X1800XT < X1950XT ,not?

A

altcon

Guest
I'm posting since I'm a bit shocked. I just took out my X1800XT 512mb and put in an X1950XT 256mb.
Sadly I feel 0 difference in all the stuff Im currently playing (STALKER, CSS, COD2, and yes Painkiller... :rolleyes: ).
The only thing I am feeling is a hotter case and slower exit times from games.
I thought that something like ~3 times the shading power would be well felt.
Is there a game you think a tangible difference will be felt?

BTW - this is not an upgrade, Im just using the X1950XT till I get an 8800/X2900 series card since I sold my X1800.
 
altcon said:
I'm posting since I'm a bit shocked. I just took out my X1800XT 512mb and put in an X1950XT 256mb.
Sadly I feel 0 difference in all the stuff Im currently playing (STALKER, CSS, COD2, and yes Painkiller... :rolleyes: ).
The only thing I am feeling is a hotter case and slower exit times from games.
I thought that something like ~3 times the shading power would be well felt.
Is there a game you think a tangible difference will be felt?

BTW - this is not an upgrade, Im just using the X1950XT till I get an 8800/X2900 series card since I sold my X1800.
Click to expand...

The lack of 512mb of the x1950 is probably hurting, assuming you are playing games at very high res with AA/AF enabled.
IMHO I didn't see much of a difference going from x800gto --> x1950pro
Sure I was able to turn a little more eye candy on, big deal.
 
Kind of funny that way.
Means memory has much more impact then most reviews would suggest.
I'm gaming at native LCD res (1280*1024) which isn't really that demanding these days....
SO Basically I should've probably stuck with my X1800Xt...
 
Reviews are done with 3.0 GHz C2Ds also, if your athlon is stock speed, try cranking it up.
 
I went from an X1800XL to an X1900XT and it was very noticeable especially in Oblivion.
I would think your card's 256mb of memory may have something to do with it. But I still think in the right games and situations, the extra shaders of the X1950 should make a difference, unless you are constantly stressing the frame buffer. But I doubt you bought a 256mb card if you're the type that needs X4 aa X16 af. Also games like CSS and PK aren't going to work the card hard enough to take advantage.
 
AFAIK STALKER is GPU capped and so is COD2, still don't see a difference.
STALKER is actually a bit worse (I'm guessing Frame Buffer), and COD2 is about the same (could be CPU cap but I'm not sure).
I also tried Oblivion, can't say I felt a difference, large spaces still gave the same framerates, maybe 1 FPS more....
Seriously, if I ever considered such an upgrade I feel silly.
 
IntelOwnz said:
IMHO I didn't see much of a difference going from x800gto --> x1950pro
Sure I was able to turn a little more eye candy on, big deal.
Click to expand...

lol, I went from an x800xl 512 to a x1900xt and the difference was night and day.
I have no idea why you would think the way you do.
 
I made the switch from an X1800XT to the X1950XT as well (both 256MB cards though), and I do notice a difference in some of my games. It's not tremendous, but it's there.

For instance, in GRAW, I averaged mid to low 30s with the X1800XT. With the X1950XT, I average in the mid to low 40s. In Oblivion, I don't have any numbers to go by, but there seems to be less stuttering in general when loading new outdoor areas (remember, I never had a 512MB card) as well as when fighting off a large group of enemies. Previously with the X1800XT, when playing Marvel Ultimate Alliance, I was not able to turn on Advanced Lighting since it stuttered like crazy in the game. With this new card, I can play it smoothly (30fps average on High Shadows, and mid 70s for Low Shadows) and have it look nicer!

I did some before and after benchmarks in a few games as well as 3DMark (just for shits and giggles :p) and the numbers show an increase in performance across the board. Not huge, but doable. (I think I'll make a thread soon and post up the screenshots after I sort and upload them.)

