Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )


 Rules

Don't want to be BANNED? Read the rules!

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
 Our PowerColor ATI Radeon X1550 is Posted
Nemo
post Dec 3 2007, 10:48 AM
Post #1


Will Fold 4 Food
******
Group: News Editor
Posts: 6,106
Joined: 10-May 04
From: Franklin, TN
Member No.: 10,039



Check it out - http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/po..._radeon_x1550_/


--------------------
P4 3.0C/Abit IC7-G/Corsair TWINX1024-3200C2PRO LED/Hitachi 2 x 80 GB SATA RAID 0/Hitachi 120GB SATA/Sapphire HD 3850 512MB /Raidmax Scorpio 868/Vantec Aeroflow/XP Pro SP 2
"however, i cannot claim to be such a fish as i am not a fish at all..." - hardnrg,Jul 4 2005, 02:49 PM


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cchalogamer
post Dec 3 2007, 12:06 PM
Post #2


Folding is good :)
Group Icon
Group: Folding Member
Posts: 4,344
Joined: 21-June 04
From: NC (USA)
Member No.: 10,771



Not trying to be too harsh here....but why in the hell was the card tested with 4x AA? It's a budgetcard and I would expect to see benchmarks setup to compare what gamers on a very strict and limited budget might expect to be playing at. Heck I dont know if it's capable of actually playing many of these games on the lowest settings at the end of the day.

Some people using such a card in a HTPC might not care that it cant run any AA as they plan to use it on an older standard def TV also were lower than 1024x768 doesnt really look any different. Sre thee benchmarks tell most of OCC that they should stay way for anything short of a family PC where integrated video would be the better choice anyway, but I'm sure a few would like to know how choosing a better OCing motherboard now with this card vs one with onboard video might change things for them if they possibly plan on adding a better card later or something else. Idk...it just seems silly to run all the tests at settings where the card cant even function properly and call it a review. It's not a 7600GT, don't expect it to run the same settings as one is how i personally see it.


--------------------
My Folding
Q6600 @3.6+/EVGA 122-CK-NF68-T1/8GB PC2-8000/1TB 7200.11/500GB 7200.11/GTX 260 SLI/Silverstone OP650(Main rig)
Phenom 9550 X4 @ 2.5/Crosshair II Formula/2GB Ballistix PC2-6400/250GB/3x9600GSO/CMPSU-650TX (F@H Rig)
Opteron 165 @2.7+ghz/EPoX EP-9NPA+Ultra/2GB G.Skill PC3200(2x1GB)/320GBx2 RAID 1/500GBx2 RAID 1/40GBx2/8800GT/500w (server)
E8400 @4.0+/GA-EP45-UD3P/2GB Ballistix PC2-5300/250GB/4870 512MB/500w (work rig)
T9300 2.5/4GB PC2-5300/2x320GB RAID 0/8800M GTS 512MB (Laptop, Gateway P-6860FX)
T6400 2.0/4GB PC2-6400/250GB/9300M 512MB (Laptop, ASUS X83V)
Atom 330/D945GCLF2/2GB PC2-5300 KVR/160GB/90w picoPSU
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bosco
post Dec 3 2007, 12:25 PM
Post #3


OCC Boss
*********
Group: Senior Admin
Posts: 27,160
Joined: 27-April 02
From: Canada
Member No.: 521



QUOTE(cchalogamer @ Dec 3 2007, 12:06 PM) [snapback]739028[/snapback]
Not trying to be too harsh here....but why in the hell was the card tested with 4x AA? It's a budgetcard and I would expect to see benchmarks setup to compare what gamers on a very strict and limited budget might expect to be playing at. Heck I dont know if it's capable of actually playing many of these games on the lowest settings at the end of the day.

Some people using such a card in a HTPC might not care that it cant run any AA as they plan to use it on an older standard def TV also were lower than 1024x768 doesnt really look any different. Sre thee benchmarks tell most of OCC that they should stay way for anything short of a family PC where integrated video would be the better choice anyway, but I'm sure a few would like to know how choosing a better OCing motherboard now with this card vs one with onboard video might change things for them if they possibly plan on adding a better card later or something else. Idk...it just seems silly to run all the tests at settings where the card cant even function properly and call it a review. It's not a 7600GT, don't expect it to run the same settings as one is how i personally see it.


It was tested for gaming benchmarks not for how well it will do as a HTPC.

If we decide to do a roundup of HTPC cards this one will be in it, but like I said this was gaming tested.

Why should be change settings because the card cannot handle it? We base our testing on strict guidelines and we do not modify that for any card period. This goes to show that a card like this is not suited for gaming so don't bother buying it for that reason.


