Budget 90nm Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce 7300

by Derek Wilson on 1/18/2006 9:00 AM EST


Back to Article

  • A554SS1N - Tuesday, February 07, 2006 - link

    Hi, just wondering when this card will be reviewed, now that 7300 cards are springing up everywhere, surely it's now possible to get hold of one?

    As far as I can tell from the very few shoddy reviews other sites have posted, it seems as though the 7300GS will probably be competition to an X600Pro and offer performance inbetween the NV43 6200 and a vanilla 6600, maybe even better in some situations where memory bandwidth isn't the promlem.

    I look forward to seeing an Anandtech review!!!!
  • Morro - Sunday, January 22, 2006 - link


    Likewise, the 256MB version of the 7300 will look like it has a 512MB framebuffer to software.

    Framebuffer?! Isn't it memory to store complete frames? As I inderstand videocard memory stores textures and data for GPU calculations.
  • gerf - Friday, January 20, 2006 - link


    NVIDIA's newest sub $100 part fairs.

    That'd be "fares" wouldn't it? :P

    Anywho, as a person who primarily uses his laptop, but would like a cheap-0 gaming computer, this would be ideal for me.
  • quasarsky - Friday, January 20, 2006 - link

    whats all the fuss about? who cares about hard launches. you can buy what was a paper launch, a x800xt now easy. i'm more concerned about it being availble years later when its in the 200-250 dollar price range. I don't have the big bucks to spend on 1500+ maybe crossfire/sli combos :-D. Reply
  • Cerb - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    IGP may rule, but there are tons of gamers who don't have big wallets, and will gladly buy something like this. Unlike the GF4MX and FX5x00 (both of which were terrible, with the FX 5200/5300/5500 only being viable when it got to being about $40), I could recommend this (assuming the performance scales with the core speed) with a straight face as being moderately cheap and actually a decent value. While actual value goes up right to the 7800GT, hardly anyone has the money to put down for something like that. Reply
  • slashbinslashbash - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    Or maybe somebody can post a link to something where I can make quick-and-easy comparisons? The cheapest and seemingly most plentiful budget card at any mainstream store such as Fry's still sadly remains the MX4000, which, if I'm not mistaken, is basically a castrated GeForce2. Truly I weep when I'm at Fry's and I see people spending $50 on these POS cards that my old GF2 GTS would beat. Yes, the 5x00 line sucked too, but I'm pretty sure even a 5200 would beat an MX4000 handily. But I can't see where Anandtech has *ever* benchmarked the MX4000. I just want some benchmarks so that I can have something solid to tell people and convince them to buy a better card. Reply
  • slashbinslashbash - Saturday, January 21, 2006 - link

    Also, any chance we can get an update on the GPU and CPU cheatsheets? :) Reply
  • SUOrangeman - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    Who uses VGA anymore? :) Reply
  • johnsonx - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    "Who uses VGA anymore?"

    Just about everyone uses the analog output. Just because enthusiasts are all geeked-up about DVI doesn't mean more than a small percent of the actual market uses digital.

    That said, I do agree that I'd prefer to see all cards ship with dual-DVI, and 1 DVI-VGA adapter in the box. That would add cost though, which is why this isn't common yet.

  • ElFenix - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    how many products have ever shipped worldwide at once? none? how many graphics cards have been available on the day of launch? 2? and those within the last year? you make it sound as if 'hard launches' happen all the time, when they don't. the only thing the push for 'hard launches' is doing is pushing NDA dates back to where the manufacturer thinks they can have stock on shelves the next day. honestly, i'd much rather know a month in advance. now, true vaporware is a problem, but knowing a month in advance is not.

    and it's 'cite,' not 'site'.

    and hard launch is two words.
  • DerekWilson - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    NVIDIA products hardlaunched in the past year and a half:

    Go 6800 Ultra (yes, it all started with a notebook launch)

    GeForce 7800 GTX

    GeForce 7800 GT

    Go 7800

    GeForce 6800 GS

    GeForce 7800 GTX 512 was available on launch day in limited quantities and sold out fast ... so we'll count it as half a hard launch ...

    ... and that's just off the top of my head. There are probably others that slipped my mind.
  • DerekWilson - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    Yes, worldwide hardware launches are more difficult than software launches ... But thanks for sticking up for us :-)

    As I said, we don't currently expect worldwide availability. That's just the direction we are headed.
  • peldor - Thursday, January 19, 2006 - link

    I don't think we're headed toward hard launches for everything. Financially it's not that great for the companies. They have to build up supplies for weeks or months, which leaves money tied up in products in a warehouse. Or the manufacturing facilities have to be built to over capacity which makes even less sense. On the high-end, low-volume parts this should be easier, but on the low-end, not so much.

