X1900XT 256MB tested at FS

[pauldh]

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_radeon_x1900_xt_256mb_performance/

Just wanted to post this link as it's a nice little review that will probably get looked over amongst X1950XT reviews today. They are testing the X1900XT 512/256, X1800XT 512, X1900GT, 7900GT reference and overclocked. Only thing missing to compete for the current $200- $300 crowns was the 256MB X1800XT.

The 256MB X1900XT doesn't quite keep up with it's 512MB brother, but if it's street prices are much cheaper, it should be able to end all "X1800XT, 1900GT or 7900GT" questions unless/until those other cards drop even more. (good for us)

Anyway, read it for yourself, well worth the time.

 

[angry_ducky]

*scratches head*
I thought all X1900XT are 512MB so why a X1950XT 256MB other than cost factor?

It's a 256MB X1900XT; Paul just said it will probably get overlooked because of the forthcoming X1950.

While on the topic of 256MB vs. 512MB. Which game uses over 256MB w/ 16AF+4AA @1600x1200 anyway?

That extra VRAM must do something because the 256MB XT is a couple FPS behind the 512MB, and the clockspeeds are the same.

 

[prozac26]

So it's like X1800XT 256 vs. 512. Now people (or n00bz) will have a hard time deciding. :lol:

If it keeps prices down, then it's good for all of us.

 

[i_am_not_god]

GRAW use's over 300mb vram when on high detail, it uses over 256 on high even at 1024 x 800, would imagine oblivion does to, not to sure thou.

 

[angry_ducky]

So it's like X1800XT 256 vs. 512. Now people (or n00bz) will have a hard time deciding. :lol:

If it keeps prices down, then it's good for all of us.

On newegg, the cheapest X1800XT 256 is $200. The cheapest X1800XT 512 is $510. That's an easy choice right there.

However, the cheapest X1900XT 512 is $275 (after a $100 rebate, mind you), and that price is less than the MSRP for the 256MB version. If the 256MB XT isn't priced under $240, I can see many people just going for the 512MB version.

Better yet, they should price the 256MB X1900XT at <$225, and lower the X1800XT prices to <$200.

 

[IcY18]

So it's like X1800XT 256 vs. 512. Now people (or n00bz) will have a hard time deciding. :lol:

If it keeps prices down, then it's good for all of us.

On newegg, the cheapest X1800XT 256 is $200. The cheapest X1800XT 512 is $510. That's an easy choice right there.

However, the cheapest X1900XT 512 is $275 (after a $100 rebate, mind you), and that price is less than the MSRP for the 256MB version. If the 256MB XT isn't priced under $240, I can see many people just going for the 512MB version.

Better yet, they should price the 256MB X1900XT at <$225, and lower the X1800XT prices to <$200.

That's really too bad, obviously no one is producing the X1800XT anymore due to its supposed replacement the x1900GT, because only 3 months ago there were numerous 512mb versions to choose from, i purchased mine for only $289 by Saphire , they also had some others for only 300 or 310,
given that it is supposed to be "last" generation tech i'm not surprised...

 

[Heyyou27]

Seeing the 512MB X1900XT go down in price so much makes me question the usefulness of the 256MB X1900XT.

 

[angry_ducky]

Seeing the 512MB X1900XT go down in price so much makes me question the usefulness of the 256MB X1900XT.

My point exactly.

 

[sojrner]

*scratches head*
I thought all X1900XT are 512MB so why a X1950XT 256MB other than cost factor?

While on the topic of 256MB vs. 512MB. Which game uses over 256MB w/ 16AF+4AA @1600x1200 anyway?

I'm sure somewhere there's an article on web that uses ATITools to measure and compare. If not, they should.

firingsquad did a test on it w/ GRAW a while back. search it up. GRAW disables some of the video settings on cards w/ less then 512 megs, and they showed that indeed it uses like 430-something megs when all is enabled. If you force it in the ini the game slows to a crawl on a 256 meg card.

(I think they did the same thing w/ Doom3 but did not get such striking results)

anyway, as more 512 meg cards come availiable more games will use it IMO.

 

[pauldh]

Seeing the 512MB X1900XT go down in price so much makes me question the usefulness of the 256MB X1900XT.

My point exactly.
Yeah, but remember guys, there is a big difference in retail price. Imagine if the 256MB X1900XT out(street)prices the 512MB X1900XT just like the X1800XT's. We could shortly have $200 X1900XT 256MB vs. $275-300 512MB versions. Pricing and availability will be the huge deciding factor, but I'm looking forward to seeing Neweggs pricing on the 256MB X1900XT over the next couple months. I suspect X1800's will start to dry up, the X1900GT will drop in price, and the 256MB X1900XT will find a place somewhere between the GT and the 512MB XT. Hopefully closer to the GT.

Wonder when we'll see the $199 X1950 pro?

 

[angry_ducky]

Wonder when we'll see the $199 X1950 pro?

If it's a 12 pipe, 36 shader card, then, judging by the review of the X1950, it probably won't perform much better than the X1900GT. Quite frankly, I'm more excited about the 256MB X1900XT than any of the X1950 series.

 

[sojrner]

Wonder when we'll see the $199 X1950 pro?

If it's a 12 pipe, 36 shader card, then, judging by the review of the X1950, it probably won't perform much better than the X1900GT. Quite frankly, I'm more excited about the 256MB X1900XT than any of the X1950 series.
And it have a big V in it's core. I too am going to call it X1700XT from now on.

was that for the "x1950pro", the 1900gt or the x1900xt 256? the 1900xt 256 is the same core as the 512 version (r580, no V). Just wondering... I assume you meant for the 1900gt, but the wording looks to be referencing the 1900xt, which is all kinds of different. 😉

 

[sojrner]

Yes, the X1950PRO.
Seeing a core with V in X19xx/18xx range pissed me off.

At least it wasn't bad as 9800Pro 128-bit :x

8O ya, that one sucked... lots of ppl got suckered into it. "Well, they're both 9800s so they must be the same, I will get the cheaper one." :tongue:

More will get it w/ this one.. "1950pro? it must be better then the 1900xtx! And it is cheaper!" :tongue: :trophy:

 

[pauldh]

Anands review states they think the performance difference between the 256MB and 512MB X1900XT is because of relaxed memory timings and not the amount of vram.

"ATI dropped down to eight 8Mx32 as opposed to the eight 16Mx32 GDDR3 modules used on the original X1900 XT. Memory speed, bandwidth, and even layout can remain the same between cards, with only a slight difference in timings due to the different capabilities of each chip type. The result is that the X1900 XT 256MB is a slower solution than the X1900 XT that still offers exceptional performance for a terrific price."

 

[Anoobis]

WTF! So is the X1950Pro the X1700XT?? And WTH is the X1650Pro? Damn you ATI!!!!! Damn you!!!!