» Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

GX-Brandon (369)   Jan 08, 2007 - 12:04 pm

Ape: First off, you've got to keep in mind that I'm working on multiple hardware articles simultaneously, and I may not have time to include ALL the AGP options out there in 1 article. I'm doing the best I can though. The X1650 XT AGP isn't available yet to the best of my knowledge (I think you're confusing the X1650 XT board with the Pro, which is available in AGP form), these AGP cards are literally just now coming in to the board partners and I'm putting the reviews of them up as fast as I can. Once I get a sample I'll certainly put the review up, it's not like I'm holding cards back on purpose or anything like that. I'm not really sure why you say the 7600GS AGP has been holding up the midrange for the past year, when the GPU hasn't even been out for a year, and as I mention in the article, the driver for the 7600 GS AGP hasn't been available since early summer. The 6800U and X850 XT PE are in there for legacy purposes. If you are curious to see how all these GPUs stack up against one another, I would suggest you check out the X1650 XT PCIe review, they're all pretty much in that article. » Login to reply to this  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. » Login to reply to this

» Login to reply to this

» Note: You need to be logged in to write a comment!