9800Pro $199 or 6800NP for $290

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Actuall 6800NU price: $290-300. If you buy one right now, you're paying a $50 premium -- about 20% more than it "should" be worth based on the other available hardware.

Good lord, it never ends. Matthias, I'm about at the point I'd send you $50 not to have to talk about the horrors of not getting the absolute best deal.

Just because you don't care doesn't mean nobody else does.

Talk about "diminishing returns"- you could have earned the $50 in the time it took you to concoct that manifesto.

Well, maybe YOU make $50 in five minutes; it takes me a little longer. Of course, this is coming from someone who acquired several 5800Us (and traded down from a 9800Pro for one) and then ran one over with his car, and who gets "bored" with computer hardware, so perhaps your idea of "value" is a little different than mine.

I don't "need more econ classes", unless I want to be an economist. I have a BS-Business and took plenty of econ on the way to it.

I also understand something about "talking to a brick wall", my other degree is a BA-Psych.

Tell me about it. :disgust:

Look, if you don't like my opinion, show some sort of evidence or counter-argument instead of just bashing me. Clearly, either a) you don't care about price/performance when you buy hardware, or b) the 6800NU is still 'worth it' for you at $300. There's nothing wrong with either of these positions (being that they are opinions) -- but I do care, and I don't think it's a good value at its current price. And that's all I have left to say on this.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Rollo
You're a lost cause Apoppin.

You can't understand a simple phrase like "at least 12% faster", and you ignore the benchmarks on the site whose bandwidth you waste by parroting your misconception of a marketing phrase that from the looks of the context, may only refer to 3dmark.

I truly doubt you're as ignorant as you pretend to be, so I'm not going to argue this point or any other with you.

What satisfaction you could derive from your obtuse "I know you are, but what am I-esque" dawdling is beyond me.

You are WAY beyond lost. You have ZERO argument and twisted logic and AVOID answering ANY of my questions. 😛

The sad part is that some people actually believe your ignorant BS. :roll:

You CANNOT answer WHY your OWN video card manufacturer can NOT say the 6800 runs at least a full 13% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5950 Ultra or the ATI 9800XT . . .

Again - ANSWER please, windbag - HOW much faster do you think the 6800 is over the 9800xt - overall?

 

[rbV5]

I haven't seen mentioned that EVGA has kind of a decent trade-up program that allows you to trade up your card within 90 days. They reduce the current price of the new card by the original purchase price of the trade in. In essence, within 90 days, if I want an 6800u, I ship them my 6800 and give them the difference (currently $210 for me). I would presume the 6800u will be "could" be cheaper and more available by then...perhaps even a PCIe version will be available.

Link

Could make this very good deal on the 6800, pretty hot down the road IMHO😉.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: rbV5
I haven't seen mentioned that EVGA has kind of a decent trade-up program that allows you to trade up your card within 90 days. They reduce the current price of the new card by the original purchase price of the trade in. In essence, within 90 days, if I want an 6800u, I ship them my 6800 and give them the difference (currently $210 for me). I would presume the 6800u will be "could" be cheaper and more available by then...perhaps even a PCIe version will be available.

Link

Could make this very good deal on the 6800, pretty hot down the road IMHO😉.

That would be a good idea rbV5, but that was meant to get people to buy 5900s in the months prior to the 6800s release.

The eVGA.com Step-up? Program is available to all eVGA.com graphics card customers who purchased their graphics cards on or after 1 FEB 2004, and are within 90 days of their purchase date (based on their invoice).

Ooops, my bad, I didn't notice the "or after" 1 Feb 2004, you are right, it is a good idea.

 

[nRollo]

Matthias:

Look, if you don't like my opinion, show some sort of evidence or counter-argument instead of just bashing me. Clearly, either a) you don't care about price/performance when you buy hardware, or b) the 6800NU is still 'worth it' for you at $300.

A. Obviously I care about price/performance when I buy hardware, at least most of the time. I just have different definitions of what acceptable price performance than you most likely
B. Yes, to me (and apparently the reviewers) the 6800 is a good value. Here's why:
Although it may not have the absolute "best" price/performance ratio, the 6800NU is at a unique point in the performance scale: in the middle between the 9800XT and the X800/6800GT.

