X1900GT vs. 7900GT

G

GaMbiNo

Weaksauce
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
96
I'm building my new rig and I'm not sure what to go with a Radeon or an Nvidia.. So these 2 cards are in the same price area so I'm wondering whats better anyone got any feedback!
 
ATI or Nvidia as opposed to... ?

Anyway, I got a 7900 GT, damn I'm in love with this card.

Was a significant upgrade from a plane jane 6800 AGP

my .02c
 
I am a little bias to ATI and I own a x1900gt. I think its a great card. Plenty powerful (enough where you wouldn't have to worry about not maxing out your games). On paper, the Nvidia is faster, but I cant stand their 9x drivers (SO much that I actually sold my 2x 7600gt's and got a slower single x1900gt)..

either way im sure you will be happy.

Heres the paper specs..
http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=384&card2=415
 
performance is neck to neck..

but thinking about power consumption... 7900 gt wins..
 
7900 for sure. Almost half the power requirement, great clocking potential, very cool running, and faster in pretty much every game except Oblivion. If you want an X1900 card, get an XT, otherwise 7900GT fo'sho!!!
 
Justinkoko said:
performance is neck to neck..

but thinking about power consumption... 7900 gt wins..
Click to expand...

Yet concerning noise, the X1900GT is quieter.

The 7900GT overall is a little faster, the X1900GT is cheaper though, by a little. You also get better IQ.
 
7900GT = X1900XT > X1900GT

Go for the 7900GT, faster in the real world, less power consumption, and very high overclocking potential. Although the X1900GT has the capacity to provide slightly better IQ, chances are that if you are running at a high resolution the X1900GT will be too choked to deliver the higher IQ. Just make sure you get the "reloaded" version if you buy an eVGA, or you could end up with the infamous artifacting.
 
Sorry, the 7900GT does not equal the X1900XT.

Also, HQ AF, less shimmering, better AA, HDR+AA, is not "slightly better". I guess to someone who hasnt seen them in action... Need a link to [H]'s IQ comparisons? ;)
 
Ok well I wanted a 7900GT and I've wanted one since they came out but I've been hearing all these faults with them and things like that.. But that was the 1st set of them yet also people do say that the stock cooler doesn't do the job. But yet again I am an Nvidia fan and my new board is the DFI LanParty Nforce 4 SLI-DR and I don't think that it would be the right thing to put an ATI card with the Nvidia chipset just doesn't make sense to me but yet agian there are people who do buy them and put an ATI card on and and beats the whole reason of an SLI sOooOoOoO I think I will probably go with the 7900 just because I enjoy Nvidia and they never let me down... :cool:
 
Agree with Fallguy. Have run them both in my pc and the XT eats the 7900GT alive. I would have thought you would have known that.

edit: grammar
 
fallguy said:
Sorry, the 7900GT does not equal the X1900XT.

Also, HQ AF, less shimmering, better AA, HDR+AA, is not "slightly better". I guess to someone who hasnt seen them in action... Need a link to [H]'s IQ comparisons? ;)
Click to expand...
Actually, I would love a link :).
 
fallguy said:
Sorry, the 7900GT does not equal the X1900XT..HDR+AA(!)
Click to expand...
To clarify:

HDR and multisampling in three current (two of them actually fairly dated) games with an unsupported, non-current beta batch that results in the following in Oblivion: highly distorted grass shadows, issues with frame buffer distortion occlusion, other strange occlusion issues concerning alpha blended sprites and some world objects and requires Catalyst AI optimizations to be enabled. HDR and AA can also be enabled in "Call of Juarez" via an executable rename hack.

We've seen no confirmation concerning which future titles exclusively feature floating point blending HDR and/or whether some sort of Chuck-like workaround will be required to enable HDR and antialiasing in these games. Valve should continue to use their integer method with their Source engine and one would assume that current and future licensees will stick with the same or similar render method. id's upcoming Quake Wars uses no HDR path at all and future id titles (such as Wolfenstein and id's next in-house developed IP) may also follow this route, as id has stated that they feel the extra precision of real HDR is desirable, but not currently really necessary.

The assumption that's being made here is that all future titles will have some sort of fp16 HDR/OpenEXR exclusivity, when that certainly isn't always going to be the case. Valve has shown, and id will show, that the end result can be nearly identical, in most cases, and faster while still being highly compatible with older hardware in terms of antialiasing support by taking advantage of alternate render methods.

So there.
 
If you actually read my post, it was seperated into two sections. The 7900GTis not as fast as the X1900XT, which is what he implied, and I refuted.

Not to menton all the other IQ differences. And the fact is, you can do HDR+AA in some games, and NV currenlty cannot.

But good try?
 
