I think you're thinking about the 700XT. The 700pro is beaten handily in just about everything by a 6600gt. And while the 700pro can usually overclock the core speed to that of an xt, I don't think the memory is as ocable. As for the 800 and 800se, they really aren't at the 6600gt's price level, which is now $150-200. I really don't think you can reccomend a 700pro over a 6600gt unless there is price difference (which there really isn't) or game performance is not the objective.Austin wrote::wink: Yes the 6600GT is faster but not by a huge margin at all (obviously Doom III aside). The X700Pro offers perf very similar to the previous top-end card, the 9800Pro but the X700Pro has is slightly enhanced architecturally and is likely to o/c a little better. Any of these three are top cards so I'd suggest making bundle, cooling & pricing the key decision makers. The X700Pro is being phased out in favour of the X800SE & X800 so should be found for a very decent price.
The marginality caused yield issues with the XT, as most chips can't function at that speed and ended up binned as the Pro. Also, by the time they got enough of the XT's available to make it sellable, the X800 already came along and it was a much better 6600GT killer than the X700XT.Austin wrote::wink: Well most people's opinion as to why the X700XT never really materialised is that it was too marginal, ie right at the limits of the X700 archy. As such many X700Pro are reportedly X700XT (albeit marginal) and capable of a good o/c, not that 6600GT is a bad o/c'er of course. Even at stock the X700PRO is easily as good as the 9800Pro which in turn is close to the 6600GT (again Doom III aside). Also remember to factor in that the AGP version of the 6600GT is slightly lower clocked.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests