• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Ati Vs. Nvida

vinny77

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
330
I am lOOKing to buy a new Graphics card.

It is bettween the

Made by ati

x800 pro
x800 xt P3

Evga
6800Ultra
6800GT

I Almost always use Ati Cards but in thi selection, I am kinda stumped. I ahve about $700 to buy a new 19"crt and a new graphics card

I have a P4 2.4c overclcoked to 3.5ghz and 512 of Ocz pc4200 memeory. System si very fast, I just have a 9600Xt now and it doesnt seem to be enogh

I just want the best for my system


Just give me whats best for my money
 
i would agree with that. i have a X800 XT PE on pre-order with CDW but god only knows when the hell that will arrive. same with the 6800 Ultras. unless you are one of the lucky few that knows somebody or happened to find a place offering these cards, then forget about it for the next month or two. thus i ordered a BFG 6800 GT today.

even if i had the opportunity though im not sure if i would get a 6800 Ultra. the fact is that the 6800 GT is basically an Ultra clocked at 350 instead of 400, and with slightly slower memory. at the very least you can run your 6800 GT at Ultra speeds (400 core 1100 memory). well, it's been posted about a lot so go read the other threads for more info.
 
The 6800GT will be your best purchase. You dont have a fast enough processor to warrant a 6800u or X800XT PE purchase. I ordered one and my 3.0c will clock higher then your 2.4c.

Unless you have an FX-53, 3.4EE, or A64 3800+, your just going to be bottlenecked by your CPU on an Ultra or PE.
 
How ismy processor not fast enogh, I can overclock it to 3.6ghz, which is alot more tha 3.0
 
Skip EVGA...go straight to the BFG 6800GT OC or BFG 6800Ultra...they both come OCed out of the box and are worth every cent !
 
running @ 3.5ghz you should have no problem. if you crank up to 1600x1200 w/ aa + af then you will almost always hit a gpu wall before hitting a cpu wall. yes you will see some improvement by going to a faster processor but that is almost always true. however, when gaming @ high res w/ eye candy gpu scaling is a much greater factor than cpu scaling. what i mean is, you will have more of an improvement by upgrading gpu rather than cpu. given your cpu is at such a high speed, it will probably take another generation or two of graphics card to make your cpu the real bottleneck.

that aside, your ram may cause you some grief. consider going up to 1gb

i second VA's recommendation of the BFG 6800GT, seems like the best deal going right now. if i were going to upgrade, that's what i would get.
 
vinny77 said:
How ismy processor not fast enogh, I can overclock it to 3.6ghz, which is alot more tha 3.0

Who said mine was at 3.0Ghz? Mine clocks over 3.7Ghz. You'll most likely still be somewhat bottlenecked unless you run 1600x1200 w/ eye candy. An A64 3400+ outperforms a P4 3.6Ghz in gaming because of its low latency on-die memory controller.

I just dont think the Ultra is worth it on that processor unless you can get one real cheap. Best Buy has their BFG 6800u on sale for $450 right now. Their out of stock though. Some people have already called in and gotten Best Buy to honor their pre-order though. They said print off the receipt and bring it in to the local Best Buy for a $50 refund.

The GT's OC to Ultra speeds and higher as it is.
 
These type of threads never end well.

the cards are slo close for the margin of error in test. its a tough call. fanboi's will back there cards. this time aroudn its pretty much what brand your loyale too.
 
Filter said:
These type of threads never end well.

the cards are slo close for the margin of error in test. its a tough call. fanboi's will back there cards. this time aroudn its pretty much what brand your loyale too.

Thats true in the case of the 6800u vs X800XT PE. I dont think it is the case with the X800Pro vs 6800GT though. Most of the reviews out lately are showing the X800Pro at the back of the line compared to the GT.

Here is a new one that does just that:

http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.cfm?articleid=550&cid=2

Until you turn on AA + AF the X800Pro is barely able to keep up. Without AF the X800Pro wouldn't even be able to compete. You can see the advantage the GT has over the Pro in 4x AA.

The GT will also OC to Ultra speeds and higher. Its a 16 pipeline card. The Pro on the other hand is only 12 pipelines and no matter how high you OC it, it wont be able to perform as well as a 16 pipeline X800XT PE.
 
vinny77 said:
who would want to play a game without AA and Af

If your running 1600x1200 or higher you dont really need AA and AF.

If the visual quality is good enough already there isn't a point in enabling high AA + AF just so you can get a fraction of the frame rates you were getting before.
 
vinny77 said:
who would want to play a game without AA and Af
I have been able to survive playing games where it doesn't look like someone sneezed on the screen up to this point. I'll take resolution and detail over smearing any day.
 
burningrave101 said:
Unless you have an FX-53, 3.4EE, or A64 3800+, your just going to be bottlenecked by your CPU on an Ultra or PE.

Not at 1600x1200 which is what those cards are for.

Who's going to play at 1024x768 with a $500 video card?
 
ThisMonsterLives said:
Not at 1600x1200 which is what those cards are for.

Who's going to play at 1024x768 with a $500 video card?

Not everyone plays at 1600x1200. Some people think it makes everything in-game too tiny. I run 1600x1200 in any game that supports it though.

http://frozenarctic.com/erek/ROFL.jpg

I saw this pic a minute ago and thought it was sorta funny lol.
 
ThisMonsterLives said:
Not at 1600x1200 which is what those cards are for.

Who's going to play at 1024x768 with a $500 video card?


I would.

Although i went with Bestbuys BFG 6800Gt thats on sale right now.

to good of a deal to pass up.
 
Go with the card that you can afford with the new monitor, all of the cards your looking at
will give you alot for your money. If you want to be more prepared for future graphics, then
go with the SM3 supported card.

You cant go wrong.
 
Filter said:
These type of threads never end well.

the cards are slo close for the margin of error in test. its a tough call. fanboi's will back there cards. this time aroudn its pretty much what brand your loyale too.

Completely agree....
 
burningrave101 said:
If your running 1600x1200 or higher you dont really need AA and AF.

If the visual quality is good enough already there isn't a point in enabling high AA + AF just so you can get a fraction of the frame rates you were getting before.


i disagree, i run @ 1600x1200 and notice a huge difference in quality when playing w/ aa+af. i've gone through and played with it so much that now if i turn it off i feel like the game is breaking up, like i'm seeing artifacts all over the place. it's just what you're used to when it comes to image quality, for me it can never be too smooth. i buy my hardware for quality and smoothness, not frame rate. if all i wanted were frame rate i would play everything @ 800x600 and never worry about it. i'd say that the reason most people go up in resolution is for bigger displays and better quality. at least that's why i'm gaming now on a 20" monitor w/ aa + af. otherwise, why buy the better hardware if you're not going to use it?
 
get an ATi card. they perform better at the highest possible settings, and if you don't want to play games maxed out then just buy a radeon 9800 pro, and use the other money to get more RAM and a bigger monitor.
 
Back
Top