X1600XT or 6800GS?

Z

Zallek

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
449
According to GPUreview.com.. (Not entirely sure how accurate it is though) the X1600XT and 6800GS are pretty similar in performance.. what Im wondering, is which is better? I havent really looked much as I just noticed that my retailer has the X1600XT for $50 less than the 6800GS I was planning on buying, so I figured I'd ask here. If they're similar in performance, should I save my self some money and just grab the X1600XT? I have no brand loyalty, although I've never actually *used* an nVidia card, but that doesnt matter. The X1*00 series all supports Sm 3.0 and all that junk right? Or is it only on the high end X1*00 cards?
 
x1600xt, just cause its very premature driver-wise right now.

technically theres on official driver for the x1000 series but when they do its new architecture will be fully utilized. right now the card are slowly getting 10% or so with each new driver, once they iron it out there should be anice increase.

you need to ask yourself if the GS is worth the extra 25$ or not. I own an X1600xt and its sweet. The card overclocks to 650/1820 on air, not bad ;)
 
You also get the added IQ features that come with the X1000 series. HQ AF is nothing to scoff at, and I can definitely notice a difference when it's on.
 
GVX said:
You also get the added IQ features that come with the X1000 series. HQ AF is nothing to scoff at, and I can definitely notice a difference when it's on.
Click to expand...

Yeah, being able to use 16x AF where the GS will only do 4-8X until it bogs down is nice too :)
 
Zallek said:
According to GPUreview.com.. (Not entirely sure how accurate it is though) the X1600XT and 6800GS are pretty similar in performance...
Click to expand...

Yes... that awesome game of 3DMark05! I spent countless nights playing it all night long ;)
 
Im currently using a lovely X850XT, so im not an nvidia fan -boy, but id really recommend the 6800GS, cuz the memory is 256-bit, as compared to the x1600xt's 128-bit bus......this has a huge impact on performance..

so get the 6800GS ;)
 
for the win for the win for the win

get whatever's cheaper right now. when driver revisions are done, the x1600xt and the 6800gs are about equivalent. and sm 3.0 the x1600xt kicks more ass any day.

it's a toss up.
 
GeForce 6800 GS vs Radeon X1600XT

After the excellent experience we had reviewing the X1800XT, the X1600XT has brought us down to earth with a bang. It reminds me greatly of the X600 series which when launched was dreadfully under spec’d and overpriced compared to other competitive parts. ATI went some way to resolving that with the hastily released X700 series and you would have thought they would have learned their lesson with that experience. Unfortunately it appears they haven’t and we await a replacement mainstream product which features a 256bit memory bus which should go some way to helping ATI match Nvidia for price and performance in the mainstream segment. A thoroughly disappointing product overall from ATI, it might not be available for some time and in reality there is no reason to wait for it.
Click to expand...

http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/X16_GS/index.htm
 
I thought that x1600xt were closer to 6600GTs rather than 6800s. Gotta give ATi props though, making such a fast 4 pipe card. :)
 
Leper Messiah said:
I thought that x1600xt were closer to 6600GTs rather than 6800s. Gotta give ATi props though, making such a fast 4 pipe card. :)
Click to expand...

And they are, I don't know where people got the idea that X1600XT were able to compete with 6800GS´ :rolleyes:
 
Leper Messiah said:
I thought that x1600xt were closer to 6600GTs rather than 6800s. Gotta give ATi props though, making such a fast 4 pipe card. :)
Click to expand...

it's not a 4 pipe card...it has 12 shader processors...but only 4 texture units and a 128 bit memory interface...so it has tons of shading horsepower, but it's held back by other factors...all around the X1600XT is a decent card...but in many games it's going to be held back by its unbalanced design...

And no, no amount of driver revisions is going to make the x1600xt faster than a 6800gs...or even equivalent...the xt will always get stomped in memory bandwidth and texture fillrate limited scenarios...
 
Dillusion said:
x1600xt, just cause its very premature driver-wise right now.

technically theres on official driver for the x1000 series but when they do its new architecture will be fully utilized. right now the card are slowly getting 10% or so with each new driver, once they iron it out there should be anice increase.

you need to ask yourself if the GS is worth the extra 25$ or not. I own an X1600xt and its sweet. The card overclocks to 650/1820 on air, not bad ;)
Click to expand...


wow it can still get some more juice out of it? thats awesome news.
 
tvdang, Dillusion is dillusional, he has no idea what he is talking about, 10% per driver..ya w/e

And there have been official drivers with true X1x00 support for a while now

BOTTOM LINE:

THE 6800GS IS A MUCHHHHHHHHHHHHH (ok maybe not that much) BETTER CARD THAN THE X1600XT. When an ATI !!!!!! site like DRIVERHEAVEN.NET says its crap, it is crap

The 6800GS has a lot of overclock potential as well
 
noo i ment the overclocking since its already pretty high......the driver thing im sure it will mature but 10% each update is kinda wierd......
 
One might look at the price difference... and one might look at reviews.... and yet one might still believe in fairy tales told by anonymous internet users :D

X1600Pro << 6600GT
X1600XT > 6600GT
X1600XT <<< 6800GS
 
Although I have no experience with a 6800GS, I can HIGHLY recommend the x1600xt seeing as I just recently purchased one. The card has MAD overclocking potention, I'm running mine at 654mhz core, and 800mhz for the mem., up from 580/689, yet it can still go higher, no artifacts at all, held back by voltage :( . Scores for 3dmark05 (yes I know it doesn't relate to actual gameplay) are @ stock: 5200, overclocked 5984, which is pretty damn impressive if you ask me. Another thing the x1600 has goin for it is the AVIVO crap if your into encoding videos, which is a big thing for me. If you have any questions regarding the card, feel free to ask me, or want some actual benchmarks with the newer drivers (5.13).
 
