|
|
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=13891 |  GrapeApe (36) Jan 14, 2007 - 04:50 pm
| » $100 when? Like in 2010+ ?
Wanna post some links to support you $100 dual format drive !?! Even LG's is being delayed and handcuffed.
Until then you're talking BS, and right now this very second you can buy an external HD-DVD playing drive for $200 (heck it's even $200CAD which is even better). Right now there are only very expensive HD and BD external drives, so for laptops users like myself this is the best option instead of paying $400-800 permium for an HD-DVD or BD drive, it's the cheapest solution for anyone with an HDCP compliant system that would rather wait until the war is somewhat over, and the FUD like yours is done too. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=13807 | GrapeApe (36) Jan 09, 2007 - 12:24 am » Edited on Jan 09, 2007 - 12:45 am
| » Well NewEgg removed their X1650XT link because sale is over.
Brandon, I know you work hard on these, and I know you're busy, I just think that the 2 most important cards to test against this one would be the direct competition the X1650XT and it's brother the X1650Pro.
And no I was/am thinking of the X1650XT, not the Pro, the one on NewEgg I linked to is no longer on sale so the link expired, but here's the non-sale link;
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814161065
and a screen capture of the page;
http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/2751/hisx1650xtagpxk1.jpg
however it's far from the only one, the InQ reviewed the PowerColor last week;
http://theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36672
(with it's poor misuse of the 1650 name invoking without mentioning Pro v XT [too often just saying the X1650 is 'twice' the X1600, where that only applies to the XT not the Pro)
HIS, TUL-Powercolor/ColourPower, and Sapphire have all announced the X1650XT AGP would be in their lineups.
Also understand I don't think you're holding the cards back, but I'm simply dissapointed not in you personally, but just in the timing of the review (just as the X1650XT appears and I'm having a hard enough time convincing the AGP luddites of it's existance, let alone reviewers). That there wasn't the good head-to-head just makes the task more difficult, negating my benefit of the review.
It's much to expect I know, but it is the most important comparison IMO, more so that the unavailable GF6800U, and the now way outdated GF6600 which is no match for the latest games and not worth a new purchase, but maybe a good upgrade reference point, so while I understand the inclusion of the GF6800, I think both is a little redundant since we know the GF6800 and GF7600 are better than the GF6600 and pretty much know it's relationship to the other cards.
As for the GF7600GS the term 'year' was more for the period of 2006, and it's been around since the spring.
Don't get me wrong, it's pretty frustrating, but my criticism is meant to be constructive as it has been in the past before when our comments were semi-anon, I often ask the more in depth questions, like in your Oblivion tests.
As for comparing AGP to PCIe reviews, that doesn't seem to be wise advice considering the number of times that the AGP and PCIe card specs don't match up. If I were just looking for my own information, I'd turn to other reviews of AGP cards, instead I was hoping for another reference point to point others to rather than simply another quick read with the conclusions I've seen dozens of times before on the PCIe end.
In the end, I hope you update this review with the X1650XT or X1650Pro once you can get your hands on them, but I'm not sure if that'll happen as I know it's alot of extra work. I've seen you update reviews before, but that's usually for errors, not for omissions of competitors like this.
That's the problem, the immediacy of the reviews is limited but their permanence means that their conclusions last longer than their applicability.
Anywhoo, don't take it personally, I just feel an opportunity was missed, and the conclusions ignore the fact that there is other competition out there other than the X1950Pro even if you didn't get a chance to test them, mention of them would be appropriate, since people do turn to the these reviews to decide how to spend their money. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=13807 | GrapeApe (36) Jan 07, 2007 - 01:18 pm » Edited on Jan 07, 2007 - 01:20 pm
| » So why no X1600Pro, X1650Pro or X1650XT?
The CURRENT competition for the GF7600GT AGP, like now in the PCIe space, is the X1650 series, especially the X1650XT , and yet no mention of it, despite it also being @ NewEgg (linked below) for the same price as the XFX. I understand it's likely a question of getting the card to review, but to forget to mention it (another fully HDCP card BTW) as the price-range defender is a little tunnel visioned.
