PowerColor ATi X1650 PRO 512MB PCI-E Graphics card £28.56 Delivered - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
144Expired

PowerColor ATi X1650 PRO 512MB PCI-E Graphics card £28.56 Delivered £25.98

£25.98 @ Ebuyer
Not for everyone but for a budget card this is an excellent price. £25.98 + £2.58 P+P - Select Supersaver delivery at checkout Card info - Graphics Engine - RADEON X1650 Video Memory - 512 M… Read More
bubbafatass Avatar
9y, 6m agoFound 9 years, 6 months ago
Not for everyone but for a budget card this is an excellent price.

£25.98 + £2.58 P+P - Select Supersaver delivery at checkout

Card info -

Graphics Engine - RADEON X1650
Video Memory - 512 MB DDR2
Engine Clock - 600 MHz
Memory Clock - 330 MHz x 2
Memory Interface - 128bit
DirectX Support - 9
Bus Standard - PCIE x16
More From Ebuyer:

All Comments

(56) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#1
That's a pretty nice price.
#2
Looks like a very good card for the money. Slightly faster than the X800GT i bought yesterday and £1 cheaper!
#3
Anyone know how much better this will be than the X1300 Pro i got with my Dell Vostro 200 MD?

Or even whats the best card I can get that will work in that machine? I think the vostro has a 300Watt PSU with no sockets for additional power to the graphics card.
#4
300W is OK for most I'd think. I;'m pretty sure any card which doesn't need external power would be OK, as I think that's true for my 250W supply. Not sure if this one needs external power though.

Have a look at this list:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/graphics-cards-gaming,review-29792-6.html
Looks like this will be a bit better. Just depends how much power you need, but I'm sure you could get something better which would still run on your PSU.
#5
Good find, good price.

I was also tempted by a 7600GT at £42.99 on ebuyer, only 1 left in stock though but slightly better performance than this card.

I think i'll get one of these x1650pro's and see how it goes. (I don't need to run the latest 3D games).
#6
can anyone confirm the minimum power supply required for this card to work
#7
Its so low its not even funny!

As long as its like 300W should be fine! Also depends on the rest of ur hardware...
#8
Agreed. I just found that it doesn't even need external power so 350W will be plenty. The most it can draw through the PCIe interface is 75W.
#9
scanner
can anyone confirm the minimum power supply required for this card to work


I bought the Sapphire version of this X1650, as well as the power drawn from the PCI bus which is 75 watts , it also needed another PCI-E power source straight from the power supply unit. So I suspect the total power needed is between 100 watts to 150 watts.
#10
so does that mean that there is a plug somewhere on the card to plug in a cable from your power supply?

if so, how would I know if my power supply has a plug/cable for a PCIe graphics card? What kind of plug is it?
#11
also, does it come with DVI-to-VGA adaptor as my monitor does not have DVI connection?
banned#12
I've currently got this card. Doesn't need to be connected to the PSU, 300W is fine.
#13
scanner
also, does it come with DVI-to-VGA adaptor as my monitor does not have DVI connection?


Quote from ebuyer comment on this item:

DVI to VGA Adaptor not included
#14
scanner
so does that mean that there is a plug somewhere on the card to plug in a cable from your power supply?

if so, how would I know if my power supply has a plug/cable for a PCIe graphics card? What kind of plug is it?


Correction, my Gigabyte version of the X1650 is an AGP version not PCI-E. The PCI-E version runs cooler and simpler in technology so it needs a max of 75 watts. So whether or not that 300 watts is sufficient depends on what else that you have in the machine. Note also that for a 300 watts PSU. if it were to be 70% efficient the max. usable energy is 70% of 300 watts = 210 watts as 30% is lost as heat pumping from the back of the PSU. I would say that if you have the basic hardware configuration , one CPU (75 watts), 1 DVD (10 watts) , 1 disk (10 watts) , Motherboard (40 watts) one graphics card then 300 watts is just about OK.
#15
I've got a Sapphire Radeon X550 I would like to replace. Will this be compatible with my motherboard?

And is this a better deal for the money

http://www.aria.co.uk/SuperSpecials/Other+products/nVidia+GeForce+8500GT+Super%2B1G+PCI-E+?productId=29719
#16
Nomak
I've got a Sapphire Radeon X550 I would like to replace. Will this be compatible with my motherboard?

