1900XT vs. 8800 GTS

F

fasterthanlight

Gawd
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
677
Looking at the specs, my Radeon still beats this newer XFX nVidia card. It may lack DX10 but who cares right now. I have 512MB, and this card has 320MB. Any reason to upgrade, or should I wait for the 9xxx from the green company?
 
TheAmerican said:
Looking at the specs, my Radeon still beats this newer XFX nVidia card. It may lack DX10 but who cares right now. I have 512MB, and this card has 320MB. Any reason to upgrade, or should I wait for the 9xxx from the green company?
Click to expand...

Specs don't show the whole picture, architecture is the key. Same reason why P4 3ghz sucks compared to 2ghz C2D.

Only upgrade if you need to upgrade. Is your 1900xt lacking in games atm? Do you wish you could play stuff on higher settings? If so, upgrade. If not, save your money until the previous questions are true.
 
jmackay is right, of course, but I question the OP. According to WHAT 'specs' is the x1900xt better than the 8800GTS? Surely, you are not looking at memory alone (likely the least important component on the whole card)? There is a lot more that matters.

Compared (GeForce 8800 GTS / Radeon X1900XT):
Bandwidth: 64 GB/s vs 46 GB/s
Shader Ops: 153,600/sec vs 30,000/sec
Texture fillrate: 12,000 MTexels/sec vs 10,000 MTexels/sec
...etc

Again, AMOUNT of memory just isn't a big deal. 320-bit memory access on the 8800 vs 256-bit memory access on the Radeon, 32 texture units and 24 raster units on the 8800 vs 16 of each on the Radeon, 128 shader processors on the GeForce vs 48 more-or-less shader units on the Radeon, etc.
 
dderidex is right. Besides, the 8800 GTS was originally released with 640 MB of memory. And 640 is more than 512 last time I checked. I don't think there is anything better in terms of specs on the x1900xt compared to a 8800 GTS. And needless to say which one is moe quiet. x1950XTX on the other hand has some very nice specs, like 64 MB/s memory bandwidth (same as 8800 gts), but I doubt the radeons memory can be overclocked to 2500MHz (80 GB/s), where as the 8800 GTSs memory can very often reach 2000MHz (80GB/s).
 
I upgraded to the 8800GTS 640mb from a 1900XT 256mb. Night and day. Especially for Oblivion with Qarls TP3 among dozens of mods. Gaming at 1680x1050 8xMSAA, 16xAF with HDR on. X1900XT could only dream of doing that.

Framerate nearly doubled in Medieval II: Total War.
 
for the price/performance difference, I would go with the 8800GTS. There were some great sales here in Canuckville, saw the 8800 320mb for 250+ tax. The 1900XT is only a few bucks less which I do not see as a better buy.
 
TheAmerican said:
Looking at the specs, my Radeon still beats this newer XFX nVidia card. It may lack DX10 but who cares right now. I have 512MB, and this card has 320MB. Any reason to upgrade, or should I wait for the 9xxx from the green company?
Click to expand...

I, too, would like to see these specs you are looking at. If by specs you mean the memory, then yes it has memory. Specs normally include the rest of the details of the card, in which the 8800gts 320mb outperforms the x1900xt BY FAR. Far far far far.
 
JackAshley said:
I, too, would like to see these specs you are looking at. If by specs you mean the memory, then yes it has memory. Specs normally include the rest of the details of the card, in which the 8800gts 320mb outperforms the x1900xt BY FAR. Far far far far.
Click to expand...

Sadly most people buy video cards based on nothing but RAM size... Considering Memory size is very important for harddrives and regular memory people figure more = better w/o looking at anything else.

Its why those crappy cards with 256/512 sell well.
 
I wasn't so much worried about the memory, I was looking at the core speed. I believe the Radeon had more "push". I appreciate the responses. I am using a Samsung 22" 1680x1050 and do play Oblivion. I wasn't sure how much more you could push out of a DX9 game with another card than my Radeon. One post says "NIGHT and DAY". I have seen this difference before in other upgrades. Makes me think about that upgrade.
 
Well I don't think that it is worth it to upgrade to the 8800GTS 320MB from your current card, if you are going with an 8800GTX then it could be a good upgrade. Your card is not the fastest card but it is still better than any new gen mid range card.
 
TheAmerican said:
I wasn't so much worried about the memory, I was looking at the core speed. I believe the Radeon had more "push".
Click to expand...
The core speed is not something that you could use to compare performance. The X1900's R580 is an entirely different type of architecture than the 8800's G80, and G80 features an SP cluster than runs at a multiple of the core clock speed.

alg7_munif said:
Well I don't think that it is worth it to upgrade to the 8800GTS 320MB from your current card, if you are going with an 8800GTX then it could be a good upgrade.
Click to expand...
I think the 8800 GTS 640 would be a good upgrade, but not the GTS 320. The lack of memory will likely result in more stuttering than is obvious with the X1900 in games like Oblivion, BioShock, and up-and-comings like Crysis, UT3 and so on, though obviously the average frame rate will tend to be a good deal higher. For the price, I just can't quite see making the jump. If you ask me, 320 MB is simply not enough.

Go for an 8800 GTS 640, an 8800 GTX (the EVGA is currently going for around $480 after MIR -- a great deal), or wait for G9x-based boards.
 
If the resolution wasn't so high(say 1440x900 instead) I'd hold off on the 8800s and wait it out, but since you run a resolution to great for your hardware i'd upgrade. You'll most likely be looking at upgrading again within a year though.
 
Best course of action: Get the 8800gts 640mb now, as it wont set you back that much further than the 320, and it'll last you quite a bit longer! :)

Just so you know, core clock speed is best only when comparing LIKE cards, for example ones with the same number of pipes and core architecture, otherwise even a higher core clocked card could easily lose to a newer, better, more powerful card even if it has a lower core clock.
 
I was considering replacing my 512MB X1900XT with an 8800GTS but I have yet to find a single game that gives my main gaming PC any problems.

Just installed Bioshock yesterday and have been playing that at 1920x1080 with all settings maxed and no stuttering at all.

Unless a person is playing 1920x1200 res. or higher, it seems an X1900XT is still a very capable card.
 
"Just installed Bioshock yesterday and have been playing that at 1920x1080 with all settings maxed and no stuttering at all."


i thought biomax was considerably more powerful then that...... and was pretty good at hurting decent rigs?
 
It's a waiting game at this point. I'd love an 8800-series period, or a 2900XT (either is still a viable upgrade from my X1900XTX), but with the increasing buzz about refreshes and so on...I should have never bought this 24" monitor--that just makes it worse. :)
 
yea i'm in the same boat.. just biding my time,

its going to be a sad day when i pull the X1900XTX out, its just been a great card....
 
To the OP:

Stick with your x1900, at that resolution, theres few games that you'll need to trun stuff down to play at an acceptable framerate, relasticly, its not worth it in the $$$$$ dept, wait for the 2nd gen DX10 cards, as for now thou, unless theres a game or games that are affecting your gaming enjoyment, I would say just hold out.

I want to note, that I on a constant basis (friends, myself, etc, currently don't own any of these thou :p, stuck on a x1600pro atm:( ) play with and use the X850, X1900XTX, X1950XT, 8800GTS 320, 8800GTS 640, and 8800ULTRA at resolutions from 1280x1024 to 1920x1200, and am well aware/have a pretty good idea of the x1900's power at 1680x1050 as djbon2112 here uses that resolution with his card, and he has very few performance issues with all the games we play, and he always dials the eye candy up :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top