I wouldn't buy a 9800 anything at this point in time, because it's been shown the 6800 is much faster (>20%)at Far Cry on the only "playable" settings for this game, for these cards.
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040705/farcry-05.html#level_research

On OpenGL games, you can look at the AT review to see how badly the 6800 beats the 9800XT.

How about at HL2?
9800XT smacked down
Not a hard choice between 49 and 35 fps at HL2, is it?
Or how about between 58 and 47?
9800XT stomped some more

I haven't seen anything to tell me the 9800XT is going to offer decent performance on the games that will be coming out in the next 12 months, so I'd gladly spend an extra $100, even if it's $50 too much according to your formula. To me, the only real choice here is between spending $300 or $400, because I don't think the 9800 anything will be a playable card in the months to come.

The 9800s are low end, "big IQ sacrifices will be made" cards now. 6800s are your cheapest chance at getting a taste of what the $400 cards are about, a compromise.

 

[Johnbear007]

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: Rollo

Actuall 6800NU price: $290-300. If you buy one right now, you're paying a $50 premium -- about 20% more than it "should" be worth based on the other available hardware.

Good lord, it never ends. Matthias, I'm about at the point I'd send you $50 not to have to talk about the horrors of not getting the absolute best deal.

Just because you don't care doesn't mean nobody else does.

Talk about "diminishing returns"- you could have earned the $50 in the time it took you to concoct that manifesto.

Well, maybe YOU make $50 in five minutes; it takes me a little longer. Of course, this is coming from someone who acquired several 5800Us (and traded down from a 9800Pro for one) and then ran one over with his car, and who gets "bored" with computer hardware, so perhaps your idea of "value" is a little different than mine.

I don't "need more econ classes", unless I want to be an economist. I have a BS-Business and took plenty of econ on the way to it.

I also understand something about "talking to a brick wall", my other degree is a BA-Psych.

Tell me about it. :disgust:

Look, if you don't like my opinion, show some sort of evidence or counter-argument instead of just bashing me. Clearly, either a) you don't care about price/performance when you buy hardware, or b) the 6800NU is still 'worth it' for you at $300. There's nothing wrong with either of these positions (being that they are opinions) -- but I do care, and I don't think it's a good value at its current price. And that's all I have left to say on this.

Not to feed the fire, but you can now get it at buy.com for 250$

 

[Johnbear007]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Rollo
You're a lost cause Apoppin.

You can't understand a simple phrase like "at least 12% faster", and you ignore the benchmarks on the site whose bandwidth you waste by parroting your misconception of a marketing phrase that from the looks of the context, may only refer to 3dmark.

I truly doubt you're as ignorant as you pretend to be, so I'm not going to argue this point or any other with you.

What satisfaction you could derive from your obtuse "I know you are, but what am I-esque" dawdling is beyond me.

You are WAY beyond lost. You have ZERO argument and twisted logic and AVOID answering ANY of my questions. 😛

The sad part is that some people actually believe your ignorant BS. :roll:

You CANNOT answer WHY your OWN video card manufacturer can NOT say the 6800 runs at least a full 13% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5950 Ultra or the ATI 9800XT . . .

Again - ANSWER please, windbag - HOW much faster do you think the 6800 is over the 9800xt - overall?

They can't say that because it doesn't always, everytime, run more than 12%........


I'm not sure what this argument is about. The language is pretty specific. At least 12% means that it runs 12% or more faster than these cards.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Apoppin:
Why are you so hung up on that marketing sound byte?
Do you think Derek can't properly bench a card and posted inaccurate information about the 6800?

We can all see it's a lot more than 12% faster than a 9800XT?

Just relax, can't you see the guy is more stubborn than a bull? If he thinks it's 12%, then let him.

Besides, the cheapest 9800XT on the net is $370 new, 9800Pro 256mb is $259 -- in which case 6800 is always better. You can't argue with him that paying $223 for 9800xt is a bad deal because I am sure at the time it was a good one. Arguying that $223 is a good deal now is also pointless because it's hard to acquire a brand new 9800xt for that much.

So where does this leave us? With the original question of 9800pro vs 6800....And it's pretty obvious that the extra $$$ spent on 6800 corresponds to a significant speed increase, making this purchase a matter of "how much do you want to spend?" However the price difference is roughly 45% and 6800 is not really 45% faster at most games than a 9800Pro. Yet it is that much faster in the most shader intensive games like Splinter Cell, T:AOD, Far Cry and Halo. This would probably mean that it will be faster in HL2 and Doom 3 and STALKER, so the extra longetivity for $100 is something to think about (not to mention PS3.0 support).

But as a side note, it really doesnt make sense to invest into new videocards yet at such outrageous prices, considering there are almost no games to take advantage of them just yet. By fall time it will make sense, and then prices will have come down.

The problem with 6800NU is that it is faster than older generation of cards, but not fast enough to enable AA/AF whenever you want to because of 12 pipes and only 128mb of memory. So it probably makes sense to either buy 9700Pro for $160 and wait for things to settle down and buy a faster card in 6 months, or just get 6800gt/x800pro now if you really can't wait. Considering there is not 1 game where 9800pro 128mb will be playable but 9700 pro will not be at same game settings, maybe this stop gap card is not such a bad idea for those that need to upgrade now but do not have enough $$$ for the fastest cards.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: Rollo
Matthias:

Look, if you don't like my opinion, show some sort of evidence or counter-argument instead of just bashing me. Clearly, either a) you don't care about price/performance when you buy hardware, or b) the 6800NU is still 'worth it' for you at $300.

A. Obviously I care about price/performance when I buy hardware, at least most of the time. I just have different definitions of what acceptable price performance than you most likely
B. Yes, to me (and apparently the reviewers) the 6800 is a good value. Here's why:
Although it may not have the absolute "best" price/performance ratio, the 6800NU is at a unique point in the performance scale: in the middle between the 9800XT and the X800/6800GT.

My god, he said something logical. Yes -- if you have to have a card faster than a 9800Pro, and you can't or won't buy a 6800GT/X800Pro or better (which are, IMHO, a better deal), there is no other option. That doesn't make it a great option, just the only option. You said before that just because the 9800Pro is a "better" buy doesn't make the 6800 a "bad" purchase -- but just because the 6800 is the only card at that pricepoint doesn't make it a good one, either.

I wouldn't buy a 9800 anything at this point in time, because it's been shown the 6800 is much faster (>20%)at Far Cry on the only "playable" settings for this game, for these cards.
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040705/farcry-05.html#level_research

Of course you linked to the one demo that got a *huge* boost from SM3.0. How about this (9800XT wins across the board) and this (9800XT wins w/ AA/AF on, close without it) and this (meets or beats it across the board again)?

On OpenGL games, you can look at the AT review to see how badly the 6800 beats the 9800XT.

Well, they used two games that seem to have major performance issues on ATI hardware (JK:JA and NWN) -- the vanilla 6800 beats the X800XT in both, which is obviously a system limitation or driver issue (so I'm not sure how much you can draw from these tests in regards to general and future OGL performance). It does give it a good beating in Wolf:ET, though. I'd love to see some numbers from Call of Duty, which actually seems to run decently on ATI hardware.

How about at HL2?
9800XT smacked down
Not a hard choice between 49 and 35 fps at HL2, is it?
Or how about between 58 and 47?
9800XT stomped some more

How about it's a very early alpha and it's a whopping 5FPS difference (0FPS on the Intel chip!) at 10x7 w/ AA/AF on?

I haven't seen anything to tell me the 9800XT is going to offer decent performance on the games that will be coming out in the next 12 months, so I'd gladly spend an extra $100, even if it's $50 too much according to your formula. To me, the only real choice here is between spending $300 or $400, because I don't think the 9800 anything will be a playable card in the months to come.

If Doom3/HL2/STALKER/<insert games coming out in the next 6-12 months> are unplayable on a 9800Pro (which, until just a few months ago, was one of the fastest cards available), nobody will buy them. Are they going to run smoothly at 1600x1200 with AA and AF cranked up? No. Will they run at 1600x1200 without AA and AF? Probably. Will they run at 1024x768 or 1280x960 with some AA and AF? Probably.

Games do help sell hardware, it's true -- but if someone just put down a chunk of change on a 9600Pro/5700U/9800Pro/5900XT, and they can't run any new games unless they sell that and buy a $300+ card, they aren't going to be happy.

The 9800s are low end, "big IQ sacrifices will be made" cards now.

