• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

6800 vrs x800

SirPappy

Golden Member
Im looking to get an upgrade and still debating as to which card I want.

6800? or x800? and what series of each card?

Im thinking about $300 to $400

its a AGP slot
running P4 2.8
1 gb Dual DDR
450 PSU
WinXP
current card=ATi 9600XT 128mb

Games I'll be playing
Doom3
CoD
FarCry
HL2


what do you think?


or should i just wait till the 6800GTs and X800XTs are about $300?
(but still, which one?) 🙂
 
I doubt the 6800GT and X800XT will get down to $300. The 9800XT still sell for $300+!!! Scrape up and extra $70 and get the sapphire X800XT from zipzoomfly or any other place where you can get it priced lower. Trust me, you wont regret it. You could as get yourself an X800 Pro or 6800 non-ultra and mod it to XT or GT status respectively, if you've got the heart.
 
Originally posted by: ironique
I doubt the 6800GT and X800XT will get down to $300. The 9800XT still sell for $300+!!! Scrape up and extra $70 and get the sapphire X800XT from zipzoomfly or any other place where you can get it priced lower. Trust me, you wont regret it. You could as get yourself an X800 Pro or 6800 non-ultra and mod it to XT or GT status respectively, if you've got the heart.

I agree, the 6800gt and x800pro wil never be $300. +1 for 6800

 
Originally posted by: ironique
... You could as get yourself a 6800 non-ultra and mod it to GT status respectively, if you've got the heart.

Nope..Thats not gonna happen

😀
 
Wait for another year and the GT/ULTRA will be yours for 300 or more bucks. Just have to wait until the UDG cards come out. 🙂
 
I prefer nVIDIA. Although, I would buy an ATI card if money were my concern and it were cheaper and performed as well.
Just a side thought that struck me: Anyone heard about plans for a 6600 Ultra?
Edit: A quick Google search took me to sites about a GF6600U
 
What is all this about 6800 performing better than X800? I though I had made up my mind about buying a Sapphire X800 XT and clocking it to PE... But all this back-and-forth makes my mind go loopy. The 6800GT has way lower frequencies and on the huge xbitlabs-review (the one with 27 VGA-cards) the X800 XT PE pretty much makes way through the others (AGP, not PCIe, that is).. only times 6800 (Ultra) performs better is in CoD, D3 and benchmarks. Could I get a really good argument to why I should buy a 6800GT (Forget about Ultra.. costs much more than X800XT). I am confused. I know 6800 has more features, but X800 still is the fastest.. and it also has 3Dc, which should become more used in the future, right?


edit: Adding a quote from another thread I found by searching "6800gt vs x800".

<<<<<<QUOTE>>>>>>>
X800XT comes stock at 500mhz. 6800GT will never reach 500mhz on aircooling or even watercooling I bet.

% wise overclocks....6800GT starts at 350mhz and gets to about 430 on average I'd say. That is roughly a 22% overclock. X800XTs tend to reach 575 maybe..So 15-16% overclock. To match 6800GTs 22% overclock, X800XT would have to be near 610mhz and that's not happening on air cooling.

Now lets look at the real picture:

X800XT 16 pipelines x 500mhz = 8000 fill-rate
6800GT 16 pipelines x 430mhz = 6880 fill-rate

So pure speed wise, X800XT will almost always be faster than 6800GT overclocked. Since Nvidia is able to work more efficiently per clock cycle, that is what keeps them in the game right now.

Basically if you play a lot of OpenGL games and Doom3, go with Nvidia for best performance. For everything else, the 2 cards will run fairly equal as it'll be hard to notice minor frame differences. In intense games like Far Cry, HL2 and Perimeter, ATI X800XT is faster than Nvidia 6800 series.

Finally 6800GT comes with 2.0ns ram and x800XT comes with 1.6ns ram I believe.

ASUS AX800 XT/TVD Graphics Card Review

If you can afford to buy an X800xt and don't mind spending $450 on a videocard, don't care for PCIe or SLI, then X800xt is a better card than 6800GT. ON the upside, X800xt is quieter, has better DVI quality connectors (DAC converters), HDTV support and *usability* of 3Dc (maybe in latter games or patches)?
<<<END QUOTE>>>

More opinions?
 
6800 Gt's should be 1,6ns ram same as Ultra and u can see nvidia has more bandwidth, ok we talk non o/c for now.#

http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.cfm?page=2&articleid=568&cid=2

If u want then in chart to count the xt u can count the extreme ultra and thats at lower mhz that ATI at 450/1200, i can easily run unmodded 460/1220 stable no artifacts in 3dmark 2005 or bit more with artifacts but ok in games, bios mod would sort.

End of day the nvidia is the only card out them with dx9c / p.s 3.0 and hardware HDR no matter if you think thats meaningless its still truth.

