1600XT finally sighted in etail

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: rmed64
This is the Powercolor version and costs $179

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814131317

Damn nice, thats $71 below MSRP.

In the uk its available for the same price as the 6600GT which is where it becomes a good deal. Hope it hits the same price levels in the US soon.

 

[rmed64]

actually, according to the INQ, ATI lowered the msrp of 256MB X1600XT to $199, so its 20 bux under msrp

 

[secretanchitman]

i'd like to see cards actually come out the day they're announced...or at least announce the card(s) the day you actually HAVE them.

but anyways, no point in getting this card, when theres a 6800GS to be had...and someone earlier said the x800gto/gto2 would blow this away as well!

 

[RobertR1]

Lame duck.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Cooler
ATI 1
Paper Launch 0

Denial 1
Cooler 0

 

[deepred98]

wow nvidia is really spanking ATI lately

 

[rbV5]

Is there a cheaper card with Dual/Dual link DVI? Looks like a decent card at $179 if you can take advantage of the features that are available.

It doesn't require a Master card for Crossfire either, I wonder how a couple of these perform?

 

[johnnqq]

i wonder if the 7600gt will be competitive with the 6800gs...maybe that's why it isn't released yet!

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: Deception

What are you talking about?

This product is considered a paper launch, because it was reviewed before the item was found in retail/e-tail channels. Compare this to the 7800 lineup, which is a hard launch because it was available for sale the day reviews appeared.

Let's re-tally the score, shall we?

ATI 0
Paper Launch 10,000

Deception

The X1600XT was for sale, on and before the Dec. 1 relesae date. Just not in the US. Typically the US gets things first, this time it didnt. It was avail in Greece, Finland and others before Dec. 1. You dont really think the 7800 line was available world-wide on the same day do you?

Originally posted by: Sunrise089

Originally posted by: Cooler
ATI 1
Paper Launch 0

Paper launch ZERO???

X1800XT

X800XT-PE

Crossfire everything

the list goes on and on

The X800XT/PE is well documented, and old news. Why even try and bring the X1800XT into the paper launch realm? It was available before the release date, and on the release date in a retail store, CompUSA.

The 512MB GTX too was available a few days before the release date. However, its virtually out of stock everywhere right now, and has been. If you're going to slam the XT/PE for being a "paper launch", then you need to call the 512MB the same. As it was launched, with very few cards, and other than a few card, hasnt been seen since. Its not even listed on CompUSA's website.

Once again people, lets try and be a little more logical, and not so bias.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Lord Banshee

Originally posted by: munky
This card isnt worth getting for any price > $150. Most of the time it's on the same performance level as a 6600gt. IMO, what's crippling the card is it's 4 texture units, and the 128-bit bus - in that order. So in games that do not have a 3:1 shader/texture op ratio, this card becomes limited by it's 4 TMU's.

wow this sounds really close to what killed the GeforceFX series.. Did they have 4x2 style pipeline config, where when a game did not use that config and had something x1 (i think textures) it would only use 4 pipe and the 9700 had the 8x1 config which killed it.

Is this the same thing or close, and if so you would think ATI would have learned from Nvidia mistake.

I was thinking something along those lines. Basically it has 12 pixel shaders, but only 4 texture units. So in a worst case scenario it will behave like a 4 pipe card. This does remind me of the FX cards. It may not be as infamous and disapointing as the 5800u (since this is only a midrange card and no leafblower), but likewise it may soon be replaced with a more "balanced" gpu.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: Deception

What are you talking about?

This product is considered a paper launch, because it was reviewed before the item was found in retail/e-tail channels. Compare this to the 7800 lineup, which is a hard launch because it was available for sale the day reviews appeared.

Let's re-tally the score, shall we?

ATI 0
Paper Launch 10,000

Deception

The X1600XT was for sale, on and before the Dec. 1 relesae date. Just not in the US. Typically the US gets things first, this time it didnt. It was avail in Greece, Finland and others before Dec. 1. You dont really think the 7800 line was available world-wide on the same day do you?

Originally posted by: Sunrise089

Originally posted by: Cooler
ATI 1
Paper Launch 0

Paper launch ZERO???

X1800XT

X800XT-PE

Crossfire everything

the list goes on and on

The X800XT/PE is well documented, and old news. Why even try and bring the X1800XT into the paper launch realm? It was available before the release date, and on the release date in a retail store, CompUSA.

