The Mid-range cards of the X1000 series spanned three key GPU Codenames, well this is how they are supposed to stack up anyway, of course the world of Mid-2000s is a confusing mess:

• RV530 (Radeon X1300(XT)/X1600/X1650): The main workhorse of ATI’s midrange X1000 lineup, RV530 balanced modest gaming performance with full DirectX 9.0c support and shader model 3.0. It powered the highest-end version of the X1300 cards (the X1300XT) through the better-known X1600 Pro and XT and then lower-end variants of the X1650 and, apparently, my X1650Pro here.
• RV535 (Radeon X1650 Pro/X1650 XT): RV535 was the shrunk and refined version of the X1650-era architecture, bringing the same overall design to 80 nm with higher clocks and better efficiency. It formed the stronger end of the X1650 family, especially in X1650 Pro and X1650 XT form, where it delivered the best mix of clock speed, thermals, and board partner variation in this branch of the Radeon range.
• RV560 (Radeon X1650 GT): Positioned as a lower-cost refresh of the X1650 line, RV560 kept the same basic 12 pixel shader, 5 vertex shader, 4 TMU, 4 ROP design but arrived on the smaller 80 nm process. In practice it sat between the older RV530-based X1650 and the faster RV535-based X1650 Pro/X1650 XT parts, offering a tidy stepping stone for OEM and mainstream boards.

The X1650GT must have been pretty rare as I can’t find any online, even searching completed sales on ebay.

These GPUs saw made out the popular mid-range and competed directly with Nvidia’s 6600 and 7600 models in the main, in addition to some 6800 cards and the 7300GT.

Happy to have a Sapphire again, they seem to be the most common ATi card brand available to use today, perhaps they were the most well built and survived better than other brands or perhaps there were more of them sold back in the day.

Anyway, with a blue PCB and alien on the head shroud, it is a welcome addition to my collection.

You will note that my card here is showing as having a 90nm RV530 GPU, which really shouldn’t be the case.

According to the smart looking table that I made above, the X1650 Pro is supposed to come with the 80nm RV535 GPU.

The clocks on my card also suspiciously match those on the X1600XT which does have the RV530 GPU at 90nm.

So thanks a bunch Sapphire, I seem to have an X1600XT with an X1650Pro name on it.

It seems that the RV535 was just a refresh, it should run cooler and perhaps consume less power, so performance-wise there shouldn’t be much of a difference.

Game Overview:

Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell launched on November 19, 2002, developed by Ubi Soft Montreal. Built on the LithTech Jupiter engine (Unreal Engine precursor), it pioneered tactical stealth gameplay with groundbreaking light/shadow mechanics and realistic audio design. The game set new standards for immersion through dynamic lighting where visibility literally shaped gameplay.

Known for its revolutionary light-based stealth, Splinter Cell remains the ultimate benchmark for early 2000s GPUs. The game’s real-time shadows, particle effects, and high-poly environments brutally stress fillrate and shader performance even on modern retro hardware.

I have the GOG version of the game which has an internal benchmark that can be used.

The Sapphire X1650Pro does not really impress in this title, despite the GDDR3 memory, it sits only a little above the X1300Pro and well behind the 6600GT.

At 1024×768 things scale down accordingly, the X1650Pro gives an average FPS of 49.72. Playable but disappointing considering the competition.

Game Overview:
Released in October 2002, Unreal Tournament 2003 was built on the early version of Unreal Engine 2. It was a big leap forward from the original UT, with improved visuals, ragdoll physics, and faster-paced gameplay.

The engine used DirectX 8.1 and introduced support for pixel shaders, dynamic lighting, and high-res textures all of which made it a solid test title for early 2000s hardware.

We played a lot of this and 2004 at LAN parties back in the day.

Still a great game and well worth going back to, even if you’re mostly limited to bot matches these days. There’s even a single-player campaign of sorts, though it’s really just a ladder of bot battles.

The game holds up visually and mechanically, and it’s a good one to throw into the testing suite for older cards. The uncapped frames are pretty useful for my purposes.

Performance Notes:

Things are much improved in UT2003, our X1650Pro is far closer, but still behind the 6600GT. At the point in writing, this is still the worst performing GDDR3 card tested and the 7600GT is far better performing.

In a more positive note, the HD2600XT cards that would be the direct successor to the X1650Pro only peform marginally better, the Lenovo version coming in at 131fps average to the 111 of the sapphire card (with similar 1% Lows)

Game Overview:

Released for Windows in December 2003, with later ports to Mac OS X and Linux, X2: The Threat is a space trading and combat simulation developed by Egosoft. It continues the story from X: Beyond the Frontier, placing players in the role of Julian Gardna, a former pirate drawn into a conflict with a new alien threat known as the Khaak

While not tied to a widely licensed engine like Unreal, X2 introduced a new in‑house graphics engine built specifically for the X‑Universe. This engine delivered Improved ship and station models, More detailed sectors with nebulae and environmental effects, Dynamic lighting and particle effects and Support for DirectX 8.1‑class hardware, aligning it with early‑2000s GPU capabilities.