--------------------
Main Rig
Intel I7 920
MSI X58 Platinum
12 gigs of Mushkin Tri Channel
2 X Nvidia GTX 295 Quad SLI
2 X 1.5 Terabyte Seagate
Thermaltake Armour Case
1000 Thermaltake PSU
Samsung 30" LCD
DIGG OCC! :::: OCC Site Rules :::: OCC Reviews
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Crow47
post Dec 3 2007, 03:35 PM
Post #4


Certified Geek
****
Group: Members
Posts: 1,100
Joined: 2-January 07
Member No.: 19,189



QUOTE(bosco @ Dec 3 2007, 03:25 PM) [snapback]739033[/snapback]
It was tested for gaming benchmarks not for how well it will do as a HTPC.

If we decide to do a roundup of HTPC cards this one will be in it, but like I said this was gaming tested.

Why should be change settings because the card cannot handle it? We base our testing on strict guidelines and we do not modify that for any card period. This goes to show that a card like this is not suited for gaming so don't bother buying it for that reason.


But you have to take into account how this card is meant to perform. It was never meant to hang with the 8600gt or anything else of that quality. To think that it would perform at those qualities is nothing short of foolish. It would be nice to see how this card would perform without the AA. Someone who might be looking for a budget card would really benefit from seeing that. Now all he/she knows is that it is horrible when compared to the 8600gt and other comparable cards. Overall this review tells me nothing. I knew from the beginning that it wouldn't do well with AA, and all you did is prove that. This review could benefit heavily with tests ran without AA. Then we could really see how this card performs in its intended range.

QUOTE(bosco @ Dec 3 2007, 03:25 PM) [snapback]739033[/snapback]
It was tested for gaming benchmarks not for how well it will do as a HTPC.

If we decide to do a roundup of HTPC cards this one will be in it, but like I said this was gaming tested.

Why should be change settings because the card cannot handle it? We base our testing on strict guidelines and we do not modify that for any card period. This goes to show that a card like this is not suited for gaming so don't bother buying it for that reason.


But you have to take into account how this card is meant to perform. It was never meant to hang with the 8600gt or anything else of that quality. To think that it would perform at those qualities is nothing short of foolish. It would be nice to see how this card would perform without the AA. Someone who might be looking for a budget card would really benefit from seeing that. Now all he/she knows is that it is horrible when compared to the 8600gt and other comparable cards. Overall this review tells me nothing. I knew from the beginning that it wouldn't do well with AA, and all you did is prove that. This review could benefit heavily with tests ran without AA. Then we could really see how this card performs in its intended range.


--------------------
CrowcompV4
Q6600 G0 3.4GHZ - Zerotherm Nirvana 120
4GB DDR2 1066 OCZ Reaper HPC - Asus P5Q Pro
2x 512MB Sapphire HD4870 Toxic Xfire (818/1053) - Corsair TX 750 (My Silencer broke)
2.32 TB HD Capacity - LG DVD Burner SATA - Lite-On Blu-Ray - Lian Li full tower

CrowBook
Pavillion DV9830US 1.83C2D - 4GB DDR2 - 640GB HD - Blu Ray - 8600M GS

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bosco
post Dec 3 2007, 03:54 PM
Post #5


OCC Boss
*********
Group: Senior Admin
Posts: 27,160
Joined: 27-April 02
From: Canada
Member No.: 521



Ya thats fine and dandy and I understand that but when we have to go threw tons of emails requesting that lowerend cards be reviewed against highend stuff we try and go with demand. So if we changed the benchmarks for a lowerend card we would have to match the other cards the same way to give accurate results. You have no idea how long it takes to benchmark a video card let alone multiple ones so again read what I said. This card was never ment to go against the big boys well duh dry.gif It was to give you a general idea where it stands when it comes to real style gaming and it does not do that just like the scores show. Now if we decided to review all the lowend cards ya we would look at changing the testing methods but we are not going to do that for one card.


--------------------
Main Rig
Intel I7 920
MSI X58 Platinum
12 gigs of Mushkin Tri Channel
2 X Nvidia GTX 295 Quad SLI
2 X 1.5 Terabyte Seagate
Thermaltake Armour Case
1000 Thermaltake PSU
Samsung 30" LCD
DIGG OCC! :::: OCC Site Rules :::: OCC Reviews
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andrewr05
post Dec 3 2007, 04:11 PM
Post #6


It's a buncha, muncha, cruncha... human!
Group Icon
Group: Donated
Posts: 6,463
Joined: 4-December 05
From: Perkinsville,VT
Member No.: 18,065



Something I was thinking....