You guys can say a 6800GS is 'better' all you want. It IS better in SOME cases, others its NOT.

The X1600XT isnt a 12 pipe card, it 'technically' is. Its not a 12x1 card like the 6800GS, but a 4x3 card. 4 real 'pipes' and 3 texture units per pipe, As opposed to 12 real pipes and only one texture unit for all of those pipes.

Even being a 128-bit card and being able to keep up with a 6800GS is nothing to scoff at, the 6800GS IS faster by a small margin in some games, but its not worth the 25$ if your on a budget.
 
my question is.......how much differnce is between the pro and the XT. i see no reviews discussing this. the memory speeds are completely different.
 
I have a 6800 GS, and I quite like it. If the X1600 XT and 6800 GS are similar in performance, then I would think factors like price, overclocking capability, features, and operating temperatures would become factors.

The way I see it, SLI has been on the market just shy of a year at this point, so running dual 6800 GS cards and getting a hold of a SLI capable motherboard should be easier to implement than finding a new CrossFire motherboard and finding a X1600 XT "master card" if you want to do the dual video card thing. Besides that, the 6800 GS does have better memory bandwidth, operates a lot cooler even while overclocked (XFX's factory overclocked GS operates at 35/50 degrees C idle/load), and, speaking of overclocking, I've managed a nice 20% core overclock with my card (reference speed: 425 MHz; stock overclock from XFX: 485 MHz; maximum stable overclock on air cooling: 535 MHz), and is readily available (a quick check around the web shows most major stores are out of stock of the X1600 XT).

Being impartial to the whole ATI vs. nVidia battle, having owned cards from both camps, I just happen to think that, in this comparison, the 6800 GS wins out on features and overall capability.
 
Dillusion said:
You guys can say a 6800GS is 'better' all you want. It IS better in SOME cases, others its NOT.

The X1600XT isnt a 12 pipe card, it 'technically' is. Its not a 12x1 card like the 6800GS, but a 4x3 card. 4 real 'pipes' and 3 texture units per pipe, As opposed to 12 real pipes and only one texture unit for all of those pipes.

Even being a 128-bit card and being able to keep up with a 6800GS is nothing to scoff at, the 6800GS IS faster by a small margin in some games, but its not worth the 25$ if your on a budget.
Click to expand...
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/games-2005.html

Small margin? The GS pretty much dominates the 1600 in just about every benchmark. Sometimes by 30-50fps or more. About %20 better performance overall.

I see how you got your screen name.
 
yojimbo said:
I have a 6800 GS, and I quite like it. If the X1600 XT and 6800 GS are similar in performance, then I would think factors like price, overclocking capability, features, and operating temperatures would become factors.

The way I see it, SLI has been on the market just shy of a year at this point, so running dual 6800 GS cards and getting a hold of a SLI capable motherboard should be easier to implement than finding a new CrossFire motherboard and finding a X1600 XT "master card" if you want to do the dual video card thing. Besides that, the 6800 GS does have better memory bandwidth, operates a lot cooler even while overclocked (XFX's factory overclocked GS operates at 35/50 degrees C idle/load), and, speaking of overclocking, I've managed a nice 20% core overclock with my card (reference speed: 425 MHz; stock overclock from XFX: 485 MHz; maximum stable overclock on air cooling: 535 MHz), and is readily available (a quick check around the web shows most major stores are out of stock of the X1600 XT).

Being impartial to the whole ATI vs. nVidia battle, having owned cards from both camps, I just happen to think that, in this comparison, the 6800 GS wins out on features and overall capability.
Click to expand...


x1600 doesnt need master card i believe.
 
PRIME1 said:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/games-2005.html

Small margin? The GS pretty much dominates the 1600 in just about every benchmark. Sometimes by 30-50fps or more. About %20 better performance overall.

I see how you got your screen name.
Click to expand...

The drivers are still very immature and x1k series is still a very new architecture. Yes 10% increases in performance with new driver revisions. Also, they're not even in the same price range. the x1600xt is a $165 card compared to the $200 6800gs. And once aa/af comes on the differance between the x1600xt and 6800gs becomes even smaller. the x1600xt in bf2 is as fast as the 6800gs with aa+af on. In fear with aa+af it again is as fast. there are several other games with the same scenario.
 
PRIME1 said:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/games-2005.html

Small margin? The GS pretty much dominates the 1600 in just about every benchmark. Sometimes by 30-50fps or more. About %20 better performance overall.

I see how you got your screen name.
Click to expand...

When you can play BF2 with 4x AA and 16xAF at 1280x1024 with a 6800GS LMK.

And yes, this architecture is VERY new, this is the first time ATi makes a core from the ground up, even the 2D engine in these cards is superb to the 68-7800 series.
 
My vote goes to the GS.

At stock speeds and overclocked speed the GS is
CONSISTANTLY faster.

The x1600xt might tighten the difference with a few driver updates
but in my opinion, driver updates can only do so much.


Get the GS
 
The X1600XT is cheaper where I am by a good $40 so I'm probably going to get that.
 
Just get whatever costs less and is more convenient, 6-10 fps might seem useful, but unless your a martian, it won't matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top