And is this a better deal for the money

http://www.aria.co.uk/SuperSpecials/Other+products/nVidia+GeForce+8500GT+Super%2B1G+PCI-E+?productId=29719


Just depends what you want to use it for, obviously the geforce card is more of a gaming card, but it's double the price. If you want a gaming card, go for that one, if you wont be playing highly graphic intensive software, go for the ATI card.
#17
Thanks for the DVI to VGA comment smurftech, this may influance whether I go for this.
#18
I bought another version of this card a couple of weeks ago for about £45.
Considering it has 512mb I was expecting it to be quite good for games. I was rather dissappointed though. Even older games such as ghost recon and far cry didn't look great.
I sold it on ebay for £35 and then bought the Powercolour X1950 from Ebuyer.
Much, much better card due to it being 256mbit memory interface and DDR3 memory.
Obviously more expensive but if you want to play a few games, get the X1950. That does require a 400 or 450w power supply though.

Vista graphics score for this card is 2.9, the X1950 is 5.9

Hope that helps someone
#19
Been looking at this but wondered if the ASUS 2400Pro 256Mb is better/worse VFM at £26.81 + del

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/132321

Oh and ta for the Vista Gfx score as that at least suggest that the onboard gfx in my Dell Vostro 200 is better from vista's perspective as it scores higher than 2.9
#20
No, this is well worth the extra £2!
#21
Gents - a wee bit of advice would be appreciated please.
I have a Dell E520 (dual core 1.6 + 2GB ram) with inbuilt Intel G965 graphics. Personally I think the machine is a little slow on Vista, particularly with the aero graphics.

Will this card make much difference to everyday graphics and video?
I also have a new 22" monitor with a DVI connection. Will using the DVI connection make much of an improvement? (My E520 does not have that connection at present)

Cheers
Scoobies
#22
My board is PCI and I understand this is pci-e x16, would it work on my board? Also is this card HD compatible,

All answeres would be greatly appreciated but no prizes will be given.

Thank you!!!!:thinking::p
#23
ayaz - do u have the model number of your board? PCI and PCI-e are 2 completely different things.

Cheers
#24
Scoobies - Having a stand alone graphics card will most of the time improve the performance of your pc (unless u go for a high end mobo or very cheap G-card).

I think this card is an ideal upgrade for people who have onboard graphics. If nothing else it has it's own memory and won't have to use any of your ram. I'm sure it will run Vista and movies no problem at all. Will run some of the older games on medium detail as well.

gr1340 - tbh this card was never gonna run games like that in any kind of high res, it's a low end card that is ideal for aero, video, older games. The x1950 is a gaming card but is 3 times the price, not obtainable by everyone.

Cheers
#25
It's a given that this card is not really much use in 3d.
The question is why would you want to spend 26 odd pounds in an 'upgrade' that doesn't really do anything?
I think if it's to replace an integrated graphics card, then perhaps the money is better spent on more RAM. (2 Gigs for 27 pounds).
Unless there really are some oooollldd games out there you just have to have.
My 2 pence worth...
#26
Doesn't do anything ?? Why do they bother selling these cards then ?

I've played plenty of games on cards like this that onboard graphics just don't want to know about.

Also as Scoobies said, Vista can be slow with Aero using on-board graphics, a reason for upgrade if thats what u want.

Cheers
#27
Although bob for games these cards come in handy for video encoding and aero on vista. They were (when released) a low end mid range card. On board memory isn't what defines a card power! The Pixel and Vertex shaders (or in the new DX10 cards Unified Pixel Shaders) are what make a card powerful, along with the clock speeds of those shaders, the core clock and the memory.

The onboard memory is for textures in games, for 3D graphics rendering and for video encoding. This card could play older games but it is a few years old, and it was designed to play games of the same age in medium detail so on modern games it won't really perform well at all.

And to k9plus1, RAM won't make things better because when the GPU can't cope it goes to your CPU.

Edit: Oh and the 8500GT is a pile of bob for gaming! You'd be better searching for an older 7xxx Geforce or 1xxx Radeon that was designed for gaming i.e the X1950pro or a 7800gt. Anything above these will produce half decent FPS and I think you might be able to find some second hand for about the same price. If you want good FPS though you have to spend good money on a GPU im afraid
#28
nick_sub
No, this is well worth the extra £2!


I presume you mean the 2400pro is better than this one for the extra £2?

