7900GTX vs. X1900XTX - Consolidated Results

[DeathReborn]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
CaiNaM I understand where you are coming from. I suppose we would have to segregate gamers into those who use high resolutions (beyond 1600x1200) and are content with 4AA/16AF and those who prefer to stay at 1600x1200 and instead increase AA quality. In the former, I would give NV the edge. In the latter I would give ATI the edge. So I should have been more clear about this. In my eyes I only have a monitor that can do 75hz at 1600x1200 and thus I quickly thought of cranking AA if I had those cards. So my bad for being sidetracked by not recognizing others would prefer 1920x1200 4AA over 1600x1200 14AA since for their LCD 1600x1200 is not native.

I'm in the former camp, I enjoy my games in 2048x1536 or 1920x1440 now (not FEAR, COD2 or BF2 tho) and even at 20x15 I don't see much need for more than 2xAA anyway. That is why in my view nVidia has the best cards for my needs but it won't stop me from advising people to ge tthe best card for their needs (be it Red or Green or Blue).

@ teteja, thanks Mr ATI Fanboy, with this is in your sig we know which way you lean "I hate Nvidia with Hate :!".

 

[yacoub]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
I'd give the nod to the 7900GTX this round. Its thermal characateristics are just excellent and that cooling solution is great. :thumbsup:

I think you're right, for the buyer like me who cares about noise levels yet still getting similar performance to the X1900XTX in most games (not to mention spending almost $100 less).

The only thing I still would prefer ATI for is image quality. There's just undeniably something about their color reproduction (probably the wrong term) that is nicer than NVidia's. I really want to see an X1900XT with a different cooling solution from someone like Sapphire before I just give in and get a 7900GTX (or GT if I want to keep the budget tighter and recognize that I don't game much anymore and could wait to spend more later for a DX10 card next spring).