Radeon x1600 pro vs. x1900 GT  

The 1900 is a hands-down better card.

The 1600pro is only 12 pipes with a 128bit memory interface, while the 1900gt is 12 pipes with 36 shader units and has a 256bit memory controller.

Even though the 1600 has more memory, it's nowhere near as fast as the 1900 for gaming.

I'm not sure if the 1900 is 'bang-for-buck' better, but if you want to play recent games at decent settings then I don't think you'll be happy with the 1600pro.

I want something that is Vista proof!

There's nothing on the market for you then. Hopefully the first DX10 cards will come out this winter.

Correct me if I'm wrong but Dx10 won't be available with ANY version of XP. You will need vista to use dx10, right?

there are going to be a lot of low level changes which knocks out direct backwards compatibility with both hardware and software, from my understanding. if you do not have minimally compliant dx10 hardware (unified shaders, etc.), it will NOT be dx10 compatible.

i would personally avoid the x1600 at all costs, unless you were not going to do any decent gaming and required certain low-budget htpc features. it is an overpriced underperformer in my opinion. if you wanted something that plays today's gen of games fairly well in order to tide you over until your vista/dx10 purchase for under the $150 mark, i would suggest looking into the 7600 GT. that card is one of the best performers in the lower to midrange cost category. it definitely beats the pants off your x1600pro..

I've been going back and forth between Nvidia and ATI myself lately. You can hurt your brain reading reviews/ratings on all those choices. I'm looking to replace a ATI X800 XL that's growing tired........

Today, I'd a bought the ATI X1800 XT (512mb) if there had been any in the store(s). Now, I'm thinking I can get the x1900 XT (512mb) for about the same price if I shop around. It gets good reviews except for the part about it sounding like a vacuum cleaner....

Tomorrow, I'll probably change my mind and look for a nvidia 7900....

I briefly thought about the 1900 GT but the reviews were not kind to it when compared to similarly priced cards. One thing I do know is I'm not going to spend $500+/- on any graphics card.

$250 is a good price on a GT.......CompUSA wants $299.00 for theirs.

Good Luck! It's a crap shoot.

I'd go for a cheaper card, because Vista is on it's way now...

Then buy the best DX10 card in about a year :)

I bought the ATI x1900 XT and await delivery. Vista/DX10 aren't delivered yet. Even when they are, when's the first game going to come out that utilizes DX10? 2008? By then it'll be time for a new card anyway.......

SOrry. Think a little sooner..

Look up Crysis in gamespot dot c0m

Crysis is the first DX10 game and it is coming out in Q4 of 2006. It uses the second Gen of the FarCry Engine which anyone call tell you is very demanding on any GPU..

Just look at the screenshots and see for yourself.. =0

The card I'm using now runs vista just fine. I'm a beta tester for vista. I just want a nice card that will take advantage of Crysis when it releases.

But from what I understand it will play also on DX9 cards (maybe not as good as DX10) ) so its not 100% SX10 only game. The playable demo's at some of the shows where actually running on DX9 vid cards.

Okay after doing some reading no card is dx10 compatible. Well I guess I'm in the market for a temporary solution. What would you guys recommend. Im running a dual core p4 4.0 ghz with 1gb of memory. This is my media center hub for all my home theater gear. Advise is appreciated.