.

Neither are going to drive a modern game with full eye candy at that rez with a solid framerate.
 
um the single 1900xtx I have at the moment plays WoW at 2304x1440 w/ eye candy enabled with no problems. Crossfire is still new though. Wait on the 7900 Sli or get one 1900xtx I guess.
 
spaceman said:
um the single 1900xtx I have at the moment plays WoW at 2304x1440 w/ eye candy enabled with no problems. Crossfire is still new though. Wait on the 7900 Sli or get one 1900xtx I guess.
Click to expand...

Yup, wait for 7900. RD580 should be out around the same time, which means we'll have a nice 7900 SLi vs X1900 XFire battle going on.
 
mashie said:
Yeah the RD580 is expected in stock the 25th and then it is just a week or so until the 7900 hopefully is announced. Let's hope it will be a proper hard launch this time.
Click to expand...

Well NVIDIA has been hard launching since the first 7800's came out. Though availability was somewhat limited on the 512MB version of the card.
 
Sir-Fragalot said:
Well NVIDIA has been hard launching since the first 7800's came out. Though availability was somewhat limited on the 512MB version of the card.
Click to expand...


Now thats what I call an understatement . Also no mention of the $$$$
 
rincewind said:
Yup, wait for 7900. RD580 should be out around the same time, which means we'll have a nice 7900 SLi vs X1900 XFire battle going on.
Click to expand...
And to give you some idea of what that will look like
http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2006q1/radeon-x1900/index.x?pg=1

TR runs higher res benchmarks. Seems either ATI or NVIDIA can run high res pretty good. The 7900 and RD580 should only improve things for both teams.
 
Anyone even seen Quad SLI capable cards for sale?

Other than that, the X1900XTX Crossfire setup is the fastest video card setup money can buy. Therefore, that's what I'd go with. Especially since ATI's FSAA and AF modes are generally superior in at least the performance department.
 
that dual GT is great and all, but if it were supposed to solve the "there is no quad SLI for sale right now" where is the bridge connector on the card?
 
STR said:
The dual Asus cards cannot run quad SLI, at least not reliably.
Click to expand...
2

I run single GTX EVGa KO at theat res.


Call of Duty 2 all eye candy on= 13fps
Call of Duty 2 trilinear on but medium textures ==44fps

BF2 no AA = 28fps ( it is arguable that you even need aa at this res.)

CS Source, 2x AA 8x af 115fps and smooth as a babies ass

HF2 2x AA 8x AF 115 FPS

Quake 4 60fps max
 
Trimlock said:
that dual GT is great and all, but if it were supposed to solve the "there is no quad SLI for sale right now" where is the bridge connector on the card?
Click to expand...

It doesn't have it because it isn't a quad SLi solution. The pictures I saw showed two very different dual 7800GTX GPU cards with 512MB of ram each. In essence, two dual 7800GTX 256MB cards with possibly higher clocks (like the 512MB GTX I assume) with two SLI Bridge connectors allowing both GPU's on both cards to communicate in SLI.
 
I have 2 x1900's in crossfire for the dell 30" 2560 x 1600. Crossfire appears to be ..quirky.. I tried to update to the 6.2 drivers but ended up reverting back to 6.1 due to every other frame rendering darker..giving me a strobing effect. Spent hours trying to get rid of it with no luck.

Performance wise 2560 is incredibly taxing on any video card. I definitly recommend 1920 x 1200 as the sweet spot for gaming at high res. This is because the 7800 and the x1900 have a large enough on chip buffer to get z optimizations (the reviews I have read mention around 3 megapixels as the limit). 2560 x 1600 is 4.1 megapixels so it overflows this buffer.

Hopefully in the future video cards will be able to handle 2560 x 1600 with ease. However, for now expect to make sacrifices in visual quality for framerate.
 
mashie said:
Thanks for the numbers.

Btw, is that the 256MB version you got?
Click to expand...

YEs Quake would be much faster but there is a cap as you probably know



Dang , you know i was running Quake4 at 1600x1200 not full resolution. Somebody give me the hack to go widescreen so i can provide an acurate number?
 
jacuzz1 said:
YEs Quake would be much faster but there is a cap as you probably know



Dang , you know i was running Quake4 at 1600x1200 not full resolution. Somebody give me the hack to go widescreen so i can provide an acurate number?
Click to expand...

You can adjust Quake IV to widescreen resolutions if a wide screen monitor is used. We've got it running on a machine with a 24 inch wide display at work.
 
Trimlock said:
that dual GT is great and all, but if it were supposed to solve the "there is no quad SLI for sale right now" where is the bridge connector on the card?
Click to expand...

That card is not meant for Quad SLI, I asked nVidia themselves about it at a teleconference.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top