Going from 7900GT to 1900XT-XTX is it worth it?

D

Don_1

Gawd
Joined
Mar 16, 2000
Messages
700
Basic specs:
Shuttle SN25P
Opty 165 @ 2,7GHz
2GB GSkill Extreme
EVGA 7900gt W/1.4 voltage mod. O/C to 667/852
VX2025wm @ 1680x1050.

I'm playing F.E.A.R., nfsmw right now but the games can get abit on the glitchy side at times.
I could turndown the settings and miss out out on some eyecandy or I could step up to different video card.

I'm just wondering if an X1900XT or XTX card would give me some smothness at 1680x1050 with the extras turned on?

Is it worth it??
 
I would say it's going to make a major difference. Whilst I have no personal experience with the 7900GT, I have used the X1900XT and now the 7950GX2. Especially at your resolution, I think you'll notice a very appreciable difference.

Benchy Linkage
 
I would just get a X1900XT though and save lotsa bucks.

The XT is the exact same card as the XTX, just clocked like 25mhz lower. Cured easily by using ATITool or another clocking utility, or better yet by a BIOS flash. :)
 
Went from a 7800GT to an Asus 1900XT from newegg yesterday.

Its night and day for performance (duh) but its the IQ i was so impressed with....so much better with ATI.'
 
yea the x1900XTX will beat the 7900gt although.. barley beat your 7900gt. guys his 7900Gt is clocked at GTX speeds. so it would kinda be like hey should i sell my 7900gtx to get a x1900xtx? lol.. the only difference you will be getting is more memory. but other than that no its not going to be much of a difference upon your cards clock speeds. ;)

i have the same LCD as you. and i run fear at 1680/1050 2xaa all maxed with no problems. i run textures at medium because of only 1GB of system memory. :( but other than that if your seeing any glitching its video memory filling up. ;)
 
burned-ati said:
yea the x1900XTX will beat the 7900gt although.. barley beat your 7900gt. guys his 7900Gt is clocked at GTX speeds. so it would kinda be like hey should i sell my 7900gtx to get a x1900xtx? lol.. the only difference you will be getting is more memory. but other than that no its not going to be much of a difference upon your cards clock speeds. ;)

i have the same LCD as you. and i run fear at 1680/1050 2xaa all maxed with no problems. i run textures at medium because of only 1GB of system memory. :( but other than that if your seeing any glitching its video memory filling up. ;)
Click to expand...

Then the extra 256mb of video memory should help ..crossing my fingers ;)
 
yes it will help. 256MB video cards are deffinetly showing there flaws. Quake4 on ultra even with 2GB system memory. will show skips here and there. also oblivion. these games obviously need 512MB video memory. but if i were you i would wait till DX10 what you have is plenty fast. it would suck to buy a X1900 now and then bam! DX10 pops out :p
 
It's been proven time and time again that oblivion only uses 256 mb of framebuffer tops.
 
Chops said:
It's been proven time and time again that oblivion only uses 256 mb of framebuffer tops.
Click to expand...

Actually the new patch removes that limitation on cards with 512.

Yes an X1900XT or XTX is noticeable faster than a 7900GT. Whoever was saying a 7900GT is automatically a 7900GTX obviously can't count:

X1900XT -> XTX = +25 MHz core, +50 MHz memory (+100 effective)

7900GT -> 7900GTX = +200 MHz core, +140 Mhz memory (+280 effective)

Quite a bit of difference there. Regardless, I've owned both a 7900GTX (a REAL one) and an X1900XT (my current card) and the X1900 is an all around better card IMO as long as you don't mind the extra power consumption (I would say extra noise too, but I got the HiS version with the special cooler, so mine's no louder than my GTX was)
 
DASHlT said:
Its night and day for performance (duh) but its the IQ i was so impressed with....so much better with ATI.'
Click to expand...

This can not be said enough! IQ while gaming is night and day in addition the desktop looks crisper/sharper with ATI, IMHO.

I agree that a 1900XT is all that is needed.
 
burned-ati said:
yes it will help. 256MB video cards are deffinetly showing there flaws. Quake4 on ultra even with 2GB system memory. will show skips here and there. also oblivion. these games obviously need 512MB video memory. but if i were you i would wait till DX10 what you have is plenty fast. it would suck to buy a X1900 now and then bam! DX10 pops out :p
Click to expand...

I play at ultra on my 7800gt and my 2 gigs of ram is fully utilized and i also get stuttering in the game. I am so glad i have 2 gigs and i cant wait for my 1900xt to get back from a newegg rma :D
 
Sabrewulf165 said:
Actually the new patch removes that limitation on cards with 512.