The 512MB GTX too was available a few days before the release date. However, its virtually out of stock everywhere right now, and has been. If you're going to slam the XT/PE for being a "paper launch", then you need to call the 512MB the same. As it was launched, with very few cards, and other than a few card, hasnt been seen since. Its not even listed on CompUSA's website.




Once again people, lets try and be a little more logical, and not so bias.

you cant really call the 512 a paper launch....i could of bought one on release and could buy one for a while after. i dont thin NV anticipated the demand for this card. plus samsung are having a hard time with the new memory. i dont recall being able to buy a 1800 anything untill very recently

even if the 7800 wasnt globally available....it wasnt far off. we had them on release, so did america, i assume china and that area must of also had them then too. enland/europe usually last on the list (well seems it)

you cant really dispute it, this generation Nvidia has had the upper hand when it comes to launches and getting the product out when they said it would be out. it was a breath of fresh air, i only hope ATI follow suit....which maybe they will with R580.

i understand ATI had a lot of trouble with R520, so i guess you can forgive them on delivering the goods late. however....one of the main reasons i went Nvidia for my upgrade was simply becuase that was all i could buy at the time..... i cant give ATI my money if theyre not gonna give me a card can i?

 

[DaveBaumann]

It may not be as infamous and disapointing as the 5800u (since this is only a midrange card and no leafblower), but likewise it may soon be replaced with a more "balanced" gpu.

Unlikely. In fact, what you will see is more cards go in directions like these. What will evolve are the applications...

Both vendors know that the shader to texture ratio is going more towards the shader side, and ATI have biased X1600 XT towards heavy shader processing with a 3:1 ALU to texture processing capability (well, more than 3:1 since each "ALU" (in ATI terms) is actually a couple of ALU's, capable of up to 5 instructions per cycle); if you compare X1600 to an X700 on something like UT2004 the X700 may well beat the X1600, compare it on a game like F.E.A.R. and the X1600 will almost certainly have a large advantage - as applications more more towards heavy shader processing, so boards like X1600XT will look better than boards with a lower ALU processing capabilities.

From R300 to R520 ATI basically didn't change their ALU to pixel pixel/texture ratio at all, while NVIDIA made a large jump from NV3x to NV40 and an incremental one from NV40 to G70 - the ALU to pixel/texture ratio on RV530 is even larger than that of G70. At the moment the balance isn't there, and NVIDIA is hitting more of a sweet spot at the moment, but shader processing will get more complex with later applications.

And I think it would be fairly safe to say that the likes of R580 and RV560 will have more in common with RV530 than they will with R520 or RV515.

 

[Deception]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: Deception

What are you talking about?

This product is considered a paper launch, because it was reviewed before the item was found in retail/e-tail channels. Compare this to the 7800 lineup, which is a hard launch because it was available for sale the day reviews appeared.

Let's re-tally the score, shall we?

ATI 0
Paper Launch 10,000

Deception

The X1600XT was for sale, on and before the Dec. 1 relesae date. Just not in the US. Typically the US gets things first, this time it didnt. It was avail in Greece, Finland and others before Dec. 1. You dont really think the 7800 line was available world-wide on the same day do you?

Originally posted by: Sunrise089

Originally posted by: Cooler
ATI 1
Paper Launch 0

Paper launch ZERO???

X1800XT

X800XT-PE

Crossfire everything

the list goes on and on

The X800XT/PE is well documented, and old news. Why even try and bring the X1800XT into the paper launch realm? It was available before the release date, and on the release date in a retail store, CompUSA.

The 512MB GTX too was available a few days before the release date. However, its virtually out of stock everywhere right now, and has been. If you're going to slam the XT/PE for being a "paper launch", then you need to call the 512MB the same. As it was launched, with very few cards, and other than a few card, hasnt been seen since. Its not even listed on CompUSA's website.

Once again people, lets try and be a little more logical, and not so bias.

There was no bias in my statement. Even if there were some areas in which the 7800 was not found (neither you nor myself can proove this indefinitely), it was a much more timley launch compared to the x1600XT.

I never showed any blatant bias in my statement toward NVIDIA or ATI; however, I simply responded to a member with a pretty big fallacy in his statement.

Making a negative statement doesn't make me a fan or a troll.

Deception

 

[Zenoth]

I'm a supporter of ATi products, but I do believe that any X1600 variants, XT or not, Sapphire or Powercolor, is a utter waste of money.

I really like the X1K series, but only the X1800 series is worth it.

Please, forget about X1300 and X1600. Get X1800, or wait for X1850.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: DaveBaumann

It may not be as infamous and disapointing as the 5800u (since this is only a midrange card and no leafblower), but likewise it may soon be replaced with a more "balanced" gpu.

