The EVGA 7300 GS: A New Quality Budget Card From NVIDIA
by Josh Venning on February 20, 2006 12:23 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
The Card
We've already taken a first look at NVIDIA's 7300 GS and you can read the article here. For this review, we will offer a brief recap of the card's features for reference, and look at some performance tests with our EVGA e-Geforce 7300 GS.
The GeForce 7300 GS was introduced by NVIDIA to take the place of the 6200 TurboCache on their budget end of graphics cards, and it does the job well, we've found. As the name implies, the 7300 GS is based on the GeForce 7 architecture, but it's been stripped down quite a bit.
There is a half-size version of the card which only has DVI and TV-out connections, but the EVGA 7300 GS that we have is full size and includes a VGA D-sub as well. The card is quite small and light, which makes sense given its budget classification. There are no external power connectors, and there is a very small fan on the GPU to keep it cool, with the EVGA logo in the center of it.
The 7300 GS also has 3 vertex and 4 pixel pipelines, the same as the 6200, but our EVGA 7300 GS has a larger memory size of 256 MB verses 16-64 MB of the 6200TC. Currently, SLI with this part is not supported, but we would be surprised if we don't see this feature enabled at some point later on. DVD decoding is another feature of this card, and it will likely include high definition video capabilities in future driver updates.
As we mentioned earlier, EVGA is a company with which we've had good experiences in the past, as their prices and warranty policy set them apart from the others. For those not familiar with their warranty policy, EVGA provides a lifetime warranty and will replace your card for any reason other than physical damage (this means damage due to things like power surges, and user-overclocking is covered). If you are looking for a 7300 GS, the EVGA version would be a good part to consider.
We've already taken a first look at NVIDIA's 7300 GS and you can read the article here. For this review, we will offer a brief recap of the card's features for reference, and look at some performance tests with our EVGA e-Geforce 7300 GS.
The GeForce 7300 GS was introduced by NVIDIA to take the place of the 6200 TurboCache on their budget end of graphics cards, and it does the job well, we've found. As the name implies, the 7300 GS is based on the GeForce 7 architecture, but it's been stripped down quite a bit.
There is a half-size version of the card which only has DVI and TV-out connections, but the EVGA 7300 GS that we have is full size and includes a VGA D-sub as well. The card is quite small and light, which makes sense given its budget classification. There are no external power connectors, and there is a very small fan on the GPU to keep it cool, with the EVGA logo in the center of it.
The 7300 GS also has 3 vertex and 4 pixel pipelines, the same as the 6200, but our EVGA 7300 GS has a larger memory size of 256 MB verses 16-64 MB of the 6200TC. Currently, SLI with this part is not supported, but we would be surprised if we don't see this feature enabled at some point later on. DVD decoding is another feature of this card, and it will likely include high definition video capabilities in future driver updates.
As we mentioned earlier, EVGA is a company with which we've had good experiences in the past, as their prices and warranty policy set them apart from the others. For those not familiar with their warranty policy, EVGA provides a lifetime warranty and will replace your card for any reason other than physical damage (this means damage due to things like power surges, and user-overclocking is covered). If you are looking for a 7300 GS, the EVGA version would be a good part to consider.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
48 Comments
View All Comments
yacoub - Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - link
To paraphrase your post, "This isn't a CPU scaling analysis to provide useful data to you to see how this GPU would perform for an actual system that would use it."That's exactly what I'm saying too.
Egglick - Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - link
It seems that after every low/midrange videocard test, there's always a couple "simple" people crying about how the CPU used for testing was too fast.The point is to test the videocard, and the videocard alone. Adding other variables such as slow CPUs and memory bottlenecks only complicates things, and gives you a skewed view of how the videocard actually performs when there aren't other components affecting it's performance. This is a videocard test, not a full system test. Adding slower components to drag down the scores would give us incorrect results as to how the videocard performs. Obviously you haven't taken any science classes beyond basic highschool level.
What you're asking for is a CPU scaling test (where it's known that the videocard isn't the only variable), and they much more involving and time consuming.
yacoub - Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - link
My system is pretty highend yet I'm at least capable of understanding the pointlessness of this review for the folks who would actually buy this card, while you are clearly not able to do so.
Wow, how worthless is that for the buyers of this card.
Again, worthless. adding a realistic CPU for the system this card would be in would give you an ACCURATE view of how the card ACTUALLY performs.
I don't know about you, but I don't play games on a videocard, I play them on a complete computer, thus knowing how the card performs in a real world system of someone who would actually be interested in this card would make the MOST sense.
Obviously you can't comprehend simple logic and reasoning and resort to personal attacks, but at least some folks here are a bit more capable.
No, what we're asking for is a useful test of this videocard in the type of system it'd actually go in. It's no more "time consuming or involving" than this test, really. Just put in a different CPU and you'd be 90% of the way there.
Show me a gamer who buys an $800 CPU but a budget GPU and I'll show you the person who hasn't "taken any science classes beyond basic highschool level".
peldor - Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - link
A Sempron is easily capable of delivering faster framerates than these video cards, let alone a low-end Athlon 3000+. Maybe on a Celeron you're dropping low enough that the CPU is a bottleneck.On a mid-range card review, your point would be much more relevant. For these cards, not so much IMO.
yacoub - Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - link
They should mention that then, at least in the conclusion if not in the Test Setup page.oneils - Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - link
No, we're just asking Anandtech to back up their conclusion:"While many gamers will find the card unappealing because of its limitations, it does have the ability to play games at lower quality settings and resolutions quite well, and for those who only dabble in gaming and don't feel like spending much money on an upgrade, this card might be a good choice."
Really? A good choice? For who? FX-55 users? Or are mid-range cpu users included in this as well?
yacoub - Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - link
And if mid-range cpu users are included in their statment as well, how can they justify such a comment when they didn't actually test the card in a mid-range box - the very type of system this card would be put in?Don't expect a reply though, you're making too much sense. ;P
mczak - Monday, February 20, 2006 - link
Sorry, but the performance numbers are completely useless if you don't mention if the cards in question have 32bit/64bit/128bit memory interfaces, the amount and clock speed of the memory (especially important for the TC cards). Those cards can easily differ by a factor of 2 if compared to themselves (i.e. card with the same name) just because of that alone.Questar - Monday, February 20, 2006 - link
"The 7300 GS will most likely raise the bar for budget cards in the future."How can it raise the bar when it performs worse than, and costs more than an x1300?
tedward - Monday, February 20, 2006 - link
Nvidia is claiming that this card will offer great video/DVD playback. I would think most people interested in this card would be non-gamers, with a HTPC box. Would be nice to see how it performs compared to the x1300 w/Avivo, and the 6150/430 chipset.