7900GT Benches Surface

chinesepiratefood said:
Windows Vista will be a flop, it will come out when? Late 06? When will we see a DX10 game? Late 07, 08?
Click to expand...

I for one think windows Vista is going to be a damm fine OS. there looking to have made a lot of improvements. and besides, dont dog on it too much. You will be running it whether you like it or not. DX10 games? probably right before DX10 release? what’s stopping them form releasing DX10 on a XP platform? not much, I think DX10 is coming weather or not Vista comes in time. \

(read up on vista, I have and I think its going to be an all around better OS than most)
 
I(illa Bee said:
You will be running it whether you like it or not.
Click to expand...

ahahahahahaah

bold statement. I feel that he could just stay with xp if he'd like. or any iteration of linux. hell, os/2, beOS, 3.11, osx....there are dozens of os's he could run instead of vista.
even if you're talking solely about gaming, you will still be able to do dx10 gaming on xp, so I don't see why he needs to run vista.

as for my opinion on this "waiting for dx10", I don't think it'll really be worth waiting for that to happen. even if dx10 cards come out in a year, I doubt they'll be very good at processing it. take the fx series or the 9xxx series as an example: yes, they can run dx9, but for most games that use dx9, you'd be better off reducing to dx8 levels because of the massive hit on your fps. the waiting game is never any fun...so I say if you're looking to get enjoyment out of your games, buy a newer card now, and you'll have it for a few years before you feel the need to upgrade, and at that point there will be decent dx10 cards out to bring into consideration.
 
quadnad said:
ahahahahahaah

bold statement. I feel that he could just stay with xp if he'd like. or any iteration of linux. hell, os/2, beOS, 3.11, osx....there are dozens of os's he could run instead of vista.
even if you're talking solely about gaming, you will still be able to do dx10 gaming on xp, so I don't see why he needs to run vista.

as for my opinion on this "waiting for dx10", I don't think it'll really be worth waiting for that to happen. even if dx10 cards come out in a year, I doubt they'll be very good at processing it. take the fx series or the 9xxx series as an example: yes, they can run dx9, but for most games that use dx9, you'd be better off reducing to dx8 levels because of the massive hit on your fps. the waiting game is never any fun...so I say if you're looking to get enjoyment out of your games, buy a newer card now, and you'll have it for a few years before you feel the need to upgrade, and at that point there will be decent dx10 cards out to bring into consideration.
Click to expand...

not to mention how long it'll take for games to show up using DX10.
 
dx10 is coming out in the summer or Early fall so there should be games by very end of 2006. Hell isn't Crysis expected by the end of this year? Also once all developers start programming just for vista you will change. Lot's of people said they wouldn't give up there win98 for nothing and that xp was a peice of garbage. Well tell me one person who has a l33t system and is still runing 98??? Vista will be fine it will have it's problems yes but all operating systems do when they first come out and all thorughout there lifespan that's just how all operating systems work. Linux has problems OSX 10 has problems hell dos has problems. If you don't upgrade though you will be left in the dust Direct X 10 games wont be released for linux and your going to be sitting there saying how cool F.E.A.R. Looks in winxp. Learn to love the bomb
 
I thought that DX10 was integrated into Vista and that it wasn't something you could simply download for XP? Is that wrong - will it be just another regular download?
 
pibrahim said:
I thought that DX10 was integrated into Vista and that it wasn't something you could simply download for XP? Is that wrong - will it be just another regular download?
Click to expand...
Think you're right DX10 is Vista only, that's why DX9 will become redundant asap once it gets released, regardless of what people think, DX9 will be dead as dishwater one year after Vista I reckon.
 
whoa that Vista Dx10 thing will be a hardship for many people. hmmmm

"Screw the poor!" Mel Brooks, History Of the World Part 1
 
spaceman said:
whoa that Vista Dx10 thing will be a hardship for many people. hmmmm

"Screw the poor!" Mel Brooks, History Of the World Part 1
Click to expand...

lol..hmm how much will vista cost?
 
yea like I said you will be using Vista one way or another.

Sure you can use another OS, like MAC OS or one of the millions of Linux genres. Have fun playing your favorite games on them. Stick with XP you say? That’s what so many people tried to do with windows 2000. They all eventually went to XP.

Especially considering DX10 is vista only? (I didn’t know that) im sure games will very quickly become DX10 ready. Whether or not they use DX10 features is another thing. ill bet game dev.s will have DX10 games ready +/- 30 days of vista release...
 
Mayhs said:
lol..hmm how much will vista cost?
Click to expand...

