Graphic Cards ATi RADEON X550 review !

Status
Not open for further replies.
Blade_Runner

Blade_Runner

Inactive
Forerunner
The Rise and End of the RADEON X300

The RADEON X300 has been with us since June last year. ATI’s entry-level offering for the PCIe market was the first graphics core to be fabbed on the 0.11 micron process. Codenamed the RV370, it features 4 pixel pipelines and 2 vertex pipelines.

There's little doubt as to why ATI fixed its sights on this segment of the market at the dawn of the PCIe era. Entry-level shipment numbers are always high, and shipment numbers represent market share, something that ATI and NVIDIA have been contesting for years. It would be folly to not try and give it their best shot when top spot now can translate into an advantage in the battles to come.

99mio5.jpg

99nokj.jpg


Conclusion
The performance of the RADEON X550 is fascinating when using the low-end market as a backdrop. It easily stamps its authority over the GeForce 6200 TC 64MB, and is a level above the GeForce 6200. From a performance perspective, isn’t the RADEON X550 being a little too humble calling the GeForce 6200 TC 64MB its rival? Why then, are they rivals? The answer is because they compete on price!

A GeForce 6200 TC 64MB graphics card currently commands a price tag of about $70-$80, while the RADEON X550 is basically positioned for the same price point, but features 256MB of local graphics memory. Considering what has been said above, this means that for the same price, the buyer is obtaining a graphics card with superior performance.
Click to expand...
[RANK="www.cpluse.com/Module/Show.aspx?ID=2377"]Source[/RANK]
 
Awesome specs ! This will easily dethrone the 6200 ! NVidia is going to be affected big time ! Cause thats the segment that really sells, and when you come up with a product like this, you mean business.

^^256MB of VRAM ! Man thats rocking for an entry level card !
 
That site's server/host is borked.It never opens fast enuf.Was the case a month back when I posted about the NV44a review there,same now.Good site on a bad server makes little sense.
 
bottle said:
^^ you havent seen this ? :D

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814145121
Click to expand...
Lol, bottle we both know that the 512MB RAM on that card is of no use !

@Chaos - Dude, I am not promoting the card, just commending ATi second decent effort at making a well priced card :P (the first was 9800 Pro :D)

I am not a nVidiot like Sid, but more inclined to nVidia as all my video cards have been nVidia made. I will be second-last (after Sid) to promote ATi :P
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What's the use of putting out a 512mb 6600gt, the card won't be nearly fast enough at 1600x1200 8xaa anyway.

It will be similar to how half of the 8500 le's came with 128mb vram, when in fact 64mb was the maximum it could benefit from as the card couldn't handle antialiasing at all except in really old games like quake1.
Very high resolutions it could handle, but not even the slightest bit of aa in the then current-gen games.
 
^^ Exactly, even 512MB for the X800XL is not justified. Though the 7800U with 512MB is a different thing altogether ! Raw-power really to destroy any game :P

I think manufacturers are tyring to fool the people who think more memory is better performance by making such cards. Quite shocking really !
 
anishcool said:
^^ Exactly, even 512MB for the X800XL is not justified.

I think manufacturers are tyring to fool the people who think more memory is better performance by making such cards. Quite shocking really !
Click to expand...

Nah...512MB in X800XL helped gr8ly in Half Life 2...

More memory is better..atleast in the FX5200..it clearly distinguished the 128bit and 64bit..hehe..128MB was 64bit, 256MB was 128bit :P even if the 128 xtra is waste, u'd get a 128bit card.....
 
^^ Lol, upgrading from 64 to 128 is ok, but from 64 (64-bit) memory on the 6200 to 512MB is insane :P
 
ya,
64 bit :@ :@ :@ :@

i just dont understand why they make cards with 64 bit interface.

guys what you think reducing pixel pipe or making it 64 bit reduce the manufacturing cost ?

i dont think..........

i had FX5200 which score 157 in 3D mark 05.
second day i sold that card and i was happy that at least my onboard 865 GBF was not running 3d 05 at all.
its good to see no results than horrible results.

i guess 6200 - 64bit with even 512 MB wont outperform 9600 XT
 
avi_avadhut said:
ya,i guess 6200 - 64bit with even 512 MB wont outperform 9600 XT
Click to expand...
Obviously, how can it outperform 9600XT :rofl:!

They just make 64-bit cards to lower the overall design structure of the card and make it a bit slower so that you buy a 6600GT :P
 
Point is the 6600Gt is often held back due to lack of sufficient memory.512MB memory will alleviate stuttering a lot.Try to play far cry on a 128mb GF6(whether 6600gt or 6800) on very high and an agp aperture less than 128mb and u'll see what I mean.
A 6800LE with 512MB will be an oc'er's dream.
 
can you tell me how much cost effective to make a card - 64bit or reduced pipelines.

my real concern is making 64 / reducing things is really low cost or just to promote their higher versions..... :S

and again 128 MB DDR3 vs 512MB DDR1 - who will win the battle ?

i will be happy with 6600GT with 128 DDR3 as my monitor support max 1280 x 1078.

instead of adding 512 DDR1 to graphic subsystem i will ad 1 GB dual channel DDR and make virtual memory "Zero" to improve the performance.
 
128 MB DDR3 vs 512MB DDR1 - who will win the battle ?
Click to expand...
There are 2 sets of variables: 512MB vs 128MB and DDR1 vs DDR3, so its pretty hard to estimate who will win.

DDR1 isnt capable of really high speeds - mostly maxes out at around 600-700Mhz DDR or so. DDR3 on the other hand can hit speeds as high as 1 - 1.2 Ghz. So 128MB of DDR3 if clocked to higher speeds would have much more memory bandwidth than an equivalent 128MB of slower speed DDR1 and obviously do much better.

However comparing it with 512MB of DDR1 is vague, as certain games tend to need more memory and might show benefit from 512MB instead of 128MB. How that would offset the memory bandwidth advantage that DDR3 has , I have no idea :ashamed:
 
Most People in India do not have proper understanding of technology. They go by numbers and for graphics cards what people see is amount of memory. For them a 128MB card is always better than a 64 MB card what ever the GPU may be. Thats why we have people who purchase a Integrated Mobo's which have 128 or 256 MB of Memory not even reliazing that its going to use the system memory. And there are others like the one who go to the reseller and asked for a PCI-X16 "AGP Card" not reliazing that AGP is a Graphics card interface standard and not the Graphics card itself. The dealer will most certainly try to convince him out of it saying He does not require a Graphics card when you have "Blazing fast Graphics" on the Mobo it self. Same holds good for sound cards. Also Any PCI-X16 card (even a X300) is faster than any AGP card ( even a 6800 GT).

Any one looked at the CSS-Knight Computer Ad in Chip or Digit? The Ad says that the System is very good for games. Ultra Fast Intel Processor, Gigantic 128 MB ram and blazing fast GMA 900 Graphics which can rip through any game". Sames the case with Sahara Computers. They have even made Sempron the Best 64 Bit Processor from AMD .

Way Back in 98 i purchased a SB Live Value and Asus Riva TNT 16 MB Card which was released just 1 or 2 months back. The dealer tried very hard to convine me that a Trident 4 MB card is way faster than the Riva TNT and the Yamaha sound card is better than a SB Live. Another dealer nearly convinced my friend to go for a Sis Xabre 128 MB card instead of a GeForce 3 64 MB card.

Even for my latest Rig which i put together in Nov 2004, I roamed throughout chandigarh looking for a dealer. Every where they simply refused to get me any of the hardware i wanted. One even said that 2.4 GHz Celeron is the latest Proccy available. But i also found some offering 2.8 and 3.0 Ghz P4 with 865 or 915 mobo's. At last I found a decent shop ( with around 15 Creative 4.1's , a Altec Lansing 251 and ATP 3 pieces in display). I went and told the dealer that I am going to Put together a Powerful Rig. He recommended a 3.0 Ghz P4 on 915 Mobo and 512 MB Ram if i have enough dough for this. He was Horrified when i told him the components i wanted. He some how even managed to get he the A^4 3000+ and MSI K8N Neo. But the most problem was caused by the 6800 GT card. He took around 2 weeks to get it from Pune (Big Byte was out of Stock). Recently I called him up for a Audigy 2 ZS. He asked me what happended to onboard sound.

Thats the state of affairs in India. But I am happy that our country is picking up in that respect these days. Tech Forums like TE have a great role to play in promoting technology and imparting understanding of technology in people.
 
i agree what you say but ........

please dont forget that one 6800Ultra card cost can purchase entire mid range office PC what normal India budget lover person wants.

he wont have time to play Doom3 or HL2. for his MS Office and Internet even PIII with 128 or 256MB and onboard 4MB graphics is enough.

and we have almost 90% requirement of these kind of PC's so its quite natural if our delears start thinking to save moeny as max as possible.
this is what i feel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom