According tot the site Xabregamers (http://xabregamers.free.fr), it seems the Xabre 400 card easily outperforms a Geforce 3 Ti 200 in 3D Mark 2001!!! Not bad for a card at the same price as a Geforce4 MX...
I wonder how well the higher end model, Xabre 600, will perform...

Hmm...Well I wouldn't get my hopes up just yet...I haven't tried that card, or heard much about it, but I'm still skeptic about jumping to conclusions...Which is why I'll remind you that 3D Mark 2001 or 2001 SE run tests in D3D...On my computer (AMD Thunder-Bird, 1200MHz), OpenGL is way faster, since it uses the MMX and 3DNow! technology...So yeah...

Also, I did go to that Xabre site, and it says "Better than the GF3 ti 200"...hmm...What about the 400?...And also, people without a GF3 or 4 (or equivalent) card will probably be more inclined twoards buying a gf4 instead...maybe the GF 4 Ti 4200 (Which I would like to have also....Best GF4 Ti card for the price...with today's games and apps at least)

Also, in the benchmark section in that little article, it shows a chart...with the GF2, 3, 4 and their xabre card...Well on top of not specifying what program or game they used and if those numbers are the frame rate achieved in that program, it also shows the Xabre card Behind all three GF3 Ti cards...So...I don't really see the point they're trying to make...It looks to me like they're either lying or...I dunno, something's obviousely not right...

And that little "These results are very promising, especially if you keep in mind that they are done on yet immature drivers holding the Xabre back..." comment looks more to me like a little excuse to say that their card is really "great" even if the benchmark shows otherwise...


Either way, it could be a nice, more affodable card, for people who don't wanna pay for a GF 4 Ti but would like the performance of a GF 3 Ti at a lower cost...

Big D.


(Yeah I should just register or something...But then again, this is my first and possibly only time on these boards.)