6800GT or X800 XL?

[heyjeff]

I was always an Nvidia fan, but once I got an LCD running at it's native resolution 1024x1280 I notice the text on websites was a bit blurry. No amount of adjustment would help. I was researching to find a replacement card for my FX5900 and saw in severaly reviews that Nvidia was known for it's problems with 2D at higher resolutions. Most of them said that ATI did have better 2D image quality. I had been leaning towards a 6800GT, but decided to give ATI a try with an x800 xl. The 2D quality was much better than with my FX5900! I was blaming my Samsung LCD when I first got it, but it wasn't it's fault at all! I spend about half my time playing WoW and the other half surfing the net, so it's important that the video card does well in both 3D and 2D. The x800 xl fits the bill perfectly!

 

[Maluno]

Why'd you ressurect this thread? Just curious.

 

[imported_Noob]

Originally posted by: Digikid2
ATI will always be better than Nvidia. Go for the X800XL.

Who knows. ATI finally had some competition with the release of the 6800's. This is good, both companies are gonna strive to make the best card so you pobably won't be disappointed with either card.

 

[Dukemaster]

Between these two the x800xl is the faster one. Here's a review that shows that: http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/x800xl/index.htm

 

[ddogg]

well....driverheaven must be the only site showing the x800xl faster than the GT. the GT is generally shown to be faster. i remember driverheaven even showing the x800pro faster than the 6800ultra sometime back so i dont rely on their benchmarks.
u can get the 6800GT for $270 on rebate at newegg which basically would seal the deal against the XL...plus it has the SM3.0 future-proof option.
another thing is that the XL doesnt seem to be a good overclocker...while the GT can easily reach ultra speeds and beyond!!