7900GT or X1900 GT?

[BFG10K]

In the past I recommended a 7900GT but ATi seems to have worked some miracles with their new drivers so it's extremely competitive with the 7900GT. Also the cooler is quieter.

 

[josh6079]

According to newegg, the cheapest 7900GT is $240, the cheapest X1900GT is $206, and the cheapest X1900XT is $241 all after MIR's.

That X1900XT is out of stock, and it is only that price after a $100 MIR. The X1900XT is more expensive but for a very good reason. Not to mention the X1900XT is the better performer with a high level of image quality.

The X1900GT seems to be alright, but if you're thinking about either a 7900GT or it, I'd go with the 7900GT.

An X1800XT is even cheaper than a 7900GT IIRC and performs pretty evenly with it, winning and losing to it in a few titles, but provides better graphics (HDR+AA, angle independent AF, warmer/more vibrant colors).

I'd seriously consider the X1900XT. The price for a card like that for how closely it gets to an X1950XTX is just too great of a deal to pass up if you're in the market for a new card.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Tweaktown's 6.8 analysis

Its another review on the new cat 6.8 drivers.

I would grab the 7900GT in this case. That is because the 7900GT is overall faster. The X1900GT although being cheap and all, is crippled with 12 TMUs compared to the GTs 24 TMUs. Games that rely on lots of TMUs, the X1900GT would literally be out runned by a 7900GT. Pixel shader heavy games would be pretty similiar, with GTs 24 pixel shaders against the X1900GTs 36.

It really depends what game the OP is going to play. If your waiting for like quake wars, i suggest the 7900GT, because NV cards in general perform fast in OpenGL titles, not to mention they provide better IQ (ATi cards cant do SSAA in openGL) and higher minimum fps.

D3d games are a toss up.

What is your budget, and what games are you going to play?

 

[Keysplayr]

It was in fun. No offense to you was intended. It's just that you do very often come off as a salesman type.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: josh6079

According to newegg, the cheapest 7900GT is $240, the cheapest X1900GT is $206, and the cheapest X1900XT is $241 all after MIR's.

That X1900XT is out of stock, and it is only that price after a $100 MIR. The X1900XT is more expensive but for a very good reason. Not to mention the X1900XT is the better performer with a high level of image quality.

The X1900GT seems to be alright, but if you're thinking about either a 7900GT or it, I'd go with the 7900GT.

An X1800XT is even cheaper than a 7900GT IIRC and performs pretty evenly with it, winning and losing to it in a few titles, but provides better graphics (HDR+AA, angle independent AF, warmer/more vibrant colors).

I'd seriously consider the X1900XT. The price for a card like that for how closely it gets to an X1950XTX is just too great of a deal to pass up if you're in the market for a new card.

Well that didnt take long. Its been in stock all day, and was just when I posted it. It was actually $250 after MIR, until today. The did an instant price drop of $15. Seems some people are excited about the price. You can get another for $275, $35 more than the cheapest 7900GT. Also, all the cards I listed where after MIR, not just the XT.

So basically we have a X1900GT thats about $40 cheaper than a 7900GT, and a 7900GT thats about $40 cheaper than a X1900XT.

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Tweaktown's 6.8 analysis

Its another review on the new cat 6.8 drivers.

Useless review for comparing the drivers, for these cards. The 6.8 readme clearly states, that the largest gains come from 256MB version os X1800 and X1900 cards. Which the article has neither of.

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
It was in fun. No offense to you was intended. It's just that you do very often come off as a salesman type.

No offense taken. I find it kinda funny, because on another forum I got called a "salesman", for how I looked. I dont think so? Anyways, I found it humerous.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Well, the OP could consider a X1800XT. But the X1900XT 256mb isnt going to be here til september 14th. (Then you have to consider if its going to be a hard launch or not, not to mention the initial prices).

 

[Ulfhednar]

X1800 XT or X1900 GT easily, don't even consider a 7900 GT with the insanely low reliability of those pieces of junk.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar
X1800 XT or X1900 GT easily, don't even consider a 7900 GT with the insanely low reliability of those pieces of junk.