X1900GT comparable to a 7900GT .... is that a joke which 7900GT is the comparison

each of my 7900GT's is faster then any x1900gt

X1900XT/oc 7900GT is a comparison ;p

quality on a X1900XT is slightly better but... performance wise the X1900GT is imo comparable to a lesser card the 7900GT is def on par performance wise with the X1900XT

and siting the fact it can enable HDR+AA is not showing that its highly faster simply higher quality not that everyone with an X1900XT/X uses HDR+AA

for the price the 7900GT is a better card from a performance standpoint then any X1900GT imo and is equal to the X1900XT in performance


7900GT KO > X1900GT
 
fallguy said:
And the fact is, you can do HDR+AA in some games, and NV currenlty cannot.

But good try?
Click to expand...

Can the X1900GT do AA+HDR? Absoloutely, no one said it couldn't. Is it fast enough to do them at a decent resolution? Absoloutely not. People with dual X1900XTs struggle with HDR+AA in Olbivion. The fact that "it supports it" means nothing if it can't perform the function at a reasonable performance level in the real world.

Get a 7900GT KO Superclocked, it can be had for $260, it will whip the pants off an X1900GT, and it match the much more expensive X1900XT blow-for-blow.
 
Get a 7900GT KO Superclocked, it can be had for $260, it will whip the pants off an X1900GT, and it match the much more expensive X1900XT blow-for-blow.
Click to expand...

exactly what I was thinking tho the reg KO can easily overclock just as high and higher then the superclock and is less expensive often.

it also depends on the resolution your gaming at the X1900XT can be slightly faster at higher resolution card for card but mostly on certain games using big use of the memory, but they do have a 7900GT 512 by several companys.

for anything 1280x1024 and down there is no notice for the 512 memory buffer imo for most games I have ever played even at 1600x1200, its only slight but future games def will prob take better use of bigger memory.
 
a couple of reasons as to why i made my switch to nVidia from ATI...

in this case... 7900GT to 1900GT or 1900XT

-performs better or as good as ATI..
-dreaded CCC software suite...
-smaller card...i like when things are small and perform the same
-much less power consumption...<--- most important factor to me..
-all this points to me..IMO...is that nvidia has more efficient architecture.. smaller card,less power comsumed...and yet performs better than 1900GT..
-purevideo..
 
7900GT over X1900GT totally agreed. Putting 7900GT on the same level as X1900XT??? LOL!!!!!

I have used both in my pc, and the XT totally owns the GT, in performance, image quality, and actually useable post-processing effects (AA/AF etc).


Lets take it back to the architecture, shall we:

The 7900 core is a streamlined 7800 core (302 million transistors 7800, 278 million 7900) with a process shrink from 110 to 90nm. The architecture targets raw speed performance, but takes significant penalties with AF/AA usage in comparison to ATI.

X1900 core is 384 million transistors, up from the X1800s ~320 million, the difference being an extra 32 PS units. Both cores contain ATI's ring bus mem controller, itself taking up approx 74-80 million transistors.

The ring bus is primarily what gives ATI the edge with AA/AF performance hits, as well as making HDR+AA feasible in terms of bandwidth utilisation. Claiming NV's architecture as more efficient based only on transistor count fails to take into account ATI's memory controller, which has and is showing its value, primarily in high IQ situations (high AA+AF).

Now lets all stop the f.a.n.b.o.i. crap and stick to the facts shall we.
 
Personally I would take the 1900gt and enjoy the superior IQ. That being said, I am sure both cards are a nice midrange solution.
 
I would still take a 7900GT over an X1900GT. You won't notice the extra IQ if your framerate is holding you back.
 
fallguy said:
If you actually read my post, it was seperated into two sections. The 7900GTis not as fast as the X1900XT, which is what he implied, and I refuted.
Click to expand...
I read your post. I was not denying this.

fallguy said:
But good try?
Click to expand...
I was only attempting to "set the record straight" on the so-called HDR+AA support. Everyone here is absolutely terrible at this - you tell those who are faintly familiar with current video cards that the X1xxx series are the only cards that support any form of HDR and multisampling when this is simply not the case.

Without clarification on "HDR+AA", it's absolutely misleading.

I accomplished what I tried to do. I am not trying to sell any particular brand of card to any particular person nor particularly disuade anyone from buying ATi by stating what we know to be true at this point.
 
^^ blah blah. Again, good try.

lloose said:
those reviews are for the 7900gtX.. and the 7950.. we are talking about the 7900gt.
Click to expand...

And? The IQ will be the same.

InorganicMatter said:
Can the X1900GT do AA+HDR? Absoloutely, no one said it couldn't. Is it fast enough to do them at a decent resolution? Absoloutely not. People with dual X1900XTs struggle with HDR+AA in Olbivion. The fact that "it supports it" means nothing if it can't perform the function at a reasonable performance level in the real world.

Get a 7900GT KO Superclocked, it can be had for $260, it will whip the pants off an X1900GT, and it match the much more expensive X1900XT blow-for-blow.
Click to expand...

Way to follow the lead, and take only one aspect of the better IQ. As the [H] article shows, ATi clearly has the IQ advantage. HQ AF.. less shimmering.. etc.

And no, the KO cannot match the X1900XT. Especially if ran close to the same quality settings. Much more expensive X1900XT? Um, $30 or $40 is "much more"? Yet you dont mention the KO is "much more" expensive than the X1900GT? Nice.
 
fallguy said:
^^ blah blah. Again, good try.

And? The IQ will be the same.

Way to follow the lead, and take only one aspect of the better IQ. As the [H] article shows, ATi clearly has the IQ advantage. HQ AF.. less shimmering.. etc.

And no, the KO cannot match the X1900XT. Especially if ran close to the same quality settings. Much more expensive X1900XT? Um, $30 or $40 is "much more"? Yet you dont mention the KO is "much more" expensive than the X1900GT? Nice.
Click to expand...

Last I checked the X1900GT was selling for the exact same price as the 7900GT. The 7900GT is the clear performance winner (if you don't believe me, just read any review of the x1900gt), so unless you have a [H]ard|On for IQ or a desire to turn your computer into a space heater, the 7900GT is the card for you.
 
just dont get a 7900gt with the reference cooler. it is horrible. if that fan doesnt bother you are either fucked in the head or partially deaf. msi and evga now have some decent coolers on their 7900gt cards so that is really not an issue anymore. :D
 
fallguy said:
^^ blah blah. Again, good try.



And? The IQ will be the same.



Way to follow the lead, and take only one aspect of the better IQ. As the [H] article shows, ATi clearly has the IQ advantage. HQ AF.. less shimmering.. etc.

And no, the KO cannot match the X1900XT. Especially if ran close to the same quality settings. Much more expensive X1900XT? Um, $30 or $40 is "much more"? Yet you dont mention the KO is "much more" expensive than the X1900GT? Nice.
Click to expand...

7900GT > X1900GT, hate to break it to you.
 
^eMpTy^ said:
Last I checked the X1900GT was selling for the exact same price as the 7900GT. The 7900GT is the clear performance winner (if you don't believe me, just read any review of the x1900gt), so unless you have a [H]ard|On for IQ or a desire to turn your computer into a space heater, the 7900GT is the card for you.
Click to expand...

I like most people buy nice vid cards because I don't care about IQ.
 
gostriker said:
I like most people buy nice vid cards because I don't care about IQ.
Click to expand...

Fact is, most people can't tell the difference. If you can, then you have the option of getting the slower X1900 to get better image quality, but not everyone cares enough to sacrifice performance.
 
I have a 400 watt power supply, could this system (see sig for rest of specs) run either the 1800xt, 1900xt, 1900gt, or 7900gt? Or would it be safer to go with the 7900gt since it consumes less power? What is the power consumption on these cards like in relation to the 6800gt which would be swapped out?

The 1800xt is a better bang for the buck than the 7900gt, unless a new psu would be needed.
 
biggles said:
I have a 400 watt power supply, could this system (see sig for rest of specs) run either the 1800xt, 1900xt, 1900gt, or 7900gt? Or would it be safer to go with the 7900gt since it consumes less power? What is the power consumption on these cards like in relation to the 6800gt which would be swapped out?

The 1800xt is a better bang for the buck than the 7900gt, unless a new psu would be needed.
Click to expand...




1800xt consumes more power.. Still I think you need a minimum of 450watts for this...

As for 7900GT you might be able to pull it off... One way is try it out.. What power supply is it? If it's generic dont bother..
 
^eMpTy^ said:
Fact is, most people can't tell the difference. If you can, then you have the option of getting the slower X1900 to get better image quality, but not everyone cares enough to sacrifice performance.
Click to expand...

Performance differences are generally quite marginal and besides performance is about slightly higher settings or IQ. From anands write up - seems the x1900gt wins in performance. And Hcop gives it the nod in IQ.


Link

Not only is the X1900 GT a better performer in most cases than the stock 7900 GT,
Click to expand...

So anyways not as clear cut as most like to say.
 
Well it depends on which 7900GT you are talking about...all of ATI's cards come at stock speeds but the 7900 series has eleventy million variations on clockspeed/ram size. If we're talking about the lowest price stock speed vanilla 7900GT than the X1900GT would probably be faster but then you can get a superclocked 7900GT which is almost as fast as a GTX and it would steal the X1900GT's lunch money..
 
gostriker said:
Performance differences are generally quite marginal and besides performance is about slightly higher settings or IQ. From anands write up - seems the x1900gt wins in performance. And Hcop gives it the nod in IQ.


Link



So anyways not as clear cut as most like to say.
Click to expand...


That has to be one of the worst Anadtech reviews ever done :eek: Absolutly no aa and af used in any of the benchmarks. And aa and af is where the x1900gt gets hurt greatly.

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/digest3d/index.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top