Dose it matter? What other OS are you going to play your new DX10 games on? Free Fedora core 4? I think not! windows XP? its not looking too good. MS has a monopoly going on, and its not even there fault. There not making game developers write games for there OS. The game developers are doing it because its the OS that is being used most so it most likely to make them the most money.

So again? Dose it matter what the OS cost? no, you will be running it regardless.

My guess is $175 for the pro version (if there is a pro/home) upon release just like the last 4 operating systems they have released Witch IMO isnt too bad considering they could easily charge 300 or more for it and people would still buy it.

new DX10 game = $50
total cost of our gamming rigs =$500-$2k
Time tweaking it to run better that ever! = $??

Having no OS to play it on because you too cheap to spend $175 on a OS = suckage...


Dapperdan said:
free to hackers
Click to expand...

no talk of that here please
 
I(illa Bee said:
yea like I said you will be using Vista one way or another.

Sure you can use another OS, like MAC OS or one of the millions of Linux genres. Have fun playing your favorite games on them. Stick with XP you say? That’s what so many people tried to do with windows 2000. They all eventually went to XP.

Especially considering DX10 is vista only? (I didn’t know that) im sure games will very quickly become DX10 ready. Whether or not they use DX10 features is another thing. ill bet game dev.s will have DX10 games ready +/- 30 days of vista release...
Click to expand...

First off, I'm not sure that dx10 will be vista only, but I'll assume it is. Who do you know gamed primarily on 2k? It was primarly oriented for the workforce, and had a number of compatibility problems with games. Most stuck with 98 until they were sure that XP would run everything they needed it to, and made the switch. However, for all the people that finally made the switch to XP, it wasn't for directx's sake. It was for compatibility with their programs.

Also, I wasn't saying that you'll be able to play all your favorite games on those other OS's, but that it seems kind of hard-nosed to say that he WILL switch to the new OS "whether he likes it or not." We're all free-thinking beings here, and I figure he'll make his own decision about switching.

As for DX10 video cards, I think that a year is a damn long time to wait to buy a new card, especially if one is in the market for a card now. I say buy a card now, and you can sell it later; then you'll have great gameplay for a while, and can switch to DX10 cards when they're mature.
 
i am going to buy vista i was just asking....thnx for the information anyways

what about their office software...i guess we will have to spend another £230 on that...not sure about prices in $....how id love to be in bill gates chair right now^^
 
Am I still reading the right thread?

Anyhow for those that have no idea where these cards come from this is for you. I just explained it one a new reviewer for my site.

This guy could very well have these cards. Reviewers, well most of us do not even have our cards yet but this guy might. He most like really works for a mobo company or someone like that who gets early beta cards at stock speeds. Now who the heck sells stock speed cards anymore, OEMs. That would explain why it benches the way it does. Also, remember that the high end cards are CPU limited....what CPU is this guy using?

Don't worry though the cards will most likely be sold by someone looking to cash in two days early like the last few launches and the forum guys will drive and get a pair and you will know how fast the cards are at the same time we do.
 
I(illa Bee said:
Stick with XP you say? That’s what so many people tried to do with windows 2000. They all eventually went to XP.
Click to expand...

Yes, good thing they switched too. XP is basically 2000 with a fancy theme.

Knowledge = Power

Use it wisely my son.
 
Don't be a silly goose, bill gates pwns you ! :D

A lot of people hate microsoft.. but i'd say 96% of those people still use windows. Vista won't be a flop. I think initially its sales will be sluggish, but it will pick up as time progresses.
 
NEODARK said:
No, SLI in 06.

at least according to the pic :(

Who cares about 3dmark though. the 6800GT was a real underperformer in 2K1 and it did just as good if not better than the X800 at the time.

We need GAME numbers.
Click to expand...

Actually, thats backwards. The X800 Pro did better in 2001, but the GT did better in games. ATi's still do better in 2001 too.

But I agree, I want game benches, not 3dmark crap.
 
Was the 7900gt sopposed to be on par or better than the 7800gtx?