This made X2 a solid benchmark title for PCs of the era, especially for players testing mid‑range and high‑end GPUs from the GeForce 3/4 and Radeon 8500/9000 families.

This is the GOG version again and it does have an internal benchmark.

Performance Notes:

Still in the DirectX 8.0 era and the X1650 Pro still performs worse than the 6600GT, the gap falling further from Unreal Tournament 2003. It does beat the 2600XT and sits well above the Triplex X1650 showing the difference faster RAM makes.

Game Overview:
Released in August 2004, Doom 3 was built on id Tech 4 and took the series in a darker, slower direction. It’s more horror than run-and-gun, with tight corridors, dynamic shadows, and a heavy focus on atmosphere. The engine introduced unified lighting and per-pixel effects, which made it a demanding title for its time, and still a good one to test mid-2000s hardware.

Game Overview:
Far Cry launched in March 2004, developed by Crytek and built on the original CryEngine. It was a technical marvel at the time, with massive outdoor environments, dynamic lighting, and advanced AI. The game leaned heavily on pixel shaders and draw distance, making it a solid stress test for mid-2000s GPUs. It also laid the groundwork for what would later become the Crysis legacy.

Minimum at 800×600 is not a tricky task and becomes GPU limited at around 260ish fps.

Our Sapphire X1650Pro doesn’t quite limit the CPU and is within a few frames of the 6600GT, though losing out to the Nvida card.

When the cards are really tested with Ultra Quality settings, the X1650 Pro does get in ahead of the 6600GT by a margin of around 6FPS.

Strangely, Anti-Aliasing in this game actually puts the X1650Pro behind the 6600GT, a reverse on what we saw with Doom3.

Performance is fine though, just under 50fps is not a bad result in FarCry.

At the Higher resolution of 1280×1024 with 6xAA, the X1650 comes in slightly behind the 6600GT but ahead of the two HD2600XT cards, the mid-range from the generation after.

Game Overview:
F.E.A.R. (First Encounter Assault Recon) launched on October 17, 2005 for Windows, developed by Monolith Productions. Built on the LithTech Jupiter EX engine, it was a technical showcase for dynamic lighting, volumetric effects, and intelligent enemy AI. The game blended tactical shooting with psychological horror, earning acclaim for its eerie atmosphere and cinematic combat.

In FEAR the X1650 Pro sits between the 6600GT and 6800GS in this game, so a slight improvement before AA is enabled

The position remains unchanged with AA, though the drop in FPS isn’t quite as dramatic as the 6600GT

Game Overview:
Battlefield 2 launched on June 21, 2005, developed by DICE and published by EA. It was a major evolution for the franchise, introducing modern warfare, class-based combat, and large-scale multiplayer battles with up to 64 players. Built on the Refractor 2 engine, it featured dynamic lighting, physics-based ragdolls, and destructible environments that pushed mid-2000s hardware.

No single-player campaign, but I find bot matches via Instant Action a lot of fun. It was hugely popular in its day, especially for Commander Mode, vehicle combat, and it apparently had a thriving modding scene.

The X1650Pro performs much better than the 6600GT in this title, the 7600GT is leagues better with an average of 96fps over the 65fps of the 7600GT.

With Anti-Aliasing the X1650Pro increases it’s lead over the 6600GT and is, for the first time, somewhat comparable with the 7600GT. It manages to split the newer HD2600XT cards also, so a good showing.

Game Overview:

Need for Speed: Carbon launched on October 30, 2006 in North America, developed by EA Black Box and published by Electronic Arts. It continued the series’ street-racing focus after Most Wanted but shifted the action to canyon showdowns and crew-based racing, adding stronger emphasis on territory control and team support. The game was built on the EAGL engine and designed to showcase glossy car models, night-time city lighting, and heavy visual effects suited to mid-2000s gaming PCs and consoles.

In NFS Carbon at Medium settings and 800×600, the X1650Pro continues to impress. For the first time it beats the 7600GT and 6800GS from Nvidia

A similar result at 1024×768, though it does show the performance hit on all cards to move things up to this resolution.

Max Settings and the game falls below the line of acceptable playability. 21FPS average is still better than the 6800GS but now well behind the 7600GT.

Ramping things up further with 4XAA and performance doesn’t drop too badly

Game Overview:
Released on November 10, 2006, Medieval II: Total War was developed by Creative Assembly and published by Sega. It’s the fourth entry in the Total War series, built on the enhanced Total War engine with support for Shader Model 2.0 and 3.0. The game blends turn-based strategy with real-time battles, set during the High Middle Ages, and includes historical scenarios like Agincourt.

