Low-End Graphics
We'll close this price guide with the budget graphic cards that are currently available. We feel that the vast majority of users are better off purchasing a mid-range card, which in many instances are two or three times as fast as the budget offerings (sometimes more). Reason being is if you don't intend to play games (which is generally why you need a better graphics card), you should probably just use whatever graphics card you already have - even integrated graphics is sufficient rather than investing money into a low-end card. If you're looking to add a graphics card in order to get better video decoding, NVIDIA's PureVideo and ATI's AVIVO solutions are worth considering, but again you might as well upgrade to a mid-range offering. As we look at the various products, the reason we make this recommendation should become clear.
Beginning here, we have the X1300 cards. The AGP X1300s are somewhat overpriced, as you can easily pick up a 6600 GT and get much better performance than an X1300 can ever deliver. The same rule applies to the X1300 for PCI-E applications. An X1600 Pro, 6600 GT, or 7600 GS can be had for about $100, which you would find us suggesting without any hesitation over an X1300 (PCI-E).
Any one of these X300 cards should be sufficient for its intended use of basic video support and the only thing we would suggest is that you try to stick to the $50 (or lower) price point. We see no real need to spend much more than that for a card of this caliber. About the only motive to purchase a $50 graphics card is if you want a DVI output for an LCD display, since most integrated graphics solutions omit that feature.
These 7300 GS cards are meant to replace the 6200 TurboCache cards. Just as with the X300 cards, we again recommend you stick to the lower end of this spectrum because the $100 mid-range cards offer a much better solution. We mentioned DVI outputs as being one reason for a budget graphics card, but of course the HTPC market often fancies a cheap, preferably fanless, graphics card over integrated graphics due to the enhanced video decoding quality (AVIVO/PureVideo) and additional connectivity options (component out). At $100 or so, X1600 Pro and 7600 GS meet all of those requirements, so if you start nearing that price point we recommend you upgrade to the next level.
That brings this video card price guide to a close. If we missed anything you feel is worth mentioning, feel free to let us know in the comments section. We'll be back again next week, taking a look at the storage market. Thanks for reading!
We'll close this price guide with the budget graphic cards that are currently available. We feel that the vast majority of users are better off purchasing a mid-range card, which in many instances are two or three times as fast as the budget offerings (sometimes more). Reason being is if you don't intend to play games (which is generally why you need a better graphics card), you should probably just use whatever graphics card you already have - even integrated graphics is sufficient rather than investing money into a low-end card. If you're looking to add a graphics card in order to get better video decoding, NVIDIA's PureVideo and ATI's AVIVO solutions are worth considering, but again you might as well upgrade to a mid-range offering. As we look at the various products, the reason we make this recommendation should become clear.
Beginning here, we have the X1300 cards. The AGP X1300s are somewhat overpriced, as you can easily pick up a 6600 GT and get much better performance than an X1300 can ever deliver. The same rule applies to the X1300 for PCI-E applications. An X1600 Pro, 6600 GT, or 7600 GS can be had for about $100, which you would find us suggesting without any hesitation over an X1300 (PCI-E).
Any one of these X300 cards should be sufficient for its intended use of basic video support and the only thing we would suggest is that you try to stick to the $50 (or lower) price point. We see no real need to spend much more than that for a card of this caliber. About the only motive to purchase a $50 graphics card is if you want a DVI output for an LCD display, since most integrated graphics solutions omit that feature.
These 7300 GS cards are meant to replace the 6200 TurboCache cards. Just as with the X300 cards, we again recommend you stick to the lower end of this spectrum because the $100 mid-range cards offer a much better solution. We mentioned DVI outputs as being one reason for a budget graphics card, but of course the HTPC market often fancies a cheap, preferably fanless, graphics card over integrated graphics due to the enhanced video decoding quality (AVIVO/PureVideo) and additional connectivity options (component out). At $100 or so, X1600 Pro and 7600 GS meet all of those requirements, so if you start nearing that price point we recommend you upgrade to the next level.