Also, after they are released, how much longer will it take for them to show up at newegg, monarch ect.
 
lol my GTX 512 gets nearly the same score. well so far i havent wasted any cash on getting it "so far"
 
Dark_fire said:
lol my GTX 512 gets nearly the same score. well so far i havent wasted any cash on getting it "so far"
Click to expand...


caugh caugh.. 2gb DDR and a 3.5Ghz CPU?

but really we all know ther 7900 is ging to be a refresh liek the 5950, X850, ti500, Gf2, GF2GTS, 8500, all refresh cards nothing more than clock speed... its seem to be there style. (NV and aTI)
 
Dark_fire said:
My 3200+ clawhammer wishes it would go that fast
and thats SLI 7900GTs not 1 7900GT
Click to expand...

ioos. I ment 2.35Ggz...

that was SLI? wow, ok I can defend it no more...
 
as has been beaten to death, there is a driver problem in sli as the dirver does not support the 7900 series cards.

if you want to see benchies look at the 7800gtx 256 marks, same clock speeds (roughly depending on card, default 7900gt is higher) and same 24 pipes. only difference is a tiny cooler and .90nm wafer.
 
why dosn't anyone think they improved there propietary technologys like Cinefx or Ultra Shadow??? That could also help performance as well you know.
 
Annnnnnnnnnnnyway, to get back on topic:

I don't see why everybody gets all worked up about benches that come out for a new card from some foreign country. Just wait for the official ones for crying out loud.

They said the 7900GT is supposed to be equal to a 7800GTX, if that's so, I'm buying one.

I know it's hard not to speculate, but at least wait until real benchmarks come out before you get let down ;) :)
 
1.8Ghz CPU?

thats got to be holding the scores back

i scored 9500 with 7800GT SLI with cpu at 2GHz
just under 11000 with cpu at 2.5GHz
 
otispunkmeyer said:
1.8Ghz CPU?

thats got to be holding the scores back

i scored 9500 with 7800GT SLI with cpu at 2GHz
just under 11000 with cpu at 2.5GHz
Click to expand...

Like I said, just wait until the official benchmark surface.
 
I(illa Bee said:
2000 was based on NT4.0

XP is very much a diffrent beast... in many ways other than looks

EDIT: How about a quick comparsion on features?
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/evaluation/whyupgrade/featurecomp.mspx

EDIT: seems XP code is built on w2k code... ehhh
Click to expand...

Windows 2000 was the first time the new kernel was used. Windows XP uses the same kernel, there were just slight modifications (same thing as Windows 98, 98SE, and ME were to Windows 95). Windows 2003 also uses the same basic kernel as 2000 and XP. The 64-bit versions of XP and 2003 are a little different (if you have ever used XP 64-bit, goto Help and About... it looks just like 2003 - build and service pack wise).
 
AthlonAlien said:
Windows 2000 was the first time the new kernel was used. Windows XP uses the same kernel, there were just slight modifications (same thing as Windows 98, 98SE, and ME were to Windows 95). Windows 2003 also uses the same basic kernel as 2000 and XP. The 64-bit versions of XP and 2003 are a little different (if you have ever used XP 64-bit, goto Help and About... it looks just like 2003 - build and service pack wise).
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, but could you stay on topic please? kthx.
 
These results just out.

System Configuration:
Athlon 64 FX-55
1GB DDR400 (2x512MB)
nForce4 motherboard

All tests were performed with a 1280x1024 resolution. The cards tested claimed 1.2ns DDR3 for both cards. ForceWare 84.12 was used for testing.

GeForce 7900GTX 512MB
650mhz core clock, 1600MHz memory clock
3dmark 03: 17800
3dmark 05: 7600
3dmark 06: 5200

GeForce 7900GT 256MB
450mhz core clock, 1300MHz memory clock
3dmark 03: 13800
3dmark 05: 7000
3dmark 06: 4550

from
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=1121

I scored higher than the 7900GT with my old 7800GT at 510/1260 with older drivers. Not very impressive at all imo. Even if you add 500 points to 06 for Dual Core procs, these are still rather low.
 
well that's because you overclocked it isn't fair comparing an overclocked video card vs a stock speed video card because who knows how much faster the 7900gt will overclock. Also how much did you pay for your gt at that time?
 
psychoace said:
well that's because you overclocked it isn't fair comparing an overclocked video card vs a stock speed video card because who knows how much faster the 7900gt will overclock. Also how much did you pay for your gt at that time?
Click to expand...

That is the thing. The real winners from the 7900gt are the people going to pick up the discounted 7800GTs. Like myself I am tempted to pick up another 7800gt and run SLi if the price drops to around 200. Really it will not be until games come out next year that the 7800 series becomes mid to low end.

Plus for us dual core adopters lets not forget the recent string of crappy drivers Nvidia has had.
 
i dont see an X1800XL being able to overclock enough to be comparable to an X1900XT though. It just makes it more obvious that this is merely a refresh to 90nm, and not a big performance jump as some have hoped. i think i payed a little over $300 for my GT at the time.
 
Edit: NM, I just realized that benchmarking was done at a higher resolution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top