However, it is true though. Most other games don't get much of a huge increase in performance over the X1800XT, but it's not exactly a monumental upgrade step either. ;) For me, selling off the old card for the new card netted a worthy upgrade for the games I play. But then again, I went in knowing that the card wasn't going to offer a tremendous improvement anyways. All I was looking for was to smooth out the performance that the X1800XT was a bit shaky in. :D
 
These days a 512Mb frame buffer is pretty necessary for high end cards. 1GB would probably be useless but 256 just ain't enough.
 
IntelOwnz said:
The lack of 512mb of the x1950 is probably hurting, assuming you are playing games at very high res with AA/AF enabled.
Click to expand...
Stereophile said:
But I doubt you bought a 256mb card if you're the type that needs X4 aa X16 af.
Click to expand...
This post seems to show pretty conclusively that 16xAF won't even manage to chew through 100kb of video memory. The effect of AA at high resolution is staggering, though.
 
Stereophile said:
I went from an X1800XL to an X1900XT and it was very noticeable especially in Oblivion.
I would think your card's 256mb of memory may have something to do with it. But I still think in the right games and situations, the extra shaders of the X1950 should make a difference, unless you are constantly stressing the frame buffer. But I doubt you bought a 256mb card if you're the type that needs X4 aa X16 af. Also games like CSS and PK aren't going to work the card hard enough to take advantage.
Click to expand...


I went from my X800gto to an X1800XT (both 256mb cards) and the difference was huge. There is definitely difference. I had to return the X1800 after a week or so as it was not stable. Instead I got the X1900 crossfire edition card (effectively an X1900XT 512mb) and it really shines. Most games probably don't need to 512mb over 256mb, but some like Oblivion need it.

The X800gto is a fantastic card even by today's standards but the X1800/X1900 series are a whole new level.
 
collection said:
x1900xt 256mb or 512?
Click to expand...

512 Anything less at the res I game at is a waste of my time and money, I can understand the OP's issue though, 512 mem at 1600x1200 makes a big difference in my experience. not sure what res he is gaming at thoguh
 
You guys should check out the 8800gts 320 vs 640 ... the same should apply here :)
 
altcon said:
I'm posting since I'm a bit shocked. I just took out my X1800XT 512mb and put in an X1950XT 256mb.
Sadly I feel 0 difference in all the stuff Im currently playing (STALKER, CSS, COD2, and yes Painkiller... :rolleyes: ).
The only thing I am feeling is a hotter case and slower exit times from games.
I thought that something like ~3 times the shading power would be well felt.
Is there a game you think a tangible difference will be felt?

BTW - this is not an upgrade, Im just using the X1950XT till I get an 8800/X2900 series card since I sold my X1800.
Click to expand...

Are you running a higher levels of AA/AF or other eye candy compared to the 1800? Also have you ran any benchmarks. Just because you 'feel' no difference doesnt mean there isnt.
 
He is running at 1280 x 1024.
He is not pushing the 1950 at all at that resolution.
The X1800XT can handle that no problem. I would assume only a slight improvement going to the 1950 and it will depend alot on what games are being played.
I run BF2 at 1440 x900 with everything cranked and 4xAA and 16x AF.
It runs butter smooth.
 
I use ATI Tray tools on both my installs, so I see the exact FPS all the time.
So far I can say there really isn't any tangible advantage at 1280*1024 to the X1950XT 256mb.
I use in game setings where you can apply AA and AF. In Stalker I use no AA but medium AF (Im using Dynamic lights on objects). In oblivion Im forcing 8AF with HDR but no aa. In Cod2, Piankiller and CSS Im using max settings through in game menu.
As I said, I can't feel a difference and the FPS counter agrees with me.
STALKER runs awfull on both cards BTW (in my Point if view).
Many areas fall into the 15-20 FPS, especially when lots of characters are around. I also think it was less "jumpy" (ie FPS was more constant) on my X1800XT 512mb.
All the same, this has convinced me that today I will not buy a card with less then 512mb even for 1280*1024.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top