question about graphic cards

B

blarf

Limp Gawd
2FA
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
390
Hi,
i've been reading lots of post about nvidia and ati and i'm still tryin to decide if i should go with a 7900GT or a x1900xt or x1800xt. i play lots of games (BF2, COD2, CS, R6....). i've read about those problems with the 7900gt...

any inputs??
 
X1900XT would do really well for w/e you're running for maybe the next year or so =). 7900GT if you don't exactly have a huge budget, and I'm not to sure about the X1800XT, but if you are going that way, I'd rather recommend an X1800XL, which is cheaper and can overclock to X1800XT speeds.
 
I've always had Nvidia cards as I was wary of the comments on drivers from ATI so it took a fair bit for me to buy an ATI card.

My old card was a 6800GT and have now got a X1800XT.
What swayed me to this card is how cheap Overclockers UK were knocking the Sapphire cards out for, £180 delivered a couple of weeks ago. I think they cost a little more now but still fantastic value.

This card is steaming fast. It has made playing Oblivion from sometimes good, other times a chug fest into a truly pleasurable experience.
The tests I have read put it right up there with the fastest cards in many games and it does make the 6800GT look old.

I highly recommend the x1800XT :)
 
i see. it's hard for me to decide. i think my first choice is the 7900gt for the price/perfs (since i'm planning on upgrading when the newer cards come out). i really like the x1900xt though. what the difference in perfs between those 3 cards?
i'm planning on running the cards on a 20.1" monitor (widescreen).
 
blarf said:
i see. it's hard for me to decide. i think my first choice is the 7900gt for the price/perfs (since i'm planning on upgrading when the newer cards come out). i really like the x1900xt though. what the difference in perfs between those 3 cards?
i'm planning on running the cards on a 20.1" monitor (widescreen).
Click to expand...

Difference between the 7900GT and the X1900XT is the memory size and the speeds. The XT has 512mb of memory while the 7900GT has 256. The X1800XT on the other hand does have 512mb of memory, but only 16 shader units I believe. Both the 7900GT and the X1900XT has 48 shader units.
 
It does depend a little on the games you play.
Generally the X1900XT is fastest then the X1800XT with the 7900GT close behind.
There are games where Nvidia is better so you need to decide.

Driver increases also play a part in performance. A new card doesnt normally performs near its performance that it has a year or so later as the driver improvements bring more speed.
If you intend to overclock the 7900GT is a demon if you fit a really good heatsink and do a Vgpu Mod.
ATI cards wont overclock as much as the NVidia cards as they run hotter.
tbh you dont need to overclock the x1800xt but I still did :)
 
well, i've been brwsing the cards forums and see that there are couple problems with the 7900.
should it be wiser to go with ATI? or should i still try the 7900gt? and yes, i only play BF2, CS, ghost recon, fear, cod2.
 
blarf said:
well, i've been brwsing the cards forums and see that there are couple problems with the 7900.
should it be wiser to go with ATI? or should i still try the 7900gt? and yes, i only play BF2, CS, ghost recon, fear, cod2.
Click to expand...
ATI's ability to do HDR and AA at the same time gets my vote right now. But I'm sure Nvidia won't stand for that for real long. Also, aren't their new cards coming out in a couple of months? As is DirectX 10. I think waiting a while would be best to see what the new offers bring. But if you have to have on now I vote X1900XT.

I can't wait to see what to see what ATI and Nvidia bring out for DX10. :)
 
I'm not sure which problems you are referring to so am not sure which you feel may affect you.
I would have bought an NVidia card a month or so ago but now I think differently having tried ATI due to finding a decent offer.

I have only one issue with this card.
I dont use the CCC (control panel) but use the older version so am not sure if it has been fixed with the newer control panel etc...
Sometimes while playing Oblivion my fan profile gets modified and either remains at 50% or 100% speed permanently and wont allow itself to be changed until I reboot.
This may be an isolated issue and cant vouch for anyone elses experience.
But thats it, my only problem.

I am not in any way unhappy with this card, it has exceeded my expectations and clocks to X1800PE speeds.
 
ok, well i guess i will do some more reading and try to decide. the problems i'm refering to for the nvidia-based cards are the artifacts that people get after couple days of use and they need to RMA the card. lots of people (from what i've read) complain that they have to downclock the card in order for it to work artifacts free.
would the companies overclocked the cards too much or what?
 
Anavel0 said:
ATI's ability to do HDR and AA at the same time gets my vote right now. But I'm sure Nvidia won't stand for that for real long. Also, aren't their new cards coming out in a couple of months? As is DirectX 10. I think waiting a while would be best to see what the new offers bring. But if you have to have on now I vote X1900XT.