Yes an X1900XT or XTX is noticeable faster than a 7900GT. Whoever was saying a 7900GT is automatically a 7900GTX obviously can't count:

X1900XT -> XTX = +25 MHz core, +50 MHz memory (+100 effective)

7900GT -> 7900GTX = +200 MHz core, +140 Mhz memory (+280 effective)

Quite a bit of difference there. Regardless, I've owned both a 7900GTX (a REAL one) and an X1900XT (my current card) and the X1900 is an all around better card IMO as long as you don't mind the extra power consumption (I would say extra noise too, but I got the HiS version with the special cooler, so mine's no louder than my GTX was)
Click to expand...

look man, his 7900GT is overclocked to 7900GTX speeds. so the only real difference he will get is memory amount. and maybe a little fast FPS. but other than that no its going to be no huge difference. im not sure what your talking about. if i had a 7900GT running at the speeds his is at. i would not go get a X1900. because there praticly doing the same. maybe a XTX will be a little fast. although, not much.. maybe 5-8FPS tops.
 
burned-ati said:
look man, his 7900GT is overclocked to 7900GTX speeds.
Click to expand...

Oops, haha. I totally missed that part!

burned-ati said:
so the only real difference he will get is memory amount. and maybe a little fast FPS. but other than that no its going to be no huge difference. im not sure what your talking about. if i had a 7900GT running at the speeds his is at. i would not go get a X1900. because there praticly doing the same. maybe a XTX will be a little fast. although, not much.. maybe 5-8FPS tops.
Click to expand...

As I said, having used both cards, it is still my opinion that the X1900 is noticeably smoother and of course there's the IQ issue, which anyone but a blind man can see favors ATI.
 
Sabrewulf165 said:
Oops, haha. I totally missed that part!



As I said, having used both cards, it is still my opinion that the X1900 is noticeably smoother and of course there's the IQ issue, which anyone but a blind man can see favors ATI.
Click to expand...

Smoothness is what I'm hoping for :D
 
Don_1 said:
Smoothness is what I'm hoping for :D
Click to expand...

I wish he would have chosen the XTX, because most XT's only usually clock just to XTX default speeds.

The IQ is the best part though, even though the smoothness is incredible with the ATi.
 
BBA said:
I wish he would have chosen the XTX, because most XT's only usually clock just to XTX default speeds.

The IQ is the best part though, even though the smoothness is incredible with the ATi.
Click to expand...

I couldn't justfiy the extra cash right now.
I just need something to run smooth until DX10 has had a chance to appear, and games to start showing up.
 
maybe you should get another 7900GT. and voltmod it as well. :p you can get a 7900Gt for around 250$ now on newegg.
 
burned-ati said:
maybe you should get another 7900GT. and voltmod it as well. :p you can get a 7900Gt for around 250$ now on newegg.
Click to expand...

My system is non-sli otherwise I would have.
 
For performance reasons probably not. For HQ AF and more title with HDR + AA then it depends on the individual. I prefer the radeons. If I bought the 7900GT I would probably opt to switch it out, but I've always seen these Ati advantages as must haves for this gen. It is a refresh gen after all. The radeons came out more impressive by leaving those hooks out there. I had a 7800GTX, so upgrading to the 7900's just seemed uninteresting to me. They offerred me nothing but a bump. Shimmering wasn't a big deal for me. However, my branch off to ATi was succesful, a "you can't go back" scenario. Until possibly next cards, where I'm sure Nv will do it too. Gotta love that competition.

I mean this early in the game it's more like you're considering switching out what you consider a mistake. I've had to do it too, wondering why I didn't buy the better card to begin with. Initial cost for the GT is for the most part recoverable. It's not a logical upgrade cost wise, but I've always been a fan of making myself happy. If you make a decent living and playing Oblivion next week with HDR + AA will make you smile click the banner at the top of the page and get your groove on. I switched boards and everything to go crossfire even though SLI is more mature and support is better. Not a logical expense at all, but that is the value I place in real deal filtering. Again, all the individual.

Now actually answering your direct questions, an x1900XT plays nfsmw really well at 1920*1200 at 2xAA for me. So I imagine you will like it's performance at 1680*1050. FEAR is a tricky game, the rare times you are outside you regret having your graphics turned up. There is a drastic performance difference, and it's all too tempting to go too far when you spend 90% of your time getting great frames at full tilt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top