• 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.

x1900 is anyone impressed?

S

stopmenow

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 1, 2006
Messages
464
i thought this card was gonna be expetacular (like most people were saying) it's not extraordinare compared to my new 7800 gtx. am i wrong?
 
Nope, I'm not impressed at all. A benchmark I saw on the x1900xt got a lower 3dmark 05 and 06 than my x1800xt at stock. I didn't see what cpu they were using for the test, but still. I'm not impressed with the x1900xtx either. The clocks are only 650/725 compared to my x1800xt flashed to the platinum edition at 700/800. I could probably go higher too. The only difference with the new x1900xtx is the number of shaders which in games compared to a flashed x1800xt is most likely negligible if you ask me.
 
One really big side effect of ATI are the usually underdeveloped drivers.
Remember the old 8500 which everyone said had better hardware, but crappy drivers, so it could not deliver.

The same has just happened to the 1800, new drivers recently came out which made it a much better contender and finally beatout the 7800 GT (and in some cases the GTX) in almost every category (if i remember correctly, the 7800GT and the GTX were owing the 1800XT when it first came out)


ati needs to step up their driver development. I would say that the 1900 needs more time to mature. but considering that it is much cheaper than the 512 and actually available! it might be a much better deal.
(dont make me quote that Asus 7800 512 for 999.99)
 
This card is only gonna to be really faster when your are more bound by Shaders. In Fear it was almost 50% faster than a 512 GTX even thought the GTX has more fill rate and memory bandwidth... What till you see the Farcry AA and HDR scores :)

Again anyone that was expecting this to be faster across the board was not paying attention....
 
Jbirney said:
This card is only gonna to be really faster when your are more bound by Shaders. In Fear it was almost 50% faster than a 512 GTX even thought the GTX has more fill rate and memory bandwidth... What till you see the Farcry AA and HDR scores :)

Again anyone that was expecting this to be faster across the board was not paying attention....
Click to expand...

So true, its sad how many so-called enthusiasts base performance off 3DMark05/06 or games that aren't shader heavy.
 
Looks like a great product, but there are some new dynamics invloved at the high end in GPU's these days, the most important being dual card technology, SLI and CrossFire.

Having built an SLI rig last month, I kinda wanted to wait for the X1900, and would have. But now, if I wanted to "upgrade" from 512 GTX, I'd need two X1900 and a new motherboard. Single card performance in this round does me no good, as with many running 7800 GT/GTX SLI systems, as we already have any single card beat. And dual cards are so powerful in most cases that more power now isn't going to do use any good.

I guess the real skinny of it now is that since hardware is so good these days, a simple incremental improvment really isn't that impressive. Sure the X1900 might be super great in games of the future, but how cares how a card today performs on software a year from now for the most part? Sure it's be great to be future proof, but how the hell knows what's going to happen a year from now?

Some credit to it though. It looks to be THE card for F.E.A.R., which I thought was last years best game. I would love to sit in front of an X1900 CrossFire system and try it at 1920x1200 4aa/16af+ max detail!
 
x1900 is anyone impressed?
Click to expand...

To answer you question...

No, nothing impresses me anymore in the world of video cards.

Why? Because, a new video card is out every 2 months. I haven't been impressed or wow'ed by anything since the 6800 Ultra or the X850 XT. Seriously.

My video card, X800XT AIW (yes, i'm still AGP), does 60+ FPS on anygame I need it to, it doesn't shit on me, it works. I see no need to be impressed with something newer.
 
lol

My X1800XT won't push X3 Reunion in reasonable frame rates at high resolution w/the eye candy turned up. So for those of us that run in high resolutions then there is plenty of room for improvement.
 
Riptide_NVN said:
lol

My X1800XT won't push X3 Reunion in reasonable frame rates at high resolution w/the eye candy turned up. So for those of us that run in high resolutions then there is plenty of room for improvement.
Click to expand...

That's when you go CrossFire! Two X1800 will out perform one X1900, right?
 
Overall the card offers a nice option for ATI fans. Their approach is different and not necessarily right or wrong. I guess a lot of it has to do with how games will be coded in upcoming months.
 