And what are 9600s? The "hahaha, we laugh at you and refuse to make our game work on your card" cards? The 9800Pro is not "low-end", and if you think it is, you need to work on your perspective a bit. The sum total of NV40 and R420 cards out there right now is probably not even one half of one percent of the graphics market (it might be ~1% of the *enthusiast* market). When an entire reasonably-equipped computer (minus monitor) costs $400-500, a graphics card costing over $100 is a *luxury* item, not a mainstream piece of equipment. Mainstream releases like HL2 and Doom3 *have* to work well on these "low-end" cards (as well as *actual* low-end cards like a 9200 or 5200, or last-generation hardware like an 8500 or 4200), or else they don't sell.

6800s are your cheapest chance at getting a taste of what the $400 cards are about, a compromise.

They are definitely a compromise, but that's not always a good thing.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: Johnbear007
Not to feed the fire, but you can now get it at buy.com for 250$

It is, however, a pre-order ("Usually ships in 1-2 weeks", but no specific date given for when it will arrive). Granted, at $250 it's actually not a bad purchase, even though you may have to wait a while to get it.

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
So where does this leave us? With the original question of 9800pro vs 6800....And it's pretty obvious that the extra $$$ spent on 6800 corresponds to a significant speed increase, making this purchase a matter of "how much do you want to spend?" However the price difference is roughly 45% and 6800 is not really 45% faster at most games than a 9800Pro. Yet it is that much faster in the most shader intensive games like Splinter Cell, T:AOD, Far Cry and Halo. This would probably mean that it will be faster in HL2 and Doom 3 and STALKER, so the extra longetivity for $100 is something to think about (not to mention PS3.0 support).

But as a side note, it really doesnt make sense to invest into new videocards yet at such outrageous prices, considering there are almost no games to take advantage of them just yet. By fall time it will make sense, and then prices will have come down.

The problem with 6800NU is that it is faster than older generation of cards, but not fast enough to enable AA/AF whenever you want to because of 12 pipes and only 128mb of memory. So it probably makes sense to either buy 9700Pro for $160 and wait for things to settle down and buy a faster card in 6 months, or just get 6800gt/x800pro now if you really can't wait. Considering there is not 1 game where 9800pro 128mb will be playable but 9700 pro will not be at same game settings, maybe this stop gap card is not such a bad idea for those that need to upgrade now but do not have enough $$$ for the fastest cards.

This is exactly the reasoning that led me to buy a 9800 Pro from the FS/FT forums 2 weeks ago. I got it for a steal at $165 shipped, too. I'm certain that it'll work fine for me until I can afford a PCI Express card next year when I get my NF4/A64 system. 😛

 

[Johnbear007]

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: Johnbear007
Not to feed the fire, but you can now get it at buy.com for 250$

It is, however, a pre-order ("Usually ships in 1-2 weeks", but no specific date given for when it will arrive). Granted, at $250 it's actually not a bad purchase, even though you may have to wait a while to get it.

Yep.. it is true that it is on pre-order. However, the price should not go up, it may actually go down before it ships and then you can cancel

although price went up on GT's so who knows what they heck is going on or will happen.

I will however probably order one. I think at 250$ it is a better deal than a 195$ 9800 pro, especially considering that I can sell far cry for maybe 20$ Since I have already played through it.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: Johnbear007
Yep.. it is true that it is on pre-order. However, the price should not go up, it may actually go down before it ships and then you can cancel

although price went up on GT's so who knows what they heck is going on or will happen.

I will however probably order one. I think at 250$ it is a better deal than a 195$ 9800 pro, especially considering that I can sell far cry for maybe 20$ Since I have already played through it.

I may have missed something on buy.com, but I don't think this card comes with Far Cry (if it does, this card is a rather good value, since you could sell Far Cry and have a 6800NU for about $225-230, making the $200 9800Pro basically obsolete). The eVGA ($300 at eVGA's website) one definitely comes with it, but I don't think the PNY does.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Johnbear007

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: Rollo
You're a lost cause Apoppin.

You can't understand a simple phrase like "at least 12% faster", and you ignore the benchmarks on the site whose bandwidth you waste by parroting your misconception of a marketing phrase that from the looks of the context, may only refer to 3dmark.

I truly doubt you're as ignorant as you pretend to be, so I'm not going to argue this point or any other with you.

What satisfaction you could derive from your obtuse "I know you are, but what am I-esque" dawdling is beyond me.

You are WAY beyond lost. You have ZERO argument and twisted logic and AVOID answering ANY of my questions. 😛

The sad part is that some people actually believe your ignorant BS. :roll:

You CANNOT answer WHY your OWN video card manufacturer can NOT say the 6800 runs at least a full 13% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5950 Ultra or the ATI 9800XT . . .