As to onboard gfx's Icomments later in this thread, I too thought add-in cards should be better but just checked my PC and it has Intel G33/G31 integrated. Vista gives mine (2Gb mem and E4500cpu) a score of 3.8 and 3.4 for the graphic card scores which would suggest my onboard chipset outstrips this xt1650pro as someone else posted it only gave 2.9????

Hmm, confused as ever LOL
#29
Nomak
I've got a Sapphire Radeon X550 I would like to replace. Will this be compatible with my motherboard?

And is this a better deal for the money

http://www.aria.co.uk/SuperSpecials/Other+products/nVidia+GeForce+8500GT+Super%2B1G+PCI-E+?productId=29719


The Geforce 8500 gets a lower rating on tom's hardware than the X1650pro.
http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=735&model2=856&chart=318
(Link above with the 2 models X1650pro & 8500GT highlighted in blue showing overall fps performance)

It's also definitely a lot worse than a 8600GT for a tenner more maybe!

Don't get that 8500GT!!

If it was my money:
You just want to fill your pci-e slot get a Geforce 7300LE (****) ~£20
Budget older gaming, get this X1650pro ~ this is a very good deal on this very thread
Budget medium gaming get a 8600GT or a X1950 if you can find one on a good deal. ~£65
High spec latest games go for a Geforce 8800GT ~ £150

Hope that helps
#30
Njay
Been looking at this but wondered if the ASUS 2400Pro 256Mb is better/worse VFM at £26.81 + del

http://www.ebuyer.com/product/132321

Oh and ta for the Vista Gfx score as that at least suggest that the onboard gfx in my Dell Vostro 200 is better from vista's perspective as it scores higher than 2.9


The HD2400 is worse.

Checkout the VGA charts on tom's hardware for more details on virtually all the gfx cards out there.
#31
No this x1650 pro should be better than the 2400pro. Not by a lot but well worth £2!
#32
You should find that the gaming score for those integrated graphics is not 3.8. There is a gaming score and then like a score for 3D like aero which are 2 different things. Believe me when I say almost ANY graphics card is better than an integrated solution even the old 7100's could probably do better! :P

Integrated is the most basic form of graphics and the only reason it can produce aero is because the makers included SM2 (I think) which is needed for Aero or whatever functionality is needed. The old FX5xxx series will produce better gaming results than integrated graphics but because they don't have this feature they cannot be used for aero.
#33
I did put both scores for onboard ???
The Gaming score is 3.4 and the Aero score is 3.8. Its the former that I don't get as that is higher than this xt1650 which apparantly gets 2.9 in someone else's machine
#34
Lol!! Thats a joke! Anyhow, if you want a true gauge of performance use a website like tomshardware (linked above by someone else) or other hardware review websites. Either that or check up on peoples 3Dmark06 scores for more info. But tomshardware is the shizna!
#35
bubbafatass
ayaz - do u have the model number of your board? PCI and PCI-e are 2 completely different things.

Cheers


Hi, it's the abit Il90-mv. Oh **** I just bought a graphics card!!
#36
I mean The IL90-MV... Doh!!
#37
This only had PCI-E x 1 which isnt the right slot, you need PCI-E x 16 slot im afraid!
#38
Small point of concern; the posted deal seems to have an odd Memory Clock speed. e.g. compare to this. Even taking into account the fact some give the doubled value and some don't, there's still quite a variation. May just be a typo, of course.
#39
ayaz
Hi, it's the abit Il90-mv. Oh **** I just bought a graphics card!!


borak
This only had PCI-E x 1 which isnt the right slot, you need PCI-E x 16 slot im afraid!


I know this will sound dodgey but I have heard that you can tape half the pins up & plug it into x1 slot?

Or does anyone know of a cheap but good x1 graphics crad?
#40
gr1340
I bought another version of this card a couple of weeks ago for about £45.
Considering it has 512mb I was expecting it to be quite good for games. I was rather dissappointed though. Even older games such as ghost recon and far cry didn't look great.
I sold it on ebay for £35 and then bought the Powercolour X1950 from Ebuyer.
Much, much better card due to it being 256mbit memory interface and DDR3 memory.
Obviously more expensive but if you want to play a few games, get the X1950. That does require a 400 or 450w power supply though.

Vista graphics score for this card is 2.9, the X1950 is 5.9

Hope that helps someone

just wondering how you scored 5.9 for visa graphics with what is a DX9 card i was sure that 5.9 was only got with a decent DX10 card and also this card is £25 the 1950 is a hell of a lot more money.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!