Unlikely. In fact, what you will see is more cards go in directions like these. What will evolve are the applications...

Both vendors know that the shader to texture ratio is going more towards the shader side, and ATI have biased X1600 XT towards heavy shader processing with a 3:1 ALU to texture processing capability (well, more than 3:1 since each "ALU" (in ATI terms) is actually a couple of ALU's, capable of up to 5 instructions per cycle); if you compare X1600 to an X700 on something like UT2004 the X700 may well beat the X1600, compare it on a game like F.E.A.R. and the X1600 will almost certainly have a large advantage - as applications more more towards heavy shader processing, so boards like X1600XT will look better than boards with a lower ALU processing capabilities.

From R300 to R520 ATI basically didn't change their ALU to pixel pixel/texture ratio at all, while NVIDIA made a large jump from NV3x to NV40 and an incremental one from NV40 to G70 - the ALU to pixel/texture ratio on RV530 is even larger than that of G70. At the moment the balance isn't there, and NVIDIA is hitting more of a sweet spot at the moment, but shader processing will get more complex with later applications.

And I think it would be fairly safe to say that the likes of R580 and RV560 will have more in common with RV530 than they will with R520 or RV515.

I can understand that design principle, and it seems like the right one seeing how the apps are going more towards longer and more complex shaders. And with a card like the the r580, if it has 16 TMU's and 48 shaders it makes sence. But with only 4 TMU's on the x1600 I feel Ati has given up a lot of performance in games that dont rely as heavily on shaders. When the future apps are here, the x1600 may start showing what it's really capable of, but for now it's performance is disapointing for a midrange card.

 

[Paratus]

X1600XT would make sense as an overall upgrade for AGP users like myself who are causual gamers. It's better than my 9600XT and my P4 3.2 with an X1000 would kick but at video encoding and HD decoding- things my processor will eventually choke on.

 

[sisq0kidd]

Dual dvi is nice

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: DaveBaumann

It may not be as infamous and disapointing as the 5800u (since this is only a midrange card and no leafblower), but likewise it may soon be replaced with a more "balanced" gpu.

Unlikely. In fact, what you will see is more cards go in directions like these. What will evolve are the applications...

Both vendors know that the shader to texture ratio is going more towards the shader side, and ATI have biased X1600 XT towards heavy shader processing with a 3:1 ALU to texture processing capability (well, more than 3:1 since each "ALU" (in ATI terms) is actually a couple of ALU's, capable of up to 5 instructions per cycle); if you compare X1600 to an X700 on something like UT2004 the X700 may well beat the X1600, compare it on a game like F.E.A.R. and the X1600 will almost certainly have a large advantage - as applications more more towards heavy shader processing, so boards like X1600XT will look better than boards with a lower ALU processing capabilities.

From R300 to R520 ATI basically didn't change their ALU to pixel pixel/texture ratio at all, while NVIDIA made a large jump from NV3x to NV40 and an incremental one from NV40 to G70 - the ALU to pixel/texture ratio on RV530 is even larger than that of G70. At the moment the balance isn't there, and NVIDIA is hitting more of a sweet spot at the moment, but shader processing will get more complex with later applications.

And I think it would be fairly safe to say that the likes of R580 and RV560 will have more in common with RV530 than they will with R520 or RV515.

Very good post, that seems to be exactly what is going on (although I know you're a vet from B3D, so you're smarter than most of us here ).

The problem with the X1600, though, is that it just doesn't have the power to render games of today to be that much of a factor for tomorrow; a card like the 6800GS or X800XL looks to be a better choice.

But definitely, the pixel/texture ratio seems like it will only get larger in terms of pixel shaders, since games are becoming more and more shader heavy, and relying on shaders to produce many more effects than before.

 

[v8envy]

The 1600 XT may outpace current and previous generation cards in future games, but will it matter? Todays and yesterday's games border on unplayable with this card in all but the low resolutions (8x6, 10x7) and settings. Even though the relative performance will increase, the end result will be going from very unplayable to imperceptibly better than very unplayable by the time these evolved future titles show up.

The video encoding is an interesting selling point, but only if you do a lot of DVD piracy. An X1300 would be a better call there, since neither card is going to provide a very satisfying gaming experience in current or future titles and are not that giant of a leap up from integrated video.

The X1300 and X1600 of any suffix are big gobbling turkeys. Avoid until they're priced at $50 and $100 respectively.