I can't wait to see what to see what ATI and Nvidia bring out for DX10. :)
Click to expand...

I went through wondering whether its a good idea to upgrade trauma too.
It came down to this, is your pc good enough to play the games you like?
If not, theres no choice.

On the plus side, Vista wont be released for 6 months, new hardware for it will be expensive and usually needs a second revision to iron out the inital problems.
DX10 will not be available for XP so unless you have a lot of cash you wont be an early adopter of DX10.
I dont know if this is true but early reports say that the Aero (high end graphics) version of Vista will be $500 USD !
 
blarf said:
ok, well i guess i will do some more reading and try to decide. the problems i'm refering to for the nvidia-based cards are the artifacts that people get after couple days of use and they need to RMA the card. lots of people (from what i've read) complain that they have to downclock the card in order for it to work artifacts free.
would the companies overclocked the cards too much or what?
Click to expand...

Ah yes.
It appears part of the 7x00 GPU doesnt like being overclocked on many cards and fails to work earlier than the rest of the card. Better cooling would certainly help here.
Only really of concern if you wish to overclock.

Some pre-overclocked cards have the same problem and I think it has surprised NVidia too as there is some quality control to ensure the cards can be overclocked.
Hopefully it is down to a small subset of the cards.
 
yes, i do overclock(sometimes). well if i can find a good deal on a x1900xt then i'll buy it, if not, i think i'll go with the 7900gt (around $270). is the x1800xt better than the 7900gt?
 
Here's some handy info for you:

x1800xt- $245
16 pixel pipes
16 pixel shader units (set)
FPHDR+FSAA

7900gt- $265 USD
24 pixel pipes
24 shader units (set)
no FPHDR+FSAA

x1900xt- $445
16 pixel pipes
48 pixel shader units (flexible)
FPHDR+FSAA

Reviews between the 7900gtX and the x1900xt are split. The 7900gt generally beats the x1800xt 512 by a few FPS, but cannot do FPHDR+FSAA and does not generally achieve the same level of IQ aat the same performance. The nVidia cards excel in pure pixel throughput, but lose ground more quickly when higher resolution, HDR, AA and AF are applied.

ATI cards generally perform multiple pixel operations more efficiently (single pass vs. multiple pass), but nVidia cards win in raw fill rate. Be aware as well that the x1800/x1900 series make use of a seriously loud cooler. If noise bothers you either go with the slightly less loud 7900gt, or buy an aftermarket cooler like Zalman's VF 900.

Personally, I cannot advise you against any of these cards. Each has its own benefits and drawbacks. Keep in mind when comparing products that raw FPS are not the whole story. One must also consider architechtural flexibility (ATI wins), driver support and compatibility (nVidia wins), future program support/ performance (x1900 wins), power draw (nVidia wins) and typical image quality (ATI wins).

I have the x1900xtx, which can be found as a refurb for the same as an xt if you're willing to take the plunge. I've never regretted the decision, especially playing Oblivion.
 
darn warrior, thanx a lot for the info. it helped a lot. as i said earlier, the only games i play are first person shooter. and i wanna run the native resolution of a 20.1ws (1680x1050 i think). well, i guess i'll look at the best perfs/price available.

oh, if i buy a nvidia, it would be my first one. i've always had ati cards
 
both cards are really good, the 7900GT and the X1800XT's, the problems you are hearing about the 7900GT's are the Super Clocks failing after a while, yea i'd probably stay away from those as well, especially with all the horror stories popping up about them

having an X1800XL, and seeing a jump from the X1900XTX, i'd say shoot for the X1900XT if you can, if you were going to go with the 7900GT or the X1800XT its really a toss up, its really hard to recommend either over the other, both OC well, both have great image quality (ATi gives more options, i love the HQ AF) both companies have great drivers, both are at great prices

in all honesty its a toss up, its really hard to recommend either over the other, i'd say go for the X1900XT if you wanted to spend that much, if not i'd probably recommend the 7900GT over the X1800XT
 
aight thanx fellaz, i'll look up prices and see what i could afford. if you guys have any inputs, feel free to post. thanx
 
At that resolution you will want the best performing card and will want to overclock.
It really comes down to the X1900XT / XTX or the 7900GTX unless money is an issue.
 
well, those high end cards are a little steep in price for me. i mean if i can snag a x1900xt for cheap, i will get it . if not i think i'll go like xfx7900gt route.
what are those cards running for nowadays?
 
warriorpoet said:
Here's some handy info for you:

x1800xt- $245
16 pixel pipes
16 pixel shader units (set)
FPHDR+FSAA

7900gt- $265 USD
24 pixel pipes
24 shader units (set)
no FPHDR+FSAA

x1900xt- $445
16 pixel pipes
48 pixel shader units (flexible)
FPHDR+FSAA

Reviews between the 7900gtX and the x1900xt are split. The 7900gt generally beats the x1800xt 512 by a few FPS, but cannot do FPHDR+FSAA and does not generally achieve the same level of IQ aat the same performance. The nVidia cards excel in pure pixel throughput, but lose ground more quickly when higher resolution, HDR, AA and AF are applied.