Again - ANSWER please, windbag - HOW much faster do you think the 6800 is over the 9800xt - overall?

They can't say that because it doesn't always, everytime, run more than 12%........

TRUE, it LOSES by a significant margin in several tests

I'm not sure what this argument is about. The language is pretty specific. At least 12% means that it runs 12% or more faster than these cards.

My "argument" is that the MANUFACTURER can NOT say it is at least 13% faster.

😉

Do you think they just picked a figure out of the air? Evga makes BOTH the 6800 and the 5950u - THEy should know if the card is 12 or 13% faster or not. 😛





Here's a comparison of the 9800XT with the 6800
The 6800 does win the majority of benchs - often not by much - and loses others. I would have said it is ~15-20% faster until i read evga's claim . . . 😉 12% DOES sound about right.


The 6800 Here is the eVGA link (again)

the GeForce 6800 . . . runs at least a full 12% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5950 Ultra or the ATI 9800XT

Then check out their "performance graph".

I bet we could put together specific benchs where the 9800xt "wins" every case. 😉

A benchmark is like a "snapshot"; an few seconds of "comparison"; eVGA makes a BLANKET statement that the 6800 runs OVERall (at least) A FULL 12% - NOT 13% - faster.

:roll:

it's pretty simple . . . the 6800 is simply not as impressive as it's bigger bro the GT or even the x800pro. 😛

i AGREE; it is the minimum new card - and not terribly good bang-for-buck - for today's games.

:roll:

the 9800xt - depending on price - is now a "value" card.

If you guys want to argue - email eVga and link to the latest reviews so they can update their FAQ. 😛

 

[artemicion]

I can't believe people are still not understanding this.

The advertisement says the 6800 runs AT LEAST 12% faster than the 9800XT.

This means that if you took the benchmark THAT MOST FAVORS THE ATI 9800XT CARD OVER THE 6800 the 6800 will perform 12% better than the 9800XT by whatever metric they are using (though I question the validity, this is what the fact states)

What this DEFINITELY MEANS is that there exists a benchmark where the 6800 performs 12% better than the 9800XT.

What this PROBABLY MEANS is that there is ALSO at least a few benchmarks that show the 6800 performs BETTER THAN 12% over the 9800XT. YOU CANNOT TELL ME YOU HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT EVERY SINGLE BENCHMARK THAT MAN HAS CREATED GIVES THE EXACT SAME RESULT OF 12%. Thus, you MUST concede that there are benchmarks that show the 6800 having a higher margin than 12%.

THEREFORE, since MOST people consider the AVERAGE PERFORMANCE to be best indicator of overall performance, YOU MUST BELIEVE THAT THE 6800 IS MORE THAN 12% BETTER THAN THE 9800XT IF THAT STATISTIC IS TRUE.

Honestly, what if I created an uber video card that got 1,000,000,000 fps on every single game out there EXCEPT on the COMMANDER KEEN benchmark, it only gets 0 fps. Would you honestly TRY to convince people that this AMAZING card has 100% less performance than the 9800XT (or any card for that matter) JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN'T PLAY COMMANDER-FREAKIN-KEEN? I'll admit that it's an important game, but hardly worth dismissing the card over.

While I admit the above is probably an egregius exageration, it shows you that you CANNOT EVALUATE AVERAGE CASE PERFORMANCE OVER ANOTHER CARD BASED ON JUST THE MINIMUM CASE PERFORMANCE OVER ANOTHER CARD.

 

[Zebo]

9800pro with xt core Oced past XT will best or be even w/NU in almost every test... course you can OC NU too... though choice. Bang for the buck the 9800. Performance NU.

I guess I'd wait if $300 is not what you have in mind for this type of performance.. guys are already getting GT's for around that price and patenece will give it again very soon.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: artemicion
I can't believe people are still not understanding this.

The advertisement says the 6800 runs AT LEAST 12% faster than the 9800XT.

This means that if you took the benchmark THAT MOST FAVORS THE ATI 9800XT CARD OVER THE 6800 the 6800 will perform 12% better than the 9800XT by whatever metric they are using (though I question the validity, this is what the fact states)

WRONG! The 9800XT BEATS the 6800 is more than a few tests

What this DEFINITELY MEANS is that there exists a benchmark where the 6800 performs 12% better than the 9800XT.