It would've been nice to see the GF7600GS in the reviews as well as that has been the defender of the nV AGP midrange for the past year.
And running few tests of the X850XTPE in Oblivion and FartCry without HDR to compare performance would've been nice instead of posting it with a no score considering this (and the X800XTs) is the card that was the 'value buy' for the under $200 range for the past year or so. Considering the only heads-up test it loses is Q4 it seems wise to see whether it was worht upgrading or not. Especially in light of the MIA status of the X16xx series, which does well in Oblivion, but not so well in FartCry, although the X1650XT outperforms in both.
I'd say the X1650Pro or X1650XT would've been a better addition than the GF6800U which hasn't been avsailable in quantity in about a year's time, and even when it was it was more expensive than the GF7600GS (and GF7600GT in PCIe) and X800 series. For the price of the GF6800U when it was for sale it made more sense to buy a GF7600GT and a dual board like the AsRock ULi MoBo.
Link: http://www.newegg.com/Product/......N82E16814161064 Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=13756 | GrapeApe (36) Jan 04, 2007 - 05:09 am
| » This list brought to you by....
So eVGA's stamp is all over the list, the question is if the mediocre Wii get honourable mention what about the Intel MACs? I don't use them, but I don't doubt their impact, obviously you missed that, but nV's MoBo (and even ATi's) was so 'ground-breaking' *yawn*.
Oh yeah, and a 30" Dell, really that's TOP hardware somehow? Compare it to a Brightside or NEC LCD-LED and it's exactly what it is, mediocre at best. The IBM 22" from 6 years ago (and Viewsonic of 5 years ago) have far better resolution, so what's so impressive, other than it was slightly (12%) cheaper than the Apple 30" before it? IT took them almost all of 2006 to make it 'considerably cheaper' although you imply that upon launch it was cheap, which it wasn't by a long shot, still $2,200. And you don't think the expansion in LCD production had more influence in price? Look at both LCDs and Plasmas, hmm much cheaper than before, do I thank Dell for the 40" Plasmas that cost $15k before and now are under a grand? Thank you Dell, if only you made world peace, then it'd be cheap enough for the 3rd world countries.
Seriously guidelines would be better because it looks like someone simply posted the pieces of their recent rig they wanted to brag about, and is it 'hardware' or commercial products? The Wii and the Core2Duo are completely different categories of products, and their inclusion simply points to other glaring omissions.
Simply put, to generic a list with little semblance of research, balance or even guidelines. Kinda disappointed in what should've been a more thought out list, but ended up looking like a long ad for essentially 3 companies. Ground breaking really only 2 of them count IMO and that's the last 2, the others were simply different takes on other products.
Other lists out there were far more comprehensive, and with far more credible reasoning.
Link: http://img400.imageshack.us/img400/7717/evgalistmu0.jpg Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=13125 | GrapeApe (36) Nov 13, 2006 - 01:38 am » Edited on Nov 13, 2006 - 02:39 am
| » Mipmap rough transitions.
For some other reviews on the web (especially Bit-Tech's) there's some eveidence that AF is still far from perfect. While this hyperbole floats around the .net is there going to be an investigation into this in the upcoming videos?
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/11/08/nvidia_geforce_8800_gtx_g80/10.html
I find it funny to have people talk about 'perfection / near-perfection' as if no one else, including nV themselves, will ever improve on the G80 implementation which still shows feathering and issues that are far from perfect.
It's improved and the best right now, definitely, but there seems to be alot of nV PR in the reviews out there with the number of comments and adjectives that appear from supposedly independant reviewers. Flag this | Edit this post |
| News Link » /news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=10654 | GrapeApe (36) Jun 12, 2006 - 11:53 am
| » Interesting, but I prefer a larger buffer.
The NAND isn't fast enough to replace HDDs yet, I'd prefer the larger buffer (like 64mb) which would reduce thrashing, reduce battery sapping writes on laptops for just automatic backups.
I found it funy they're mentioning the sound of the drive working in adobe, personally I'd prefer the sound if it meant twice the speed.
Until it's fast enough Flash drives aren't all that great and hybrids would be better. Flag this | Edit this post |
|