 

[josh6079]

Well that didnt take long. Its been in stock all day, and was just when I posted it. It was actually $250 after MIR, until today. The did an instant price drop of $15. Seems some people are excited about the price. You can get another for $275, $35 more than the cheapest 7900GT. Also, all the cards I listed where after MIR, not just the XT.

No, I know you listed all after MIR's. I just wanted to point out that that card was already gone. The MIR of $100 dollars is almost too high though. MIR's could have a lot of things go wrong with them and the companies are pretty picky sometimes with what is considered valid for a MIR. If anything goes wrong with the MIR, you'd be $100 off of where you'd thought you'd be. It would be safer to spend closer to $280~$300 for this card since that is about the price of an X1900XT without any possible MIR gimmicks.

 

[Ulfhednar]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar
X1800 XT or X1900 GT easily, don't even consider a 7900 GT with the insanely low reliability of those pieces of junk.

Been under a rock all year or did you just feel like pulling a face?

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar
X1800 XT or X1900 GT easily, don't even consider a 7900 GT with the insanely low reliability of those pieces of junk.

What's your ATI badge number?

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Well that didnt take long. Its been in stock all day, and was just when I posted it. It was actually $250 after MIR, until today. The did an instant price drop of $15. Seems some people are excited about the price. You can get another for $275, $35 more than the cheapest 7900GT. Also, all the cards I listed where after MIR, not just the XT.

So basically we have a X1900GT thats about $40 cheaper than a 7900GT, and a 7900GT thats about $40 cheaper than a X1900XT.

Well if you are going to recommend out of stock cards, you can tell him to buy a X1950XTX

Useless review for comparing the drivers, for these cards. The 6.8 readme clearly states, that the largest gains come from 256MB version os X1800 and X1900 cards. Which the article has neither of.

Useless because it does not support your cause? Typical.

Just like the FiringSquad review that showed NVIDIA cards with equal or better image quality. But that can't be in your world..... so once again it must be space aliens or something.

 

[Ulfhednar]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar
X1800 XT or X1900 GT easily, don't even consider a 7900 GT with the insanely low reliability of those pieces of junk.

What's your ATI badge number?

I have more Nvidia graphics cards in this house than ATI ones, so ATI won't let me have a badge. Sorry.

 

[RussianSensation]

For the most part after 9700pro vs. Geforce 4/5800 series, neither side produced "bad" cards. 6800GT/Ultra = X800/850xt, 7900GT = X1800xt.

For the most part you cannot make a mistake with buying mid-high end cards. Although there are still ppl with A64 3500+ and 6600gt rigs or how about 6600 conroes and pairing them with 7600GTs. I think that's where ppl make most crucial mistakes of not knowing how to balance cpu and gpu power.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar
X1800 XT or X1900 GT easily, don't even consider a 7900 GT with the insanely low reliability of those pieces of junk.

Been under a rock all year or did you just feel like pulling a face?

No need for petty personal insults there bud. You shouldnt have exaggerated the 7900GTs problem. This has already been addressed and by now, its been fixed.

How can you call a 7900GT junk? i like to see you try make a GPU

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Ulfhednar
X1800 XT or X1900 GT easily, don't even consider a 7900 GT with the insanely low reliability of those pieces of junk.

What's your ATI badge number?

I have more Nvidia graphics cards in this house than ATI ones, so ATI won't let me have a badge. Sorry.

LOL, highly doubt it. How is that GX2 working out for....... Oh wait.. You never intended to get one. I almost forgot. Almost. I'm gonna join Pabster and CookieMonster here ---> :Q

Don't know where your "hate" is coming from, but I would advise that you try to get a handle on it. :thumbsdown:

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Well that didnt take long. Its been in stock all day, and was just when I posted it. It was actually $250 after MIR, until today. The did an instant price drop of $15. Seems some people are excited about the price. You can get another for $275, $35 more than the cheapest 7900GT. Also, all the cards I listed where after MIR, not just the XT.

So basically we have a X1900GT thats about $40 cheaper than a 7900GT, and a 7900GT thats about $40 cheaper than a X1900XT.