Sure . . . .look at eVGA's performance graph

What this PROBABLY MEANS is that there is ALSO at least a few benchmarks that show the 6800 performs BETTER THAN 12% over the 9800XT. YOU CANNOT TELL ME YOU HONESTLY BELIEVE THAT EVERY SINGLE BENCHMARK THAT MAN HAS CREATED GIVES THE EXACT SAME RESULT OF 12%. Thus, you MUST concede that there are benchmarks that show the 6800 having a higher margin than 12%.

This is NOT at issue . . . most of the time, the 6800 is faster than the 9800xt. CLEARLY eVGA was doing an "OVERall AVERAGE" - faster by a full 12% - NOT 13%

THEREFORE, since MOST people consider the AVERAGE PERFORMANCE to be best indicator of overall performance, YOU MUST BELIEVE THAT THE 6800 IS MORE THAN 12% BETTER THAN THE 9800XT IF THAT STATISTIC IS TRUE.

Honestly, what if I created an uber video card that got 1,000,000,000 fps on every single game out there EXCEPT on the COMMANDER KEEN benchmark, it only gets 0 fps. Would you honestly TRY to convince people that this AMAZING card has 100% less performance than the 9800XT (or any card for that matter) JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN'T PLAY COMMANDER-FREAKIN-KEEN? I'll admit that it's an important game, but hardly worth dismissing the card over.

While I admit the above is probably an egregius exageration, it shows you that you CANNOT EVALUATE AVERAGE CASE PERFORMANCE OVER ANOTHER CARD BASED ON JUST THE MINIMUM CASE PERFORMANCE OVER ANOTHER CARD.

Yeah those last two paragraphs should probably be rewritten . . . pretty "creative" writing. :roll:

 

[Johnbear007]

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: Johnbear007
Yep.. it is true that it is on pre-order. However, the price should not go up, it may actually go down before it ships and then you can cancel

although price went up on GT's so who knows what they heck is going on or will happen.

I will however probably order one. I think at 250$ it is a better deal than a 195$ 9800 pro, especially considering that I can sell far cry for maybe 20$ Since I have already played through it.

I may have missed something on buy.com, but I don't think this card comes with Far Cry (if it does, this card is a rather good value, since you could sell Far Cry and have a 6800NU for about $225-230, making the $200 9800Pro basically obsolete). The eVGA ($300 at eVGA's website) one definitely comes with it, but I don't think the PNY does.

Sorry, I was thinking of the newegg deal and just assumed far cry came with the PNY. You are right, I see no indication that it does.

However 250 is still better than 290 since if you want far cry you can get it on ebay for about 20$

 

[Johnbear007]

The 12% argument is getting stupid, and it is also off topic. The topic is 9800 pro Vs 6800 just drop the stupid 12% argument, it's the dubmest argument on all sides I have ever seen on AT.

Lets just get back on topic

 

[artemicion]

oh . my . god

Ah yes, the firing squad x800 pro review. I love how you so selectively take bits and pieces of data from it without looking at the big picture. LOOK AT ME SO CAN I!

OMFGWTFPWNED
THE 6800 PERFORMS BETTER THAN THE 6800 GT IN CALL OF DUTY 800x600x32 4xA 8xAF, HALO 800x600x32 and FAR CRY 800x600x32.
OMFG LOL ALL YOU IDIOTS WHO BOUGHT THE GT, OMFG PWNED.

OMFG the 6800 IS EVEN BETTER THAN THE X800 PRO IN SOME CASES. PWNED ATI PWNED.

Now by ACTUALLY CALCULATING the percentage performance
((6800fps - 9800xtfps) / 9800xtfps)
difference between the 6800 and the 9800XT, we get the following numbers (not including the far cry ones, too much typing):
6800 over 9800XT
11.9 ,18.4, 18.8, 14.0, 17.6, 23.3, 18.6, 2.7, 20.5, 28.9, 23, 17.1, 24.3, 41.2, 36.5, 15.8, 19.7, 25.0, 28.7, 31.4. 36.7, 40.1, 47.0

9800XT over 6800
9.3,12.9,4.2,13.4

For a grand total of:
19.3% performance over the 9800XT
Even if you factor in a 0 for every far cry test since i was too lazy to include then (which would be GENEROUS) you still have close to 15%

MY GOD MAN, EVEN YOUR OWN BENCHMARKS FAIL YOU.

