• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Finally a review comparing...

So except in Oblivion and Age of Empires 3 (of all games...) the X1800XT wins. But to be honest I wasn't expecting the X1900GT to win any of them. Maybe the shaders really do help.
 
Originally posted by: thilan29
So except in Oblivion and Age of Empires 3 (of all games...) the X1800XT wins. But to be honest I wasn't expecting the X1900GT to win any of them. Maybe the shaders really do help.
Click to expand...

i dunno.. @ 1600:

"Utilising Bloom along with 4x AA and 8x AF at 1600x1200 extends the lead of the Radeon X1800 XT here, giving it close to a 25% advantage over the X1900 GT. "

it depends on the situation, according to their test. personally, i think the GT should be lots faster, based on the fact it's a newer model, and it's more expensive. unfortunately, overall it's generally slower then the prev. gen 1800xt, and to me that's a bit of a disappointment.

thier overclocking results for the the GT are disappointing to me as well. as the 1800xt's disappear from the channels, and the choice basically becomes the 1900GT vs 7900GT at the $300 pricepoint, i'm thinking the 7900 would have the clear advantage...
 
I think ATI would have been better off using a more balanced architecture. Maybe 20pipes with 40 shaders?? Would that have taken less transistors??

So far the 48 shaders I don't think have paid off. Their performance is up to snuff though...even with less pipes, so I guess I shouldn't complain.
 
there's been some talk about that.. and i can't say that i disagree.

frankly i think the GT would have been a much better product had they gone the way of g70/g71 (ie the GT being essentially the same as the GTX) by offering the same core but with lower clockspeed and brought the cost down by using slower memory and a different pcb.
 
Eh. It's about right IMO. remember, ATI doesn't want to cannibalize sales of the higher-priced XT models--which is what the 1800 is doing right now; that could be why they seem to be clearing them out of the channel.

As far as overclocking--it's all about cooling and voltage!! I'm amazed this thing runs at all with a single-slot cooler... think about it, R580 with single-slot... *shudder* remember, this thing competes with 7900GT, which also ships with low volts and a dinky cooler.

Overall I'm happy with my 1800XT. 😀

And I was expecting the 1900GT to win FEAR.... instead, they're pretty even with the 1800 ahead with AA. Pretty impressive showing for the R520.
 
The GT doesnt have the 512 MB for the higher resolutions though... if you keep that in thought, the results are gimped
 
If a soft mod comes along and prices drop, the 1900gt could be the card of choice for the cheap crowd (like me). Besides the low prices for the x1800xt do not seem to exist in Canada.
 
Selling the X1800 XT at 300US I don't think was ever supposed to happen. This is another case where the top model of the previous gen being a tad more powerful then the new model that is replacing it, but is a bit more cost efficient.

Remember 9500 Pro to 9600 Pro??
 
So ATI is trying to move out the 1800 and replace it with this?

If thats so, I should hurry and pick one up.
 
Yes, ATi is trying to get rid of the X1800 inventory. I mean, why one earth would they want to sell their previous flagship card at $250~. In business sense, its quite insane. But to us it good. So grab the X1800XTs while you can.

But what really made me interested in this comparision is that the X1900GTs 36PS doesnt give the lead in shader intensive titles much but instead get beaten by a 16PS X1800XT quite a few times.

 
But what really made me interested in this comparision is that the X1900GTs 36PS doesnt give the lead in shader intensive titles much but instead get beaten by a 16PS X1800XT quite a few times.
Click to expand...
It's impressive, now that I think about it, how well the 1900gt did. It has fewer pipelines AND lower clockspeed core and mem. With a little voltage, some better cooling, and some luck this could be more overclockable than the 1800XT. Certainly there is a large potential there.
 
Originally posted by: OvErHeAtInG
But what really made me interested in this comparision is that the X1900GTs 36PS doesnt give the lead in shader intensive titles much but instead get beaten by a 16PS X1800XT quite a few times.
Click to expand...
It's impressive, now that I think about it, how well the 1900gt did. It has fewer pipelines AND lower clockspeed core and mem. With a little voltage, some better cooling, and some luck this could be more overclockable than the 1800XT. Certainly there is a large potential there.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Wait for someone to give it more juice before discounting it. It may turn out better than most expect. We all know the core can hit much higher than 625mhz, and the ram isnt even hitting its rated speed at stock volts.
 
Originally posted by: itsrunninghot
Originally posted by: OvErHeAtInG
But what really made me interested in this comparision is that the X1900GTs 36PS doesnt give the lead in shader intensive titles much but instead get beaten by a 16PS X1800XT quite a few times.
Click to expand...
It's impressive, now that I think about it, how well the 1900gt did. It has fewer pipelines AND lower clockspeed core and mem. With a little voltage, some better cooling, and some luck this could be more overclockable than the 1800XT. Certainly there is a large potential there.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Wait for someone to give it more juice before discounting it. It may turn out better than most expect. We all know the core can hit much higher than 625mhz, and the ram isnt even hitting its rated speed at stock volts.
Click to expand...

This is 1.375v: http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=3646&s=9
 
This part utilises a single slot cooler, which is a welcome relief from the overly loud solution found on the higher-end Radeon X1900 parts. All in all, the noise from this fan is far less unobtrusive than ATI's dual-slot cooling solutions
Click to expand...
I wonder if they proofread.
 
Nice..thanks for link. My 5 month old 6800GS is struggling with some games but I knew it was based off old tech anyways so its no big deal. That 1800XT 512mb looks tempting if I can sell my 6800GS for something reasonable. I wish I could see a 6800GS vs 512mb 1800XT just for a direct comparison.
 
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: thilan29
Originally posted by: DeathReborn
This is 1.375v: http://www.vr-zone.com/?i=3646&s=9
Click to expand...

Damn this clocks pretty well. 900MHz on 1.4ns ram???!!! I wish my 1.4ns ram would hit even 700MHz.
Click to expand...

ATI Overclocker loosens timings if I'm correct. But bandwith is greater for games and timings for benchmarks unless I'm mistaken... anyone?
Click to expand...

It looks like it was done using ATI Tool though?? No mention of overclocker.

But yeah does anyone know if it's bandwidth or timings for games?? I'd really like to know this also.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top