Jump to content


Photo

Our PowerColor ATI Radeon X1550 is Posted


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 Nemo

Nemo

    Will Fold 4 Food

  • Honorary Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7228 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Franklin, TN

Posted 03 December 2007 - 10:48 AM

Check it out - http://www.overclock..._radeon_x1550_/

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 2.83GHz / ASUS P5Q Deluxe / Patriot Extreme Performance 2GB PC2-9600 DDR2-1200MHz / 2x Seagate ST3160827AS 160GB RAID 1 / Seagate ST31000340AS 1TB
Corsair TX750W / Sapphire HD 5870 1GB GDDR5 / SilverStone TJ05 / Scythe Zipang 140mm CPU Cooler / ASUS VH202T-P 20" widescreen monitor (x2) / XP Pro SP 3
"however, i cannot claim to be such a fish as i am not a fish at all..." - hardnrg,Jul 4 2005, 02:49 PM
 

Posted Image

Posted Image

Follow OCC on Posted Image
Subscribe to the OCC Newsletter

Lucky Mudder Race 2013


#2 cchalogamer

cchalogamer

    Folding is good :)

  • Folding Member
  • 4551 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NC (USA)

Posted 03 December 2007 - 12:06 PM

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.

1zdcjtx.png

i7-4930K/GA-X79-UP4/32GB G.Skill & Team Vulcan Mixed/240GB Seagate 600 SSD/3TB/GTX 770 SLI/Rosewill Capstone 750 (main rig)

i7-4770K/GA-Z87X-UD5H/16GB ADATA/240GB Seagate 600 SSD/3TB/2 x 1TB RAID 1/1.5TB/GTX 670/Rosewill Capstone 750-M (secondary location main rig)

i7-4700MQ/MSI GT60 2OD-026US/16GB/128GB mSATA/1TB/GTX 780M/180W AC Adapter w/9 cell battery (gaming laptop) R.I.P. Shopping for the replacement  :cry:

i5-3570K/GA-Z77X-UD5H/8GB Kingston HyperX/500GB/3 x 2TB/2 x 320GB RAID 1/Antec BP550 (server)

Q6600/EVGA 122-CK-NF68-T1/4GB PC2-8000/2TB/2 x 1TB/500GB/9600GSO/500W(work rig)


#3 Bosco

Bosco

    OCC Boss

  • Senior Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32046 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 03 December 2007 - 12:25 PM

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 Gaming Rig
Intel 3960X
MSI X79A-GD65 8D
16GB of Corsair Vengeance
NVIDIA 780TI's in SLI
Corsair Force 3 GT 240GB SSD
Coolermaster 932 Case
Noctua D14 CPU Cooler
Thermaltake Toughpower XT Platinum 1275 Watts
3 X 24" LCD's
Donating to OCC :::: OCC Site Rules :::: OCC Reviews
RIP Verran and Nemo gone but never will be forgotten.


#4 Crow47

Crow47

    Certified Geek

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1278 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2007 - 03:35 PM

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.

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.

CrowcompVII

Intel DZ77GA-70K - i7-3770 3.4GHz - 16GB DDR3 1866 HyperX Predator - PNY nVidia GTX 670 2GB SLI  - 240GB Mushkin Chronos SSD -

850 Watt Seasonic M12ii - H60 Closed Loop Cooler - Corsair Air 540 - Win 8.1 Pro x64 - QNix QX2710 27" 1440p  @ 85 Hz (Samsung PLS)


CrowBook
HP Elitebook Workstation 8570w 

2.6GHz Intel Core i7 3720QM - 16GB DDR3 1600 (4 x 4GB) - 512GB SSD RAID 0 (I live life on the edge!) - 1080p LED LCD

 AMD FirePro M4000 1GB GDDR5 - Windows 8.1 Pro x64


#5 Bosco

Bosco

    OCC Boss

  • Senior Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32046 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 03 December 2007 - 03:54 PM

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 <_< 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 Gaming Rig
Intel 3960X
MSI X79A-GD65 8D
16GB of Corsair Vengeance
NVIDIA 780TI's in SLI
Corsair Force 3 GT 240GB SSD
Coolermaster 932 Case
Noctua D14 CPU Cooler
Thermaltake Toughpower XT Platinum 1275 Watts
3 X 24" LCD's
Donating to OCC :::: OCC Site Rules :::: OCC Reviews
RIP Verran and Nemo gone but never will be forgotten.


#6 Andrewr05

Andrewr05

    I'll be whatever I wanna do!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11555 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Perkinsville, VT

Posted 03 December 2007 - 04:11 PM

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...

ona5.png

Rig specs:

Spoiler

#7 Bosco

Bosco

    OCC Boss

  • Senior Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32046 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada

Posted 03 December 2007 - 04:31 PM

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 Gaming Rig
Intel 3960X
MSI X79A-GD65 8D
16GB of Corsair Vengeance
NVIDIA 780TI's in SLI
Corsair Force 3 GT 240GB SSD
Coolermaster 932 Case
Noctua D14 CPU Cooler
Thermaltake Toughpower XT Platinum 1275 Watts
3 X 24" LCD's
Donating to OCC :::: OCC Site Rules :::: OCC Reviews
RIP Verran and Nemo gone but never will be forgotten.


#8 Bleeble

Bleeble

    All work and no play...

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2622 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Probably moving

Posted 03 December 2007 - 04:48 PM

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: 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 ---


#9 ccokeman

ccokeman

    Frank <3 Reesa

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11107 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 December 2007 - 05:46 PM

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 @ 3.6
Memory Mushkin 998995 Blackline 12GB 9-9-9-24
Motherboard MSI X58 Big Bang
Graphics ASUS GTX 580
Power Corsair AX 1200,
Monitor Gateway UXD3000, LG W3000H, ASUS VG236 x 3
Water Cooling By DangerDen & Swiftech
Follow OCC on Posted Image