ATI cards generally perform multiple pixel operations more efficiently (single pass vs. multiple pass), but nVidia cards win in raw fill rate. Be aware as well that the x1800/x1900 series make use of a seriously loud cooler. If noise bothers you either go with the slightly less loud 7900gt, or buy an aftermarket cooler like Zalman's VF 900.

Personally, I cannot advise you against any of these cards. Each has its own benefits and drawbacks. Keep in mind when comparing products that raw FPS are not the whole story. One must also consider architechtural flexibility (ATI wins), driver support and compatibility (nVidia wins), future program support/ performance (x1900 wins), power draw (nVidia wins) and typical image quality (ATI wins).

I have the x1900xtx, which can be found as a refurb for the same as an xt if you're willing to take the plunge. I've never regretted the decision, especially playing Oblivion.
Click to expand...

I thought the X1800 XT was universally claimed to be a slightly better performer with slightly better image quality than the 7900 GT (I did say slightly), but at higher noise/power levels, and possibly (I did say possibly) lower overclockability. That's the impression I'm getting from reading the comments of others, and from reviews.
 
so the order would go:
OCed x1900xt>x1900xt>OC7900gt>x1800xt>7900gt

am i right or not?
 
Cyrilix said:
I thought the X1800 XT was universally claimed to be a slightly better performer with slightly better image quality than the 7900 GT (I did say slightly), but at higher noise/power levels, and possibly (I did say possibly) lower overclockability. That's the impression I'm getting from reading the comments of others, and from reviews.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you say.
Standard IQ is better going from a 6800GT to a X1800XT but there isnt much in it.
If I hadnt seen the difference I wouldnt have been bothered.
One thing that is nice and you can tell, is the ability to do HDR and AA in Oblivion.
It bugged me my 6800GT couldnt do it and was one reason for my snapping up a cheap X1800XT card and not choosing the 7900GT which I was looking at.

I've been very surprised at how quietly the XT runs when Idle, its practically silent.
When gaming it is wise to find the max overclock with fan running about 70% unless you dont mind the noise. I managed to get X1800PE speeds at 70% fan and it was fast before overclocking so am happy with that. (went from core/memory clocks of 600/700 to 700/800)
At 100% fan speed, I notice it turning on for sure but after a few seconds the gaming takes over and It fades awayyyyy :D

Another nice benefit ATI gives is the ability to change Vgpu using software.
This opens up the door for more clocking if you get a better cooler.
I use ATITool for overclocking, Vmods, fan speeds, artifact testing... its a great util.

NVidias drivers make their cards easier to overclock with the automated max clock finder that doesnt crash when it gets too fast (lol @ ATI).
 
Chernobyl1 said:
I went through wondering whether its a good idea to upgrade trauma too.
It came down to this, is your pc good enough to play the games you like?
If not, theres no choice.

On the plus side, Vista wont be released for 6 months, new hardware for it will be expensive and usually needs a second revision to iron out the inital problems.
DX10 will not be available for XP so unless you have a lot of cash you wont be an early adopter of DX10.
I dont know if this is true but early reports say that the Aero (high end graphics) version of Vista will be $500 USD !
Click to expand...
So will DX10 not be backwards compatible with XP. If not that is going to be super lame. And I though Vista was going to be a yearly payment plan deal. Or was that just a rumor that I saw?
Either way you bring up a really good point. I think I might be taking a trip over to newegg real soon.
 
So will DX10 not be backwards compatible with XP. If not that is going to be super lame.
Click to expand...

you won't be able to install DX10 on windows XP, how ever DX10 cards will run on XP just fine and give you all the same performance increases you would expect from a new release

And I though Vista was going to be a yearly payment plan deal. Or was that just a rumor that I saw?
Click to expand...

no idea what you are trying to say here, but micro soft hasn't said anything about renewing your key yearly
 
hmm, I remember seeing something about MS using "Pay as you Go" but didnt read it as early rumours need to settle.
 
you could pay the difference for the upgrades

say you had the home version and wanted the pro version, you'd pay the difference and download the upgrade to pro version

what is the pay as you go thing you heard, what does it entail?
 
Rumor was you have to pay to use Vista every year. Or something to that effect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top