That brings this video card price guide to a close. If we missed anything you feel is worth mentioning, feel free to let us know in the comments section. We'll be back again next week, taking a look at the storage market. Thanks for reading!
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
34 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - link
7600GT is over twice as fast as X1600 XT, and even more than that compared to X1600 Pro. X700 Pro would be about the level of X1300 Pro, minus features. Performance of X1600 XT compared to 6600GT showed the 6600 GT to be faster http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2552&p...">in almost all games, so yes, the X1600 really aren't that attractive. You may not "see a bit of difference", but are you just going by impressions or are you actually running benchmarks? Honestly, most games you won't see a difference unless you drop below 60 FPS, which might require higher resolutions or other games for testing.slashbinslashbash - Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - link
Right now the X1900 AIW is at $275 at most places (NewEgg, ZZF, etc.). Over the past weekend NewEgg even had it at $225. It's the cheapest way to get into the X1900 with a full 16/48 pipeline config. About as cheap as the X1900GT with only 12 pipelines. Plus of course the AIW also has the VIVO and TV tuner capabilities and comes with a software bundle of Adobe Photoshop Elements and Adobe Premiere Elements (worth $100). For me, it's a no-brainer.JarredWalton - Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - link
Sorry for the omission. I've gone back and added the AIW card to page 3. It's definitely a reasonable choice, as it has performance roughly equaling the X1900 GT plus you get VIVO support. If you're after faster graphics performance, however, there are better solutions.Spacecomber - Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - link
I was wondering if more might have been said about this card, the X1600 Pro for the AGP slot. It strikes me that this card is at the top of its particular class, budget AGP game cards.These cards often sell for just a little over $100, and this seems to give them a good bang for your buck value compared to their competition, which I take to be the AGP versions of the 6600 GT and X800GTO.
I've not seen a good head to head comparison of these cards, but looking at their specifications, I would think that they should perform fairly similarly.
Anyone else have any thoughts on what is a good buy in the $100-$150 range for the AGP slot? I know that there are some good prices on things like refurbished models that are no longer available new, as well as your close out bargains; however, I'm focusing on those cards that are readily available.
JarredWalton - Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - link
The 6600 GT easily outperforms X1600 Pro AGP. The only reason to get X1600 over 6600 is if you want support for AVIVO.Spacecomber - Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - link
That's interesting to know. You wouldn't necessarily have guessed that looking at their specifications.X1600Pro:
500 core, 800 memory, 128-bit, 256MB GDDR2, 12 pipelines
6600GT:
500 core, 1000 memory, 128-bit 128MB GDDR3, 8 pipelines
Any guesses as to what is holding the X1600Pro back? Is it the slightly slower clocked GDDR2 memory, compared to the faster clocked GDDR3 memory that you find on the 6600GT?
JarredWalton - Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - link
Possibly. I figured it would win, because on the high end X1800/X1900 the ATI cards seem less dependent on memory bandwidth. However, http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2552&p...">in testing, the X1600 just doesn't perform as expected - even the X1600 XT can't outperform the 6600GT in most cases! Possibly some features were cut that ATI isn't telling.Exodus220 - Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - link
I absolutely love reading your overview of the video cards and other computer hardware. However, I always run into the same frustration of trying to locate the cheapest product in your list. Sure you guys will give your recommendation but it would be so much easier if you could just sort them by lowest price to the highest price. I don't know if it has been a consideration but it sure would help my reading experience and process in searching for what you have listed as the best option.Spacecomber - Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - link
I had the same thought when reading this guide. It is especially confusing since you often have different models mixed in with each other, such as 7600GS and 7600GT lumped together. Sorting by price should indirectly sort the models, as well, and those models by a particular manufacturer that seem to not be with their group (after sorting by price) will stand out as either being a good deal or being over priced.rrcn - Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - link
I have gone ahead and sorted all the cards I can. Unfortunately, I cannot sort the 7900GT and GTX cards due to the way we must enter the search code that displays the charts. Entering in the code to display the GTX cards is fine and dandy, but when I search for the GT cards, it also displays the GTX cards.