Looks impressive to me. More preformace than the 7800gtx 512MB for less money and its availible. oh and more features. Whats not to like?
 
i think the 1900xt is a really good card ,

i can play fear and nfs:most wanted at 1600x1200 with everything on

these 2 cards in crossfire will kill the 7800gtx 512 sli,

and as to 7900gtx , we will see what it can do when its out
 
It's nice, I guess...for people who crave every possible frame in a game. The performance increases in shader-heavy games are pretty impressive but I can't help but not be awed by this release when I look at the big picture.

As much as I like what ATI is doing with this release, I'm really not convinced that it's going to matter much once the true "next generation" of DX10 video cards comes out this spring (?). Now THERE'S a set of ATI cards I'll be really interested in...
 
cod2 is a heavy shader game correct? hopefully this will help drive this game to level that is acceptable. rig in the sig and still hitting 30 frames in cod2 when i zoom in some times @ all high 4 xaa and 10x7 resolution..
 
I think once non-beta drivers are released, you will begin to see a whole lot more out of this card. Right now there are only a handfull of reviews out there, I'm certainly taking their results with a grain of salt for now.
 
I'm just glad to see ATI release a card that competes with the GTX 512 and available for MSRP at launch day.

Good job ATI.
 
Iam impressed also, those FEAR benchies look sweet! And what I have understanded, the shader heavy games are the future?

Getting one X1900XT as soon as they reach Finland.
 
I wish there was something that could show off the shader horsepower this thing has...I think this will prove to be a very fast card in future games...however I think G71 will prove to be the better solution...16 TMUs just doesn't seem to be enough...
 
i think if they wanted to add more TMU's they'd need an overhaul on the core, to me its enough to get them to the R600

step up on the drivers? how much further does a company need to go to make people happy, shit people, they have a more dedicated driver team then any other company, even outside the video card market, sometimes people just can't be happy

Nope, I'm not impressed at all. A benchmark I saw on the x1900xt got a lower 3dmark 05 and 06 than my x1800xt at stock. I didn't see what cpu they were using for the test, but still. I'm not impressed with the x1900xtx either. The clocks are only 650/725 compared to my x1800xt flashed to the platinum edition at 700/800. I could probably go higher too. The only difference with the new x1900xtx is the number of shaders which in games compared to a flashed x1800xt is most likely negligible if you ask me.
Click to expand...

i'm very confused why you brought up 3dmark as a reason for not being happy with it, i'm guessing if you saw the 3dmark benchmark you saw the FEAR benchmark, which would lead me to assume you 1) don't care about games and 2) only play 3dmark

the increase in shaders is showing a MASSIVE IMPROVEMENT, not negligible, and it was never hypothesised to be this massive either, are you stairing at the ground or something?
 
i'm impressed because prices on X1800XT's plumetted and i got 1 for £280 v £410 for a 1900XT.

that £130 will now go toward a master card :)
 
im slightly impressed and i own a 512mb GTX. one thing though is this card didnt come out until 2 months after nvidia released their high performance part and it is still barely beating it?
not trying to flame or anything as i have owned both nvidia and ati cards in the past. my last ati card was a 9800 pro o/ced to XT and that lasted me a long time.
and i also understand some people can argue availability but supposedly Nvidias crap availability was due to memory issues. How many people have the x1900xt neway? or have ordered it from somewhere that has actually shipped their card out? i think nvidias new part coming out is just going to put them back on top again due to more pipelines and even higher clockspeeds than the 512mb gtx. it really doesnt matter though because the real war is gonna start with dx10.
 
Not sure if I'm impressed or not. I was kind of hoping for a fast single card solution to maybe replace my SLI setup but it really doesn't seem the case. A really interesting review would be a X1900XT vs a 7800GT SLI setup since both cost the same now that 7800GT's are less than $300.00. It kind of looks like the 7800GT setup is a bit faster.
 
This card is beating the 7800GTX 512 in most games with first revision drivers and killing it in shader intensive games. I give it two to three driver releases, or two to three months, and this card will keep up with whatever NV launches. Now the real question is when will we see NV's refresh to their refresh?

