Benchmarks on average....I got bored....

[Munky]

I cant see how averaging a bunch of benchmarks from different reviews done on different systems can say anything conclusive, especially since in some cases they contradict each other (ie Farcry performance). The AT review seemed rushed, and left a lot uncovered. The techreport one was a bit better, but I'm still waiting for a review that does more tests. Maybe xbitlabs or B3D will put out a good one...

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: munky
I cant see how averaging a bunch of benchmarks from different reviews done on different systems can say anything conclusive, especially since in some cases they contradict each other (ie Farcry performance). The AT review seemed rushed, and left a lot uncovered. The techreport one was a bit better, but I'm still waiting for a review that does more tests. Maybe xbitlabs or B3D will put out a good one...

IMO the best reviews were: extremetech, techreport, guru3d, hexus and xbitlabs.

I think AT staff is working on a more detailed review that will blow all of these out of water. 😀

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: munky
I cant see how averaging a bunch of benchmarks from different reviews done on different systems can say anything conclusive, especially since in some cases they contradict each other (ie Farcry performance). The AT review seemed rushed, and left a lot uncovered. The techreport one was a bit better, but I'm still waiting for a review that does more tests. Maybe xbitlabs or B3D will put out a good one...

If the performance difference in the majority of games between the two cards is less than 10%, I would say that is negligable for the most part. 10% really isn't that big of a performance difference and probably won't make or break any game on the market.

It seems to me that both of these cards are top of the line, except that one is available and significantly cheaper, while the other is unnavailable and have yet to see final street price.

 

[Maluno]

Originally posted by: x80064

Originally posted by: boshuter
Do you own both cards and run these tests yourself? Or is this just more linking to reviews you found online?

You can find a review to back up any claim you want to make..... until someone "respected" actually has both cards and runs some benches it's all crap.

Nope, I dont have BOTH cards. Nobody does. The scores are from different sources ( sites ) on average. I'm trying to figure out what card to go with. I also did not imply that these scores were gonna be real world scores when individuals run their tests. Since there is no X18 XT on shelves yet...I cannot find out what the real world scores are. So until then, this is what I did to HOPEFULLY get a clue about which to purchase. So they may be crap to you, but their not to me. And you say respected? Sure..I very well may not be.....But how respectful is it to crap on someone else's thread?

pwned. 😉

 

[Cookie Monster]

Exactly X80064, all benchs show different results. Some show 7800GTX beating the X1800 XT or its the other way around. BUT one thing for sure right now is that in terms of performance, HDR/AA+AF results, power usage, noise and temps, price the 7800GT beats the X1800 XL in almost all the benches.

I think this is similar to the 6800 vs X800 XT PE. The 6800GT beated the X800 pro, but the X800 XT PE had the edge over the 6800 ultra.

In this case the X1800XT has a slight edge over the 7800GTX. But the 7800GT beats the X1800XL.

But hey, as the guys from techreport says:

"We may have a rematch between the Radeon X1800 XT 512MB and a new 512MB version of the GeForce 7800 GTX shortly, too, that could produce a clear champ. "

 

[Goi]

xbitlabs already did the power consumption part, and this is GPU power consumption, not total system power consumption. I generally trust xbitlabs reviews, they seem to know what they're doing, unlike a lot of other sites.

 

[M0RPH]

If you were going to take benchmarks from different web reviews and average them together, you should have used percentage differences and not the raw numbers. What you've done here really isn't valid or helpful.

 

[Ronin]

Like most of your posts. 😉 We liked you better when you weren't posting.

 

[DidlySquat]

Like most of his posts, he has a good point.

 

[Ronin]

You don't read much, apparently. His posts tend to be inflammatory, and controversial at best, with a rare gem of truth and sincerity.

 

[sxr7171]

Originally posted by: DidlySquat

Originally posted by: ZobarStyl
All those scores appear to be without AA/AF, which is pretty absurd for cards this powerful. When you move to 20x15 resolution or 16x12 full AA/AF, the numbers actual start to show up. The x1800XT does better with AA/AF at these rezzes (it has a lot more memory bandwidth) but still can't run OGL games worth a damn. I'd look up those kind of numbers for comparison, instead of using CPU-limited numbers.

agreed. The lower resolution 1024x768 and even 1280x1024 are not relevant because people that buy these cards for $500 are likely to own high end monitors and run their games at 1600x1200 or above. I know I'd never even get my 7800GTX if I planned to run my games at 1280x1024 or below.

Thank you. It's about time people realized this. If I wanted to run at 1024x768 or 1280x1024 I would stick with my 6600GT. The only reason I am even considering an upgrade is to play at 1920x1200 with 4xaa and 16xaf or better.