Well if you are going to recommend out of stock cards, you can tell him to buy a X1950XTX

Useless review for comparing the drivers, for these cards. The 6.8 readme clearly states, that the largest gains come from 256MB version os X1800 and X1900 cards. Which the article has neither of.

Useless because it does not support your cause? Typical.

Just like the FiringSquad review that showed NVIDIA cards with equal or better image quality. But that can't be in your world..... so once again it must be space aliens or something.

Please read the whole thread, before replying. The card was in stock, when I listed it. Funny, I recall you suggesting a 7800GTX 512MB all the time. Which was next to impossible to find in stock, and $650+.

FS doesnt say that NV has better IQ. Keep in mind, their tests were done with default settings. No HQ AF, no HDR+AA, etc. They also show NV has much worse shimmering.

You're trying way too hard.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Well that didnt take long. Its been in stock all day, and was just when I posted it. It was actually $250 after MIR, until today. The did an instant price drop of $15. Seems some people are excited about the price. You can get another for $275, $35 more than the cheapest 7900GT. Also, all the cards I listed where after MIR, not just the XT.

So basically we have a X1900GT thats about $40 cheaper than a 7900GT, and a 7900GT thats about $40 cheaper than a X1900XT.

Well if you are going to recommend out of stock cards, you can tell him to buy a X1950XTX

Useless review for comparing the drivers, for these cards. The 6.8 readme clearly states, that the largest gains come from 256MB version os X1800 and X1900 cards. Which the article has neither of.

Useless because it does not support your cause? Typical.

Just like the FiringSquad review that showed NVIDIA cards with equal or better image quality. But that can't be in your world..... so once again it must be space aliens or something.

Please read the whole thread, before replying. The card was in stock, when I listed it. Funny, I recall you suggesting a 7800GTX 512MB all the time. Which was next to impossible to find in stock, and $650+.

FS doesnt say that NV has better IQ. Keep in mind, their tests were done with default settings. No HQ AF, no HDR+AA, etc. They also show NV has much worse shimmering.

You're trying way too hard.

Not for anything, but if one card renders all detail, and the other does not, how are we defining quality again? FPS with high quality settings is the order of the day? Or something else. FS does not have to say that NV has better quality no do they. They show it in the details. Please do not overlook this VERY important and pivotal information. (In the graphics card world anyway). Do you want a graphics card that leaves out thousands and thousands of details that would go unnoticed unless magnified for higher FPS when IQ settings go up? No. I think you are a person who would want a card that renders what it is supposed to render. The only thing NV has to work on is AF implementation. Other than that, their Image Quality is quite good. HDR + AA is nice and everything, but what's the point if your paying for a card that does not render everything the way it should.??

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Not for anything, but if one card renders all detail, and the other does not, how are we defining quality again? FPS with high quality settings is the order of the day? Or something else. FS does not have to say that NV has better quality no do they. They show it in the details. Please do not overlook this VERY important and pivotal information. (In the graphics card world anyway). Do you want a graphics card that leaves out thousands and thousands of details that would go unnoticed unless magnified for higher FPS when IQ settings go up? No. I think you are a person who would want a card that renders what it is supposed to render. The only thing NV has to work on is AF implementation. Other than that, their Image Quality is quite good. HDR + AA is nice and everything, but what's the point if your paying for a card that does not render everything the way it should.??

All detail? What are you talking about, HL2? If so, its rendering as it "should". You're assuming NV renders everything that ATi does, in every game out there? You're reaching pretty far too. How many sites need to say, and how many polls need to show that ATi has better IQ, before some people will accept it? To some it doesnt matter, to others it does. Some cant tell the difference, others can. Its something that is subjective, a huge issue for some, a non-issue for others. But lets not pretend that NV has the same level of IQ that ATi has.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Not for anything, but if one card renders all detail, and the other does not, how are we defining quality again? FPS with high quality settings is the order of the day? Or something else. FS does not have to say that NV has better quality no do they. They show it in the details. Please do not overlook this VERY important and pivotal information. (In the graphics card world anyway). Do you want a graphics card that leaves out thousands and thousands of details that would go unnoticed unless magnified for higher FPS when IQ settings go up? No. I think you are a person who would want a card that renders what it is supposed to render. The only thing NV has to work on is AF implementation. Other than that, their Image Quality is quite good. HDR + AA is nice and everything, but what's the point if your paying for a card that does not render everything the way it should.??