Mine goes in my box tonight!
 
Just read the [H] review and it seems that we can not really judge this card now as most games don't use that much shaders except FEAR, the real question would be: Will future games turn to be as shader intensive as ATI hopes?

ATI has taken a gamble, let's see if it pays off...
 
While the card is impressive, and I was really thinking about getting it, it doesn't seem worth it too me. My GTX SLi will hold me over for ~ 6 months until DirectX10 cards are released.
 
This new card looks impressive, but I'm just glad it didnt smack my 7800 gtx 256 sli (what a mouthful) set up too badly.

I agree that the DX-10 will make a big splash (especially lookind ay Crytek's new game) and that may really be where the money is. It looks like the 1900 may be up to the task????

The xtx looks kind of pricey, tho. but so was the 7800 when it hit the street. I think my next step up will be the next gen nVidia. For now Im gonna sit tight with what Ive got.
 
While the X1900 is impressive, most people already have setups (X1800's or 7800's) they can live with until DX10. Nice to see ATI become competitive again, especially after Nvidia carried the high end market unchallenged for 6 months.
 
It's better than the X1800 for sure, but not the clear champion it needed to be. I will be curious to see how the mid-high version does ($300-$400) range. It's real competition will be the G71 and ATI should be able to get out at least 1 driver revision by the time that gets released.

Availability could be better. Newegg only has an OEM version for $600 and Monarch is listing February before they get any stock.

Sad thing is no matter how well the R580 or G71 do, DirectX 10 is scheduled for this year and that could change everything.
 
The biggest problem I see is that there is really nothing "good" using current technology from ATI in the $200-400 range. $600 for people like me is out of reach. Since the X1800 series is being phased out already (based on X1900 reviews...not necessarily ATI), there's nothing in the middle between the X1600 and the X1900. If I were ATI, I'd keep producing the X1800XL at least and price it at $250-275 and try and steal some of the 7800GT's thunder.
 
i dont understand! i thought cod2 was a shader intensive game. isnt this card sopposed to help with this game? i dont see a boost in frames in the hardocp review.
 
PRIME1 said:
It's better than the X1800 for sure, but not the clear champion it needed to be. I will be curious to see how the mid-high version does ($300-$400) range. It's real competition will be the G71 and ATI should be able to get out at least 1 driver revision by the time that gets released.

Availability could be better. Newegg only has an OEM version for $600 and Monarch is listing February before they get any stock.

Sad thing is no matter how well the R580 or G71 do, DirectX 10 is scheduled for this year and that could change everything.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about?! Monarch has a ton of X1900's in stock.
http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=M&Category_Code=atihq
 
kirbyrj said:
The biggest problem I see is that there is really nothing "good" using current technology from ATI in the $200-400 range. $600 for people like me is out of reach. Since the X1800 series is being phased out already (based on X1900 reviews...not necessarily ATI), there's nothing in the middle between the X1600 and the X1900. If I were ATI, I'd keep producing the X1800XL at least and price it at $250-275 and try and steal some of the 7800GT's thunder.
Click to expand...


There is an X1700 coming soon. I'm very impressed with the x1900! :)
 
Diseaseboy said:
Not sure if I'm impressed or not. I was kind of hoping for a fast single card solution to maybe replace my SLI setup but it really doesn't seem the case. A really interesting review would be a X1900XT vs a 7800GT SLI setup since both cost the same now that 7800GT's are less than $300.00. It kind of looks like the 7800GT setup is a bit faster.
Click to expand...

But if you buy an X1900XT instead of a 7800GT SLI setup, if you need more power you can add another X1900XT. You can't add another 7800GT SLI setup, at least not right now.
 
Suflex said:
Just read the [H] review and it seems that we can not really judge this card now as most games don't use that much shaders except FEAR...
Click to expand...
I think people are missing the point. Games that aren't shader intensive are pretty much as fast as they need to be already. We don't need further boosts in resolution or fill rates; we need shader processing power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top