6600GT vs a X800 Vanilla Any reivews?

[bradyapba]

I have a 6800 Vanilla... My friend wants a 6600GT...

He needs PCi express, and has a P4 3.0, 1 gig of ram, and is currently running an x300.


Hes been eyeing the 6600GT.

I have been trying to steer him towards the x800... more pipes, 256 bit, etc, etc... I know all the stats...

What i am looking for is a concrete reviews comparing the 6600GT vs and X800 vanilla.

I have been searching the web, but cant find anything...

Any one know of any?

thanks,

Chris

 

[Tab]

6600GT

There is a difference between playing next generation games and not playing them at all.

 

[bradyapba]

andy why would you pick the 6600 gt?

 

[blckgrffn]

What are you talking about?

The X800 will likely be noticeably faster in everything but doom3, where it will probably come up the same or just a shade slower. HL2 on the X800 is bound to be much smoother, and that includes CS. I have looked for these benches myself but have been unable to find them. The x800 has a higher fill rate and a definite memory bandwidth advantage as well, and you can get a 256 meg version which should help out in games like Doom3, HL2, and BF2. Find one for a good price and it is a no brainer. You can get a 6600GT for like $170 though, and I have yet to find a price like that on the X800.

By the way, ps3.0 will kill your 6600GT anyway, so I have a hard time buying your argument, Tab.

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: Tab
6600GT

There is a difference between playing next generation games and not playing them at all.

Just because the 6600GT has SM3 doesn't mean it'll play next generation games, or play them well. It only has 128MB of RAM, and it only has 8 pipelines. IIRC the memory controller is only 128bit, too. Those specs are kind of anemic when you think about what next generation games may require for playable framerates.

 

[bradyapba]

Ok,

Let me clear up some other thing.

He has very limited funds. Even the $170 for the 6600GT is a stretch. I have seen some X800's for $196.

He is just not going to be able ot afford a 256 meg version, those are out of his price range.

I know the x800 is going to be faster 12 pipes vs 8, 256 bit bus vs 128....

i just want some hard # proof i can show him, i was hoping there was some reviews out there....... but maybe there just isn't any.

 

[blckgrffn]

The X800 just didn't get any attention, kind of like the 6800... Those upper level midrange cards seem to get ingnored by review sites, who seem to like to review the lower middle range, high range, and upper lower range of video cards.

 

[bradyapba]

i love my 6800 vanilla. Got it for $199... geez, seven months ago....it screams, and has the best bang for the buck VC still to this day i think.....

But i agree with you, the 6800 and x800 seemed to be ignored.

 

[LTC8K6]

Well, the 9800pro compares pretty well with a 6600GT, so the X800 should be better than the 6600GT, since it's a lot faster than a 9800pro.

Since new cards are about to be released, it might be good to hold off for a bit and see what develops. You should at least get a better price on those cards when the new ones come out.

 

[Lonyo]

Go to Anandtech.
There are numbers comparing the X800 and 6600GT.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Lonyo
Go to Anandtech.
There are numbers comparing the X800 and 6600GT.

i'm sure they will both be in one of THG's big roundups too

they are usually pretty comprehensive

 

[hans030390]

I've seen some comparisons...I think the 6600gt comes close most of the time (sometimes beating it)

But basically, if he wants to play next gen games, he'll need SM3.0 which the x800 series DOESN'T have. the 6xxx cards do. I would actually recommend that he saves up for a 6800 vanilla, as they are under 200$ now. That would be as good as an x800 PLUS have shader model 3.0

and yes, you will need sm3.0 for next gen games unless you want them to look like crap.

edit: i haven't found a PCI-e 6800 for less than $220...sorry. Too bad he doesnt have agp...those are cheaper.

But still, the 6600gt will be a better buy (especially if he's stretched with money)

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: hans030390
I've seen some comparisons...I think the 6600gt comes close most of the time (sometimes beating it)

But basically, if he wants to play next gen games, he'll need SM3.0 which the x800 series DOESN'T have. the 6xxx cards do. I would actually recommend that he saves up for a 6800 vanilla, as they are under 200$ now. That would be as good as an x800 PLUS have shader model 3.0

and yes, you will need sm3.0 for next gen games unless you want them to look like crap.

i really hope you start promoting ati cards when they have sm3.0 too :|



But really if he wants that, he can wait a little bit and get a low/mid g70 or r520 that will do the job far better for a similar amount of money eh?

 

[hans030390]

If i had money, I would be picking up an R520 card instead of a 7800

That is a good idea for him to wait though. This is a good article http://www.boxgods.com/dept/hardware/in...ion=Article&ID=108&Page=1#Introduction

SM3 will be used very heavily in next gen games, and it gives a nice performance boost IF the image quality isn't improved that much over any earlier shader model.

Um...i dunno what else to say. but once again, yes, i will support ati cards when they support sm3

 

[Nil Einne]

Search harder coz there are def some reviews comparing the 6600GT and X800 vanilla. I've looked at at least 3. I think xbitlabs or one of those other Russian sites had one and there was another new site which had one although they reached a rather stupid conclusion IMHO. Sorry I don't have any of the links at hand.