All detail? What are you talking about, HL2? If so, its rendering as it "should". You're assuming NV renders everything that ATi does, in every game out there? You're reaching pretty far too. How many sites need to say, and how many polls need to show that ATi has better IQ, before some people will accept it? To some it doesnt matter, to others it does. Some cant tell the difference, others can. Its something that is subjective, a huge issue for some, a non-issue for others. But lets not pretend that NV has the same level of IQ that ATi has.

It's pretty simple, and actually makes sense.
HL2, CoD2 and others. I'm not pretending that NV has better IQ than ATI. I can see it in that article even if you won't.

NV renders more detail than ATI does. This is why there is a larger performance hit when Image Quality settings are cranked up. By far NV cards are doing more work than ATI cards. Like I said many times before this FS article, I suspected this was the case. The FS article just reinforces it. I'm not reaching here at all Ackmed and it's silly of you to say so when I am merely directing your attention to something you will not acknowledge. I was actually very pleased to see that my suspicions weren't without merit, if only for the fact that I wasn't completely incorrect.

It just makes sense. No reaching. No reason to. It's staring you and I and everyone here in the face. ATI superior image quality is a lie. May even go as far to say driver cheats, (but you didn't hear that from me).

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
All detail? What are you talking about, HL2? If so, its rendering as it "should". You're assuming NV renders everything that ATi does, in every game out there? You're reaching pretty far too. How many sites need to say, and how many polls need to show that ATi has better IQ, before some people will accept it? To some it doesnt matter, to others it does. Some cant tell the difference, others can. Its something that is subjective, a huge issue for some, a non-issue for others. But lets not pretend that NV has the same level of IQ that ATi has.

Ackmed, it's about time you give it up. And post your ATI badge number while you're at it.

First you say IQ is subjective (which it is) then you say "lets not pretend that the IQ is the same..."

I've owned literally tens of both nVidia and ATi over the years. I've owned recently 7800GT, 7800GTX, 7900GTX, and X1900XTX. There is very little IQ difference. I could point out (subjectively) an area where either card disappoints me.

PS I see you are selling your X1900XTX. Planning an nVidia upgrade?

 

[hmorphone]

keysplayr2003 - you've caught me by surprise with this whole ATI is using a shorter draw distance (and leaving out some details) thing. Where can I go to look at the data on this? And, while we're at it, are you really running a GF 5900nu?

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: hmorphone
keysplayr2003 - you've caught me by surprise with this whole ATI is using a shorter draw distance (and leaving out some details) thing. Where can I go to look at the data on this? And, while we're at it, are you really running a GF 5900nu?

You can check out the article from firing squad. HERE .And yes, I am currently using a GeForce 5900nu. About 3 months ago, I sold off my entire gaming rig. P43.0E 2GB DDR 7800GTX Albatron skt 478/PCI-e mobo, anticipating the Conroe launch. I have my new platform now, but just need the vid card. Waiting on the 7900GS. Seems like it will be a killer card for a very cheap price.

I have actually just traded away the entire rig in my sig. It's getting shipped out either today or tomorrow. Using my trusty lappy until my new rig is built.

 

[MegaWorks]

Try to find a X1800XT, it's better than both GTs.

 

[hmorphone]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

You can check out the article from firing squad. HERE .And yes, I am currently using a GeForce 5900nu. About 3 months ago, I sold off my entire gaming rig. P43.0E 2GB DDR 7800GTX Albatron skt 478/PCI-e mobo, anticipating the Conroe launch. I have my new platform now, but just need the vid card. Waiting on the 7900GS. Seems like it will be a killer card for a very cheap price.

I have actually just traded away the entire rig in my sig. It's getting shipped out either today or tomorrow. Using my trusty lappy until my new rig is built.

I'll go take a look at that article you linked.
Good luck on the new build:beer:
Are you sure I can't talk you into a X1900GT instead of that GS? I got mine for $168