<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://hothardware.com/cs/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>3D Graphics Cards and Video</title><link>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/8.aspx</link><description>NVIDIA, ATI, Matrox, PowerVR, even 3DfX! Graphics chips and the boards that they are built on.</description><dc:language>en</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2008.5 SP2 (Build: 40407.4157)</generator><item><title>Re: Overclocked Radeon HD 3650 Showdown</title><link>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/thread/303837.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 16:03:26 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">ba4e517a-01ef-48a6-b096-821b95afe388:303837</guid><dc:creator>Crisis Causer</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/thread/303837.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=8&amp;PostID=303837</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;p&gt;Hehe, look at them all get spanked by Crysis.&lt;img src="http://hothardware.com/cs2007/emoticons/emotion-4.gif" alt="Stick out tongue" /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;ATi&amp;#39;s 3650 line isn&amp;#39;t too competitive.&amp;nbsp; The aging 8600GT line is a better option, imo.&amp;nbsp; Even the 2600XT often outperforms the 3650 by a smidge. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item><item><title>RE: Overclocked Radeon HD 3650 Showdown</title><link>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/thread/303835.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 15:56:39 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">ba4e517a-01ef-48a6-b096-821b95afe388:303835</guid><dc:creator>Marco C</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/thread/303835.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=8&amp;PostID=303835</wfw:commentRss><description>For the sake of comparison with other articles, we like to use the same high-quality settings across the board.  HH readers are savvy enough to know that using lower-quality settings will result in higher performance.  It&amp;#39;s the relative performance between products that&amp;#39;s important to consider.</description></item><item><title>RE: Overclocked Radeon HD 3650 Showdown</title><link>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/thread/303827.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 15:43:34 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">ba4e517a-01ef-48a6-b096-821b95afe388:303827</guid><dc:creator>ice_73</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/thread/303827.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=8&amp;PostID=303827</wfw:commentRss><description>i dont find any of these cards to be playable at settings that high. 15 fps tops for company of heroes? 11.67 fps tops for crysis? i dont think people who buy the 3650 are looking for high quality high res gaming. i think it would of been better to have tests in both high quality and medium.</description></item><item><title>Overclocked Radeon HD 3650 Showdown</title><link>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/thread/303819.aspx</link><pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 15:19:37 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">ba4e517a-01ef-48a6-b096-821b95afe388:303819</guid><dc:creator>News</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><comments>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/thread/303819.aspx</comments><wfw:commentRss>http://hothardware.com/cs/forums/commentrss.aspx?SectionID=8&amp;PostID=303819</wfw:commentRss><description>&lt;br /&gt;                &lt;div class="newsText" id="dvPreComment"&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;&lt;img style="WIDTH:110px;HEIGHT:87px;" alt="" hspace="2" src="http://www.hothardware.com/newsimages/Item6799/3650_news.jpg" align="left" /&gt;Just last week, we posted an evaluation of a Radeon HD 3650 card by Diamond Multimedia, where said manufacturer decided to one-up ATI&amp;#39;s reference specifications by raising the amount of on-board memory to a full one gigabyte.&amp;#160; The results, unfortunately, were not overly favorable as the memory happened to be of the inexpensive, low-speed DDR2 variety.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Arial;"&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Today, however, we take a look at two more HD 3650s, one each from ASUS and HIS, where the emphasis was placed more on clock speeds than on memory buffer size.&amp;#160; While the default speeds set forth by ATI&amp;#39;s reference specifications were listed as 725 MHz for the GPU core and 800 MHz for the memory, the two cards represented in this article are decidedly faster: 800 / 900 MHz for ASUS and 790 / 890MHz for HIS.&amp;#160; The 10 MHz variance is not the only thing that separates the two cards, however.&amp;#160; ASUS&amp;#39; EAH3650 TOP comes with the standard 256 MB frame buffer, whereas HIS doubles this to 512 MB on their Radeon HD 3650 IceQ Turbo.&amp;#160; One card has slightly higher speeds, the other has twice the memory - let&amp;#39;s see who wins this showdown of overclocked Radeon HD 3650s.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/Overclocked_Radeon_HD_3650_Showdown__ASUS_vs_HIS"&gt;&lt;u&gt;&lt;span style="COLOR:#800080;"&gt;Overclocked Radeon HD 3650 Showdown - ASUS vs. HIS&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/u&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;                &lt;div class="newsTextBody" id="dvBody"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;                &lt;div class="newsText" id="dvComment"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br /&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>