U need compair a ultra to the x800 pro and XT not the GT or non ultra to be fair.

Just like amd and intel with amd getting more out of lower mhz as of cpc. 😉
 
Speed isn't everything. Does it matter that one runs at 145 when one runs at 135. Not really except bragging rights. Ill buy who ever has the best bang for your buck when i buy Video Cards.

This round i think Nvidia has much more to offer than ATI. They have a new architecture and a whole mess of features. ATI still wins, for the most part, on pure brute force/speed. However, cannot.

Last gen i would have gotten a 9800Pro but when i bought there was no VIVO capable card, and they were a bit more expensive than i wanted to pay.

I agree with Humey, there is no sense in comparing the XT to a GT. The GT should be compared to XL and Pro, the Ultra should be compared to the X800XT, XT PE, the X850XT, XT PE. Its going to be a bit slower for Nvidia until they release a refresh.

We will see what next gen brings, but i would put Nvidia a bit over ATI this round,SLI is a big plus also.

-Kevin
 
Given the games you're playing, I'd suggest getting a 6800GT. In Far Cry you get HDR and PS 3.0, in Doom 3 you get substantially better performance than a comparably priced X800. You should have no trouble finding an AGP 6800GT for around $360. If you're lucky, you may even be able to snag an Ultra at the price. Check the for sale forums.
 
I'd get an Asus or Sapphire Radeon X800 Pro VIVO with 1.6ns GDDR3 and unlock the extra 4 pipes and overclock it past X800XT PE speeds. This is what I did and it smacks around the GeFarce 6800 Ultra.🙂
 
I understand that 6800GT should be compared to X800Pro or XL rather than X800XT, but in my case it would be wrong, since 6800GT and X800XT has minimal price differences. Wouldn't that give me more "bang for bucks"?

and Humey: I see your eVGA 6800 test, and the chart on the first page only shows that the 6800 Ultra Extreme has more mem. bandwith than the X800 XT. The normal Ultra doesn't. And the X800XT still has 8.32G/S Pixel/Texel fillrate, which none of the others come close to. I would say that the X800XT then would give me more "bang for bucks", since both 6800 Ultra and 6800 Ultra Extreme costs like $100 more than the X800XT. This is what makes me unsure. Should I pay for speed/smoothness(ATI's clocks) in games, or beauty? (SM 3.0, PS 3.0, HDR etc..)

Gamingphreek: When the performance difference is 145 to 135, it doesn't matter, just like you say. But after reading the 50p long GPU test, I saw that on max resolution and detail, the X800XT always was on like 40-60fps while the 6800GT/Ultra was on like 20-40.. that is a really noticable difference in e.g. a heavy shootout.

And btw: Isn't the Ultra Extreme card just like a "Golden Sample"? A pre-clocked version? I'm sorry to keep nagging about this, but $650 is a lot of money to waste.
 
Correct, but ultra is far lower clocks than the ATI and extreme is simply a o/c ultra same as ATI's top model is simply a o/c version, so its fair to compair, and no matter what clock you o/c to, that ATI to it not gonna have DX9C / P.S 3.0 or real hardware HDR, i know some you say well who cares, but again is still truth, you get newer tech on the N40 and will see things on screen with new games you wont on older cards. most new games i got ask you to install DX9C from their cds if you not got anyhow.

Fact of it is the N40 is prob the best agp card in world and only one to have DX9c / P.S 3.0 / hardware HDR as ATI's new cards will prob only be pci e not agp.

I will never ever own a ATI just to let you know or a Intel. 🙂

If a gpu or a cpu can = or better another at far lower mhz i think i know whick id class as the better chip.😉
 
oh christ lets play the clockspeed card again, this has descended to a noob argument.

Im sure my 3.9ghz P4 dominates an FX-55 :roll:
 
Acanthus: Don't start offending me 😉 I know very well that clockspeed isn't everything. I was mainly referring to the benchmarks where it seems obvious that the X800XT gets higher fps than most other card in most games. I run a AMD 64 S754 with 2.2GHz (3000+) and know very well that is performs way better than a P3.2GHz. AMD gives more bang for bucks. I will probably never buy a Pentium... And I have never bought an ATI card. But all this back-and-forth makes me confused. The X800-series has gotten a good reputation, but surfing on these forums gives me the impression that HDR/Shaders are more worth. I'm in such a difficult situation. Help needed! Someone take over my brain and do the right decision, please!

Conclusion could be like: "ATI = Intel. nVidia = AMD"? Ergo; running more efficiently per clock cycle? Don't worry about going complicated on me... I know digital electronics.
 
Making your move based on shaders is extremely FOOLISH. Potential technology, that might be used to an advantage on games in the future? Or performance now? I have yet to see benchmarks where the X800 XT/PE isn't higher than the Ultra. If this is different, please point me in the right direction.
 
Back
Top