Maybe we should have "TIERS", such as Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 or something of that nature.

A card could be tested at "Tier 3" settings and if it does not perform to certain requirements (gets below a certain acceptable FPS in the benchmark) it could then be dropped down to the "Tier 2" benchmark thus allowing the comparison of like cards...

Card "X" tested @ "Tier 3" settings--unacceptable fps returned--drop to "Tier 2"
and of course if the card did not work well at "Tier 2" it could then be dropped to "Tier 1"

Tier 3 would consist of the "average" HIGH END card resolutions with the appropriate settings (AA blah blah etc)
Tier 2 would consist of the "average" MID RANGE card resolutions with the appropriate settings (AA blah blah etc)
Tier 1 would consist of the "average" BUDGET card resolutions with the appropriate settings (AA blah blah etc)

Probably too much work, but in the end all cards could be separated in the REVIEW section into their "Tiers" and you could easily see whether or not a certain card performed well against another card if it was/wasn't in the same list.

meh...


--------------------
CASE: Antec P182 CPU: Xeon X3220MEMORY: 4GB DDR2 GPU: XFX 8800GTS (Alpha Dog Edition) + Gigabyte 8800GT for physx
MOBO: Gigabyte GA-X48-DQ6 PSU: Antec EA500 LCD: 20" Acer Widescreen OS: Windows XP
-
Use the following link to access the Official Overclockersclub Chat Room:
OCC CHAT
(be sure to set you browsers irc handler to your standalone IRC client)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bosco
post Dec 3 2007, 04:31 PM
Post #7


OCC Boss
*********
Group: Senior Admin
Posts: 27,160
Joined: 27-April 02
From: Canada
Member No.: 521



Well that could work except the fact that we don't really do alot of really low end stuff that is compareable to each other.

But I understand stand what you guys are saying but again changing the review settings for a card is not a good idea.



--------------------
Main Rig
Intel I7 920
MSI X58 Platinum
12 gigs of Mushkin Tri Channel
2 X Nvidia GTX 295 Quad SLI
2 X 1.5 Terabyte Seagate
Thermaltake Armour Case
1000 Thermaltake PSU
Samsung 30" LCD
DIGG OCC! :::: OCC Site Rules :::: OCC Reviews
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bleeble
post Dec 3 2007, 04:48 PM
Post #8


All work and no play...
*****
Group: Members
Posts: 2,622
Joined: 5-January 05
From: Probably moving
Member No.: 14,506



QUOTE(bosco @ Dec 3 2007, 04:31 PM) [snapback]739092[/snapback]
Well that could work except the fact that we don't really do alot of really low end stuff that is compareable to each other.

But I understand stand what you guys are saying but again changing the review settings for a card is not a good idea.

withstupid.gif I'm going to have to agree with bosco here. It's aggravating not being able to find comparable benchmarks for two cards, CPUs, etc. If OCC uses consistent testing methods, all the reviews can be compared with one another. This is in contrast to other sites, where the benchmark numbers are no good beyond a single review.


--------------------
"Ninety percent of the politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation." -Henry Kissinger

---
Q6700 2.66GHz @ (testing) --- DFI P35-T2RL "Blood Iron" --- Crucial Ballistix 2x1GB DDR2-800 @ (testing) --- EVGA 8800GTS 512MB --- PCP&C Silencer 750 --- 2.25TB RAID 5 (Storage) --- 2x160GB RAID 0 (Boot) ---

--- Laing DDC-2 w/Petra's Top --- PA120.3 w/3 Yate Loon D12SM --- D-TEK Fuzion CPU --- MAZE4 GPU ---

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ccokeman
post Dec 3 2007, 05:46 PM
Post #9


The more i teach the dumber i get!
******
Group: Reviewer
Posts: 7,396
Joined: 10-August 03
Member No.: 5,490



This card is meant for the kids and wifes out there that do e-mail and runescape and not much more. We set our testing up to purposely stress components to see what level they actually perform at. We could do tiered testing but what does that accomplish. Sure it does well against an X800 or a 6800 but how does it hold up when the rubber meets the road. Say you want a gaming card and hey its a 1550 its not to bad but.... You get the point. Its not for hardcore gaming.


--------------------
Processor Intel Core I7 920 x2, I7 965 and more
Memory Mushkin PC3 12800 7-7-7-20
Motherboard MSI X58 Eclipse SLI
Graphics Yes I have them all SLI and CrossfireX
Power Supply Thermaltake Toughpower 1200, Mushkin 800
Monitor Gateway UXD3000
Water Cooling By DangerDen
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic


 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st November 2009 - 01:32 PM
© 2001- Overclockers Club ® Privacy Policy