Best Video Card for Around $400

IanE

Senior member
Jul 12, 2004
370
0
0
Ok... so with this new patch that makes ATI Card 40% faster supposedly, I'm reconsidering everything about my next purchase, a graphics card.

I'm struggling between a Radeon X800 Pro and the GeForce 6800 GT.

the system itll run on is as follow:
AMD 64 3000
1024mb Corsair XMS PC3200
MSI K8N Neo Platinum

and other standard goodies. What do you guys think about the cards? The benchmarks I've been looking at lately have the 6800GT waaaay ahead of the X800 Pro... but is such a technical upper hand noticable to the human eye?
 

Insomniak

Banned
Sep 11, 2003
4,836
0
0
I say the 6800GT. Better feature set, better performance than the X800Pro, same price.

Need I remind people that the 40% "gain" is not mathematically equal, and ONLY applies to Doom 3? In most other games, the 6800GT hands the X800Pro it's butt on a platter.

This is not to say the X800Pro is a bad card - it's a wonderful piece of hardware. If you can find a good deal on one, grab it. But if price is equal...
 

Cawchy87

Diamond Member
Mar 8, 2004
5,104
2
81
no more stuggleing. get the gt.

or mabye the x800pro vivo. oh man, this is a hard choice.
 

Blastman

Golden Member
Oct 21, 1999
1,758
0
76
The X800pro is faster than the 6800GT in DX with AA/AF -- and since that is the majority of games -- I still see it as a faster overall card. The assertion that the Pro is ? ?outclassed? ? by the GT is ridiculous. The fillrate on the X800 is actually slightly faster despite the GT being 16pipes as the X800?s low-k process give it a substantial clock rate advantage. I?ve seen several people with both a GT and Pro and they all thought the X800pro was faster with AA/AF.


12x10-4AA/8AF? 6800GT/X800pro ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? xbit

COD ? ? ? ? ? ...100.6/107.3
UT4 (1) ? ? ? ? ... 82.4/85.5
UT4 (2) ? ? ? ? ... 83.0/82.3
Farcry (1) ? ? ? ? 47/50.5
Farcry (2) ? ? ? ? 56/61
Farcry (3) ? ? ? ? 51.4/53.4
Painkiller ? ? ? ? ..162.7/161.3
Firestarter ? ? ? ? 185.4/171.4
StarWars KotoR ? ? 40.2/40.6
Splinter Cell ? ? ? .. 52/57
POP ? ? ? ? ? ? ..135/100
Max Payne 2 ? ? ? 145/157
Lock On ? ? ? ? .. 17/18
Collin McRae R4 ? .. 79.4/88.7
Perimeter ... ... ... ... 18.5/18.6
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? hdfr? 16x12-4AA/8AF
UT3 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? .. 55.7/57.2
Farcry ? ? ?? ? ? ? 37.6/42.5
Tomb Raider ? ? ? ? 42.4/44.0
Splinter Cell ? ? ? ? 29.0/31.6
Il-2 FB ? ? ?? ? ? ? 29.1/31.6
Warcraft III ? ? ?? .. 45.0/44.0
Collin McRae 04 ?? ? 57.8/60.4
FIFA 2004 ? ? ? ? ? 48.0/57.0

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?12x10 - 4AA/8AF ? 6800Ultra/X800pro?link

F1 Challenge (1) ? ? ? 88.1/90.4
F1 Challenge (1)? ? ? 66.9/69.1
Collin McRae 04 ?? ? .. 71.2/73.4
UT3 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 92.5/94.1

xbit ?

The ASUS AX800 PRO/TD is overall a speedy runner, especially in modern games that abound in complex special effects created with the help of pixel shaders. In such cases it matches the performance of the GeForce 6800 GT and more, and sometimes even leaves behind the GeForce 6800 Ultra that belongs to a higher price category ??.

Thus, the AX800 PRO/TD suits perfectly for playing modern games that make a wide use of complex pixel shaders and for upcoming games that will be using ever more complex shader-based effects.

There are a lot more benches where the X800pro beats the 6800GT, including Mafia, BF1942, Thief 3, Unreal 2, TRON2.0?etc.

The problem with the GT is that it one of the ALU?s is tied to the texture address unit. This means a performance hit running shaders+AF that the X800pro doesn?t have. As more and more shaders are used in DX (and that?s a big trend), the performance hit from this design is likely to leave it behind the X800 Pro. And that?s what we?ve seen so far in shader-intensive games like Farcry, TRON2.0, and TR, the X800pro is faster out of the box. The 6800GT needed a patch (that wasn?t really SM3.0) to keep up to the Pro in a shader heavy game like Farcry. My money is on the X800 to provide better performance in the long run.