    Market timing will continue to be a huge part of the decision to paper launch vs hard launch.
  • Phiro - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    Diablo: II had a simultaneous worldwide launch.

    Star Wars: Episode 3 "Revenge Of The Sith" had a simultaneous worldwide launch.

    Fantastic Four had a simultaneous worldwide launch.

  • Phiro - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    Troy was simultaneous. The Frozen Throne expasion for WC3 was simultaneous. The Pretendo Revolution is planned on being simultaneous.

    Bobby Fisher's new chess game was simultaneous.

    Red Alert 2 was simultaneous.

    Steam releases from Valve are simultaneous.

    Apple's Tiger release was simultaneous.
  • Phiro - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    ATI maintains to this day that the 9500 & 9700 release and then three months later the PRO release were both simultaneous worldwide launches. Reply
  • ViRGE - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    Without forcing manufacturers to hard launch, they're going to pull shit like the 6800 Ultra Extreme, the X1800XT, and other such launches where they'll announce a product just to steal another company's thunder, and then potentially never release it, fail to release it in decent quantities, or announce a product so far out that we start talking about things that are still a gleam in the eyes of a VHDL. The only solution to this problem is to pressure companies in to hard launching, as they can not commit these abuses if they actually need to have the product ready to go. Gamers deserve real products with real specifications and real benchmarks, so that they know what to buy; soft launches are nothing more than a method of spreading FUD to hurt one's opponent and eventually the gamers themselves. Reply
  • ElFenix - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    no, that's vaporware. not 'soft launches.' the problem isn't that the product comes out a week or two later in large quantities, it's that it never comes out (ultra extreme) or comes out in such a trickle that it isn't available anywhere unless you're really lucky (xt pe, gtx 512). the beef was and always has been with vaporware. yes, the 'hard launch' is a way to fix it, but it brings its own downside. Reply
  • Jep4444 - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    doesnt even solve the problem, the GTX512 was hard launched and its still nearly impossible to find Reply
  • OrSin - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    On board video for ATI Xpress and NV 6100's are more theng ood enought for most business applications and family video games (Wheel of fortune type). Thie card has no place. Most real games this card can't do anything.

    This quote "Because many game developers write software for the least common denominator" is just not true. Most of the huge selling "real" game of last year, you needed to upgrade your card to play. I say real because I'm not including game like the Sims. But even if include the market for games like the Sims, this card is once again not need when on board video will do. If you not paying $150 and up for card you might was well stick with on board video.
  • Puddleglum - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    You're mything with your facts. The quote "Because many game developers write software for the least [slowest] common denomintaor" is indeed true. However, obviously there are some games that simply push the envelope well past the slower cards. You cannot reason that "this card is once again not need when on board video will do," if you're basing that on "Most real games this card can't do anything."

    One of the more real games that exists right now is Battlefield 2, which will run on a GeForce FX 5700; EA recommends 256MB of on-card RAM. This card not only beats out a 5700, but, from the article, there may be a 256MB version with the 7300. For < $100.

    Upgrading from onboard video will be a common reason for a buyer to look at this card, as this card brings the user into the possibility of playing nearly all games that are out right now. Not only will it play the game, but this card will support the new features, such as rendering DX9 or even HDR, where I don't believe any onboard can touch right now.

    There will certainly be customers in line at Fry's with a game in one hand and a 7300 in the other.
  • highlnder69 - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    "Now all we really need is for Intel to care about putting performance and quality into their graphics hardware."

    Maybe they should start with their processors first and then move on upgrading their integrated graphics...
  • deathwalker - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    ouch..you are mean. It is amazing how Intel has let themselves fall from there position of dominance in the processor market forn years ago. Then again..did they really fall or is it the prespective that thay have fallen when measured agains how fast AMD has come on since the since the introduction of their XP line? Reply
  • neogodless - Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - link

    While it is impossible to do a direct match-up between PCI Express cards and AGP, I'd like to see how this competes against previous budget cards, or even previous mainstream cards that can now be bought on a budget. At the very least, I'd like to see this compared to Dell's de facto PCI Express card, the Radeon X300 SE, because we can see what kind of upgrade option this would be for those on a budget.

    And... in a perfect world, it'd also be put up against the likes of the previous generation as well, but those are all AGP... oh well!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now