The Sapphire X1650Pro gives a useful 53Fps at 1024×768 Medium, very close to the 6800GS and well ahead of the 6600GT.

The 7600GT is back to being out of reach, 53fps to 73fps.

With Best settings including 2xAA, the X1650 can only manage 15Fps, the 6800GS can only manage 1 more and the 6600GT is really struggling with only an average FPS of 9.

Game Overview:

Test Drive Unlimited launched in 2006, developed by Eden Games and published by Atari. It took the series in a new direction with a huge open-world recreation of Oahu, where driving, buying cars and homes, and challenging other players were all part of the experience.

It was built on Eden’s Twilight 2 engine, giving it a more ambitious open-world setup than the previous Test Drive games. The big hook was its “massively open online racing” style, which blended solo progression with always-on multiplayer roaming.

800×600 medium settings against mainly budget cards and the X1650Pro beats the 6600GT by a healthy 8fps average, though the 1% low figure is pretty poor.

At High settings the X1650 Pro starts to suffer, still beating the 6600GT but we are getting used to that now and 27Fps and a 10fps 1% low isn’t many peoples idea of playable nowadays.

Game Overview:
Oblivion launched on March 20, 2006, developed by Bethesda Game Studios. Built on the Gamebryo engine, it introduced a vast open world, dynamic weather, and real-time lighting. The game was a technical leap for RPGs, with detailed environments and extensive mod support that kept it alive well beyond its release window (it’s just had a re-release recently).

Known for its sprawling world Oblivion remains a benchmark title for mid-2000s hardware. The game’s reliance on draw distance and lighting effects makes GPUs struggle.

A strong showing with these medium settings and lowish resolution, 68Fps average is above the 6800GS and not too far below the 7600GT. The X1650 Pro is well ahead of the 6600GT now.

A big jump up to Ultra High at 1024×768 and the X1650 Pro can only give 27fps, a little behind the 6800GS but remaining well ahead of the 6600GT

Game Overview:
Crysis launched in November 2007 and quickly became the go-to benchmark title for PC gamers. Built on CryEngine 2, it pushed hardware to the limit with massive draw distances, dynamic lighting, destructible environments, and full DirectX 10 support.

The game is just about playable on the HD2600XT and 8600GT under DirectX 9.
‘Very High’ settings are technically selectable, but not on XP. To be tested separately later in the article.

At Low settings at 1024×768 The X1650Pro can manage 38FPS, coming in above the 6800GS again but a full 10fps behind the 7600GT.

Medium Settings are a struggle to play and benchmark; 16fps average is all the X1650 could give. This does perform better than the 7600GT but in reality it’s not playable on any of the fixed-function mid-range.

The Sapphire X1650Pro gives a 61Fps average, a good result and now far ahead of the 6800GS. The 7600GT is only a 3fps average above so one of the best showings yet.

Full Dynamic Lighting ruins the party though and the X1650Pro falls to just 18fps.

Game Overview:
Assassin’s Creed launched in November 2007, developed by Ubisoft Montreal and built on the Anvil engine. It introduced open-world stealth gameplay, parkour movement, and historical settings wrapped in sci-fi framing. The first entry takes place during the Third Crusade, with cities like Damascus, Acre, and Jerusalem rendered in impressive detail for the time.

Performance Notes:

At 800×600 low the triplex X1650 gives a playable 54 fps, only a little behind the 6800GS and above even the X1300XT, those extra pipelines more than making up for clock and memory speed deficits.

Pushing the graphics up a notch level and increasing the resolution knocks the average fps down to 34.

The X1650 does a little better than you may expect, given the gaming benchmarks on the earliest titles, beating the X1300Pro handily despite the clock deficits.

The result is still well below the 6600GT however.

in 3d Mark 2003 the position is maintained, above the X1300pro but below the 6600GT by some margin.

In 3d Mark 2006 those extra pipelines start to have an effect and the X1650 is now a good margin above the 6600GT

Quite a demanding benchmark and the X1650 beats the 6600GT and X1300Pro handily again.

The TDP for the X1650Pro is 44watts apparently, the same Phenom II based system draws 166w from the wall when running the Unigine Haven benchmark. So a fair bit more efficient than the Nvidia 6000series cards that it was competing with on here.

Temperature wise, we did it 70 degrees briefly though the monitor spent most of it’s time between 69. something.

The PCB temperature peaks at 51 degrees.

The Fan speed seems to have two settings, 26% and stepping up to 39% when things get warm. The fan is quiet enough though, not as obnoxious as with the Triplex X1650 tested before – I couldn’t want to get that out of the system.