7300GT vs x1600 pro

Hey gang. I'm a bit confused by some results I've just discovered so I am gona ask around here.

First, the system I am using is in my sig as Magnus. The current specs are:

Asus M2N-E
Sempron 3200+ @ 2330 mhz, HT @ 777 mhz
1GB Kingston ValueRAM PC4300 @ 667 mhz (God i love value ram)
Western Digital 80GB hard drive

So heres the thing: I recently switched my HTPC from my x1600 pro to the onbaord GF6150 cause the image quality was way better. The x1600 pro was just sitting there so I decided to see if it was on par with the 7300GT.

In reviews i read, it indicated that the x1600 pro was a bit better. Not a whole lot, but a bit. So i decided to run 3DMark 05. Here are the results:

7300GT 256mb DDR2
ForceWare 158.18
3dmark 05 score 1495

MSI X1600 Pro 256mb DDR2
Catalyst 7.5
3dmark 05 score 4061

What i find odd is that the x1600 pro more than doubled its score. Is this 3DMark not a good measure for these cards? Is the Nvidia Vista driver issue still around? I am using fairly recent drivers for the 7300 and the x1600 has the latest drivers, but can it make that much of a difference?

I was wondering if someone could help out.


EDIT: Btw the OS Is Vista Business N (64-bit)

It still looks like the performance is nowhere near what the x1600 pro is. The x1600 pro runs Halo 2 quite nicely. The 7300GT runs it like it was an ATI Rage Pro

I belive the 7300GT has either 4 or 8 pixel pipes compares to the X1600 pros 12. This could be part of the Issue...maybe try some older drivers on the 7300GT too maybe a 97.xx....just an idea.

Ok i'll try the old driver, see if that makes a difference

That and see if the 7300 is a 64bit or 128 bi card, that is a huge difference.

it is the 128bit card.

i'm not too shocked. the 7300 series is the lowest for nvidia and the 1600 series is in the midrange for ATI. thats like saying your surpised your 4cyl corrolla is slower than a v6 accord.

You're gonna want to have something w/ DDR3, or better.

jaymz9350 said:

i'm not too shocked. the 7300 series is the lowest for nvidia and the 1600 series is in the midrange for ATI. thats like saying your surpised your 4cyl corrolla is slower than a v6 accord.

Click to expand...

I'm suprised because they're the same price man. and the 7300gt is a high, low end card. Its the highest-lowend card they got. They also have the 7300GS, 7300LE, and the 7100 whatever.

Its common to have a difference in performance for price, but double the capacity?

Actually the x1600pro has 4 pixel pipelines. It has 12 'pixel shaders' much like the 1900xt has 16 pipes and 48 'pixel shaders'

I've recently discovered a few skewed results. The 7300gt, in some tests, gets fairly close to the x1650XT, so that means it has to be a driver issue. Kinda sad, though. Glad i got a bit of a clear answer, anyway.