I will summarise what the conclusions I reached are tho. The X800 is a very bad idea. Yes it is better then the 6600GT but performance, except in extreme cases (4xAA and 8xAnsio at 1600 or whatever) is only about 20% better at most and is easily less then that (especially with Doom3 and stuff of course). The price difference as of 2 weeks ago was about 50%. Tell him to save up for the next gen card.

 

[fstime]

x800

 

[gac009]

http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q1/sapphire-x800/index.x?pg=10

 

[filterxg]

X800 will give you better results. The exception to the recommendation is if you (like me) play around with linux, then stick with NVidia products.

Oh and don't worry about Shader 3.0, I don't see it as a requirement for awhile. At some point in the near future it will be an advantage, but by then either card will be struggling to play the games.

 

[LTC8K6]

I still say hold on for a bit and see what develops in the next month or so.
Don't worry about SM3 for these cards. It's like buying an FX5200 to get DX9.

 

[mwmorph]

im so confused. why do you need SM3? Sm2 does exactly what SM3 does, except it's slightly harder to program for. SM1.1 and No SM is till supported by god! why do you people say SM3 will be necessary for next gen when almost all games will still support SM2(vast majority of DX9 parts are sm2 including the FX,9xxx and Xxxx lines) and those that dont will at least support SM1.1 or 1.4! seriously, no NEXT GEN game will run acceptably under a 6800gt with SM3 turned on except for AOEIII(since stratgey game, 30fps is all that isn eeded) which will barely run 30fps average at 10x7. For midrange, forget about any sort of SM3 argument and buy whichever is faster considering FPS need to run 60fps average at least to have smooth gameplay.

 

[Blastman]

Originally posted by: hans030390

But basically, if he wants to play next gen games, he'll need SM3.0 which the x800 series DOESN'T have.

Ya, it should be great playing the next Unreal on a 6600GT at 640x480 with no AA/AF. That?s ridiculous BTW -- you won?t need SM3.0 to play next the generation games. There will be no ?SM3.0? games probably for 10 years or more -- a 6600 will be a museum piece by then. SM3.0 features will be added slowly over time. Maybe we?ll see couple of more NV sponsored water shaders in the next year.

There is really no point in making all the shaders floating point (SM2.0) when an integer shader (SM1.x) will do. The SM1.x shaders run much faster. SM1.x looks very good in HL2 (except for the water) so one can do a lot with SM1.x shaders. We?ll see a mix of integer and FP shaders for a long time.

3Dmark2005 was a SM2.0 only benchmark in that all the shaders were floating point SM2.0 spec shaders. A 16 pipe card like the 6800GT can barely hit 20fps on the game tests at 10x7 with no AA/AF. You would be in single digits at 10x7 with 4AA/8AF.

There are a few benches with a X800 over at TR ?

http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q1/sapphire-x800/index.x?pg=6

 

[frank84]

if he wants to play "next generation games",
he needs MONEY first..

spending $160 on upgrade isn't going to help.

 

[xtknight]

Originally posted by: mwmorph
im so confused. why do you need SM3? Sm2 does exactly what SM3 does, except it's slightly harder to program for. SM1.1 and No SM is till supported by god! why do you people say SM3 will be necessary for next gen when almost all games will still support SM2(vast majority of DX9 parts are sm2 including the FX,9xxx and Xxxx lines) and those that dont will at least support SM1.1 or 1.4! seriously, no NEXT GEN game will run acceptably under a 6800gt with SM3 turned on except for AOEIII(since stratgey game, 30fps is all that isn eeded) which will barely run 30fps average at 10x7. For midrange, forget about any sort of SM3 argument and buy whichever is faster considering FPS need to run 60fps average at least to have smooth gameplay.

SM3.0 does offer more features over SM2.0 (in vertex shaders). but why are you comparing apples to oranges? SM3.0 will not be slower than SM2.0 providing the shaders produce the same effects. It will only be faster than SM2.0, especially with larger shaders on new games. There are ways to turn off SM3.0-only features to get the performance benefit over SM2.0. Like in splinter cell chaos theory, you can turn off displacement mapping, etc. and then yield a performance boost over SM2.0. nothing's necessary but it is nice to have, especially on the cheaper card. it really depends on how long he's planning on keeping that card. Note I was mainly quoting your facts. I'm not saying SM3.0 on the 6600GT is going to bring out miracles. Regardless I recommend he gets neither of those cards if he wants to play next-gen.

OP I think you should wait for the G70 to be released then get a 6800 vanilla, GT, or X800 XT for cheap(er?). Actually the X800 XL would probably be your best bet when the prices come down. The problem is there's so many factors involved. Do you mind sacrificing quality for price? Setting graphics to low in a next-next-generation game? If you want a card for $170 I think you'll want to wait.

If you need something now the X800 isn't a bad choice because it beats an OC'd 6600GT at a lot, especially at high resolutions.

Benchmarks: BFG 6600 GT OC vs Gigabyte X800

edit: less inflammatory