7900 GTX vs X1900 XTX

Leon2ky said:
I imagine anyone who owns a VF700 or a VF900 completely disagree with you.

I owned a vf900 and it wasn't any better. I ended up putting on my stock cooler cause it wasn't worth it.
 
Many perople have said that they have had issues with the ATI drivers, such as instability, and in particular ccc crashing on them, i have nothing against them and have not used them myself i am just going of what many people have said. For me the nVidia drivers are rock solid and havent had any issues with them plus i like that nVidia releases beta drivers on nzone and thats why i support them :)
 
Dutt1113 said:
I owned a vf900 and it wasn't any better. I ended up putting on my stock cooler cause it wasn't worth it.

lol - Well thanks for backing up your case with facts, numbers and data.
 
I recently installed an AC Accelero x2 on my X1900, which I chose over an x1900XTX or 78/900. The new cooler made a very noticable temperature and noise difference. I chose the XT for two reasons: I felt it was more fuitureproof, and I believe their design spec in regards to processing shaders is well-thought out. The second reason is: if I want to do XF, any XTX I have now will drop to XT speeds with a XF edition master card.
 
Dutt1113 said:
How did you get a 7900gt overclocked so high. Are you using phase change or liquid nitrogen or something?

volt modding :D i got my 7900 to 670/1850, reference is 450/1320, mine came @ 500/1500
 
Citizen Philip said:
I recently installed an AC Accelero x2 on my X1900, which I chose over an x1900XTX or 78/900. The new cooler made a very noticable temperature and noise difference. I chose the XT for two reasons: I felt it was more fuitureproof, and I believe their design spec in regards to processing shaders is well-thought out. The second reason is: if I want to do XF, any XTX I have now will drop to XT speeds with a XF edition master card.

No, it will NOT drop clock speeds of the slave card though you should try to overclock the master card to as close to the same speeds for efficiency. That urban legend needs to die.

The only time XF will "downgrade" is when the master has more pipes or more RAM than the slave, in which case the MASTER pipes and/or RAM are reduced to provide symmetry. If you look at the entire ATI Crossfire Edition lineup, you'll see that all have the maximum number of pipelines and RAM found on a particular X8xx or X1xxx series, so it's not possible to buy a slave with more pipes or RAM than the compatable CE card.

As for downclocking on the XTX, you can easily test this with a 1900XF setup (and I've done it myself) by flashing my slave XT to XTX (650/775) and leaving the XF Edition card at default 621/721, (or conversely, flashing an XTX down to XT). Just flashing to XTX speeds results in a mild to modest increase in FPS and benchmark scores, and those scores drop just as soon as you reflash back to XT speeds.
 
MrWizard6600 said:
seriosly, thats amazing...

yea for the latter two matters neither Nvidia or Ati take a clear lead, but for overclocking, even with all the ATi V mods, and overclocking software, Nvidia with its basic display editor and clock setter, is wayyy better.

i oced this card (6600gt) from 500 to 650, using nothing but the Nvidia tuner, but then i got fans up the wazoo....

the problem with some ati cards is they just do not scale, and i totally dont understand why. Ex whats the diferance between 1900XTX and 1900XT? 25Mhz, thats it. Sapphire stuck on a liquid cooling solution (the Blizzard, not to pricy but its still liquid cooling), and they managed to pump another 25Mhz outta the card. 25... thats not good enough. not when you can get 5X that on stock cooling from Nvidia.

I somewhat agree with you as a previous owner of Nvidia cards. I feel that ATI overclocks well, but the utilities are not as friendly and it takes a lot more tinkering. I am currently running my x1900 at 749/855 on stock cooling with the fan at 3900rpm.
 
My 7900gtx card went to 715/1866 w/o any mods. In games it would run at a max of 64c, and this was playing COD2 on highest settings (except no AA) at 2048x1536. It was PRETTY :)

However, it started artifacting in BF2 at stock settings and then also in COD2 at stock settings. Had to RMA, now I have my money back and am waiting for E3 to see what to do! :cool:
 
Spoudazo said:
My 7900gtx card went to 715/1866 w/o any mods. In games it would run at a max of 64c, and this was playing COD2 on highest settings (except no AA) at 2048x1536. It was PRETTY :)

However, it started artifacting in BF2 at stock settings and then also in COD2 at stock settings. Had to RMA, now I have my money back and am waiting for E3 to see what to do! :cool:

No, you did not have to. You made a clear choice to heavily overclock it, and it likely *broke* because of it. You voided your warranty.. unless your warranty covered overclocking. RMA'ing was a choice, you did not have to. And shouldnt have.
 
Spoudazo said:
My 7900gtx card went to 715/1866 w/o any mods. In games it would run at a max of 64c, and this was playing COD2 on highest settings (except no AA) at 2048x1536. It was PRETTY :)

However, it started artifacting in BF2 at stock settings and then also in COD2 at stock settings. Had to RMA, now I have my money back and am waiting for E3 to see what to do! :cool:

Horray for people abusing the RMA process. As a result of your actions, nVidia will have to increase the cost of their cards in order to recover the lost income.
 
Spoudazo said:
My 7900gtx card went to 715/1866 w/o any mods. In games it would run at a max of 64c, and this was playing COD2 on highest settings (except no AA) at 2048x1536. It was PRETTY :)

However, it started artifacting in BF2 at stock settings and then also in COD2 at stock settings. Had to RMA, now I have my money back and am waiting for E3 to see what to do! :cool:

Hooray for you! How's that conscience treatin' ya? Fine? Yuck. :mad:
 
lol if his oc is under guarantee then the 3 above posts would look silly :p

but i do agree it must be bad for your conscience...
 
Back
Top