 

[dheffer]

Originally posted by: artemicion
OMFGWTFPWNED
THE 6800 PERFORMS BETTER THAN THE 6800 GT IN CALL OF DUTY 800x600x32 4xA 8xAF, HALO 800x600x32 and FAR CRY 800x600x32.
OMFG LOL ALL YOU IDIOTS WHO BOUGHT THE GT, OMFG PWNED.

OMFG the 6800 IS EVEN BETTER THAN THE X800 PRO IN SOME CASES. PWNED ATI PWNED.

MY GOD MAN, EVEN YOUR OWN BENCHMARKS FAIL YOU.

The guy who STARTED this thread, looking for the answer as to whether a 9800 pro or a 6800 was a better deal wrote in English. Maybe you should do the same. Just something to think about.

Arguements are a lot more easily won when we all speak the same language. Also, please, let us get back to the arguement between the 9800 and the 6800.

Let's not make this into an ATi vs. nVidea war. Don't you people have more pride in something else other than your video card? College football? Nationalities? Pretty much anything other than a video card... it's just a piece of PCB that makes pretty graphics, just buy whichever one you want to, and shut the hell up.

Any one personally make this upgrade? Please, let's try and help this guy, I considered this myself, and chose to get the 9800 pro for $194, and I successfully modded it into a 9800XT. I felt that this was good graphics bang for the buck. If all of this arguing has proved one point its that if you spend the extra 90, you get ~10-20% difference. How do you feel about this upgrade? Worth the money or what? I say buy whichever card thats in the price bracket that you initially wanted.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: artemicion
oh . my . god

Ah yes, the firing squad x800 pro review. I love how you so selectively take bits and pieces of data from it without looking at the big picture. LOOK AT ME SO CAN I!

OMFGWTFPWNED
THE 6800 PERFORMS BETTER THAN THE 6800 GT IN CALL OF DUTY 800x600x32 4xA 8xAF, HALO 800x600x32 and FAR CRY 800x600x32.
OMFG LOL ALL YOU IDIOTS WHO BOUGHT THE GT, OMFG PWNED.

OMFG the 6800 IS EVEN BETTER THAN THE X800 PRO IN SOME CASES. PWNED ATI PWNED.

Now by ACTUALLY CALCULATING the percentage performance
((6800fps - 9800xtfps) / 9800xtfps)
difference between the 6800 and the 9800XT, we get the following numbers (not including the far cry ones, too much typing):
6800 over 9800XT
11.9 ,18.4, 18.8, 14.0, 17.6, 23.3, 18.6, 2.7, 20.5, 28.9, 23, 17.1, 24.3, 41.2, 36.5, 15.8, 19.7, 25.0, 28.7, 31.4. 36.7, 40.1, 47.0

9800XT over 6800
9.3,12.9,4.2,13.4

For a grand total of:
19.3% performance over the 9800XT
Even if you factor in a 0 for every far cry test since i was too lazy to include then (which would be GENEROUS) you still have close to 15%

MY GOD MAN, EVEN YOUR OWN BENCHMARKS FAIL YOU.

send an e-mail to eVga - it's THEIR "12% faster" claim. 😛

:roll:

you still don't get it.


As to the TOPIC,

9800Pro $199 or 6800NP for $290

; it's a personal choice. Both choices have their pluses and minuses. 😉

My OPINION is the 9800 is better bang-4-buck than the 6800. Factor in the 6800GT and i'd say nVidia has their BEST bang-4-buck card -but that is again off-topic.

 

[artemicion]

apoppin:
do you just not understand the difference of a claim of AT LEAST and a claim of ON AVERAGE?
or are you just trying to anger us?

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: artemicion
apoppin:
do you just not understand the difference of a claim of AT LEAST and a claim of ON AVERAGE?
or are you just trying to anger us?

Please don't feed the trolls.

Apoppin, I'm starting to see how you got to 14K posts. :frown:

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: artemicion
apoppin:
do you just not understand the difference of a claim of AT LEAST and a claim of ON AVERAGE?
or are you just trying to anger us?

do you?

Do you see WHY 'at least 12% faster' might be accurate, yet 13% is NOT?

Why in a certain bench the 9800xt gets beat (a lot) yet WINS others? That the 12% might be "an overall average"?

probably not. 😛

:roll: