Geforce 6800 vs. Radeon 9800 Pro

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
As far as i remember AA on Nvidia HW was more effective. It is AF that really screws them over.

-Kevin

Depends. At least in the past, NVIDIA's AA at the "same" level (ie, 2x, 4x, etc.) was noticeably lower in quality than ATI's, but took a comparable performance hit. I haven't seen anything really recent (other than some things looking at the X800, but those were focused on AF) on AA quality and performance, so maybe things have changed on the 6800 cards.

Sigh. I could spend a day on the misinformation here.


It's pretty well known the nV40/6800 chips have implemented RGSS AA and have the same quality as ATI these days Matthias.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
As far as i remember AA on Nvidia HW was more effective. It is AF that really screws them over.

-Kevin

Depends. At least in the past, NVIDIA's AA at the "same" level (ie, 2x, 4x, etc.) was noticeably lower in quality than ATI's, but took a comparable performance hit. I haven't seen anything really recent (other than some things looking at the X800, but those were focused on AF) on AA quality and performance, so maybe things have changed on the 6800 cards.

Sigh. I could spend a day on the misinformation here.


It's pretty well known the nV40/6800 chips have implemented RGSS AA and have the same quality as ATI these days Matthias.

As far as the whole raging "value" argument goes, I think you have two camps here:

1. People who are either too poor or don't care much about performance buying 9800Pros and XTs, than rabidly defending them with the bizarre "logic": "A NU isn't as good of a deal as a Pro, so if you can't/won't afford a Pro, you might as well screw yourself with a card that was good last year and save a $100..
2. People who take a more realistic approach and say, "The 9800Pro, the 6800NU, and the 6800GT are the best values at the $200/$300/$400 price points. Your wallet and value you place on fps should determine your purchase.


Of course, then you have the totally inexplicable people like Apoppin, who just spent $66 less on a 9800XT than he could have got a 6800NU with Far Cry for. (and his card was probably used to boot)
Who would be nuts enough to buy a card that loses 90% of benchmarks by 15-25% for less than the cost of a game difference?!?!! (when you consider you could sell the Far Cry for $30. and have the 6800NU for $36 more)
LOL- I'll tell you this much: Whatever "value index" the 6800NU has, I could put mine on FS/FT with a "FT:6800NU for 9800XT+ cash" header and start a frenzy. If Apoppin did the reverse,"FT 9800XT for 6800NU, will add cash" do you think he would get ONE response?
LOL

BTW- a few people getting Pros on pricing mistakes does not mean they cost $300.. I know, I spent much time yesterday just trying to find a GT or Ultra in stock for MSRP, let alone a good deal. :roll:
The grapes were sour anyway Apoppin, enjoy that High Q Doom 3 at Voodoo 2 fps!

And we could spend 2 days on your MISinfo.

I am truly sorry you do not understand my posts.

I am also sorry you are incapable of understanding the Doom iii review at HardOcp - that the "xt" is (now) a "value" card with it's "place" (definitely below the 6800s; ~ the peformance of the 6800LE and ahead of the 9800p) - it WILL play Doom iii demo at 47.7 FPS at 10x7, HiQ AND 8xAF - that is nowhere near your ridiculous "2 FPS".

:roll:

You have insisted - over and over - that your 6800s is "better" then it "really" is. And now - by your own admission - it will NOT play Doom iii at HiQ; so you have bought your SECOND card in about a month.

i am done wasting time with you

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
As far as i remember AA on Nvidia HW was more effective. It is AF that really screws them over.

-Kevin

Depends. At least in the past, NVIDIA's AA at the "same" level (ie, 2x, 4x, etc.) was noticeably lower in quality than ATI's, but took a comparable performance hit. I haven't seen anything really recent (other than some things looking at the X800, but those were focused on AF) on AA quality and performance, so maybe things have changed on the 6800 cards.

Sigh. I could spend a day on the misinformation here.


It's pretty well known the nV40/6800 chips have implemented RGSS AA and have the same quality as ATI these days Matthias.

Which is why I said (in the very post you quoted!):

maybe things have changed on the 6800 cards

ie, I knew they had lower quality on the NV30, but was unsure about the NV40. I don't appreciate the implication that I'm purposefully spreading misinformation.

As far as the whole raging "value" argument goes, I think you have two camps here:

1. People who are either too poor or don't care much about performance buying 9800Pros and XTs, than rabidly defending them with the bizarre "logic": "A NU isn't as good of a deal as a Pro, so if you can't/won't afford a Pro, you might as well screw yourself with a card that was good last year and save a $100..
2. People who take a more realistic approach and say, "The 9800Pro, the 6800NU, and the 6800GT are the best values at the $200/$300/$400 price points. Your wallet and value you place on fps should determine your purchase.

You mean "logic" like "the 6800NU has worse price/performance than the 9800Pro, and maybe you should take that into account when making your decision?" Yeah, clearly I'm insane. :disgust:

Just because the 6800NU is faster doesn't mean it's a good deal. The 9800Pro still offers a VERY acceptable level of performance for many, many people, and will run Doom3 faster than anything except a 5900U or a next-gen card (the 5900xt/NU will be close, but likely ahead by a bit; we'll have to wait for benchmarks). I don't really want to start another thread on this; we'll just keep going back and forth because you have a different concept of value and acceptable performance than me.

 

[SilverBack]

For what it's worth,
I have both an ATI 800 Pro ($445 at NewEgg) and a EVGA 6800GT ($399 at EVga.com).
The GT is better than the Pro in every benchmark I've tried and it overclocks better to boot.
If you have the $399 this is a great card.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Oh, look, a pissing match :roll: There are no winners, only losers, when these happen gentlemen. I suggest we all agree to disagree and move on to juicier topics, like older OS owners gettin' the finger from ID :light:

 

[Runner20]

Get the Radeon 9800 Pro, its safer to get since you dont know if u have enough power for the nvidia card since they are very power hungry. Im not sure of your power supply however.
But I have a radeon 9800 pro and it sure can play Doom 3 or any other game fine.

 

[rbV5]

You missed the post above - the 6800 will SUCK at Doom iii Unless you think Medium Quality is "fine" for a 300 dollar card. What a waste (for Doom iii)

Looks like you need to look at HardOCP Doom3 buying guide...6800 will definately not such in High Quality, especially on the Northwood Platform.

 

[nRollo]

You have insisted - over and over - that your 6800s is "better" then it "really" is. And now - by your own admission - it will NOT play Doom iii at HiQ; so you have bought your SECOND card in about a month.

i am done wasting time with you

For Doom3 at least, the 6800NU is a bargain.

 

[Oreo]

Originally posted by: Rollo

You have insisted - over and over - that your 6800s is "better" then it "really" is. And now - by your own admission - it will NOT play Doom iii at HiQ; so you have bought your SECOND card in about a month.

i am done wasting time with you

LOL- that's right, you have to get busy getting ready to play crappy 10X7 AA-less Doom3 that is still going to stutter and jerk.

Of course, my 4 year old will have a much better Doom 3 card than you, maybe if you give him some Laffy Taffy, he'll let you come over and play on his computer?

LOL at your incorrect speculations.

Don't even bother with his trolling. He has, shall we say issues, so just let him be till he behaves like a normal person instead of a defensive kid.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

According to the JUST released HardOCP analysis...with an XP 3200+ system the 6800 will playably run

Resolution: 1280x1024
Texture Quality: High Quality

The 9800 Pro

Resolution: 1024x768
Texture Quality: High Quality

That's a significant difference for 17" LCD owners. These numbers are consistent across most test setups.



With a p4 3.0 system

6800
Resolution: 1600x1200
Texture Quality: High Quality

9800 Pro
Resolution: 1024x768
Texture Quality: Medium Quality




Again, to the original poster, I have to say, good decision going with the 6800. If it'll handle D3 like this, then the numerous games sure to borrow it's engine should be no problem. And with nothing more stressing on the horizon, AFAIK, you should be all set for a while.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Anandtech benchmarks for Doom 3 now available. The 6800 shows a 70% to over 100% improvement over the 9800XT with the 9800Pro running about 10% slower than the 9800XT. I think that confirms what the non-ATI fanbois have been saying in this thread. Excellent choice, Beach2nd1. Worth the extra $80 to run the most strenuous game out at high levels? You be the judge.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Anandtech benchmarks for Doom 3 now available. The 6800 shows a 70% to over 100% improvement over the 9800XT with the 9800Pro running about 10% slower than the 9800XT. I think that confirms what the non-ATI fanbois have been saying in this thread. Excellent choice, Beach2nd1. Worth the extra $80 to run the most strenuous game out at high levels? You be the judge.

I have to agree that for Doom3, the 6800NU is worth the upgrade. However, there is evidence that the 6800NU runs as a 32x0 card when doing stencil shadows (which Doom3 uses basically everywhere). In other shader-heavy games -- even other games using the Doom3 engine -- it might not fare as well. I still suggest waiting until prices drop and a more complete performance picture is available -- but if you want a card that's a beast at Doom3 for $300, the 6800NU is it.

 

[Epsil0n00]

Originally posted by: beach2nd1
Wow! I certainly didn't expect to come home from work and find this many replies! A lot of good discussion, but I think I am going to go with a 6800 over the 9800 Pro. The main reason is that I only upgrade every few years and it seems like it will last me longer (plus the fact that the 6800 GT is too rich for my blood). I also plan on playing Doom 3 a lot and the nvidia cards seem to be where its at for that title. It also doesn't hurt that the 6800 comes with Far Cry, so that is $40-$50 I would have ended up spending anyway. Thanks everyone for all the help!

P.S. Please keep arguing, its very good reading.

Beach (or anyone else), Where did you end up purchasing your 6800 from and where did you find it that comes with FarCry? I would like to buy a 6800 also (instead of the 9800Pro) and I want to get FarCry with it.

Thanks!
Epsil0n

 

[awolkoff]

Originally posted by: Megatomic
I plan to go with this until I play a game that my system barfs on at 1024x768x32. Doom3 may do it, we'll see.

Oh, and if my gamble works out I saved myself about $150. If not, well it was fun modifying the 9800 Pro. It's a nice card.

I'd be curious to hear how your plan works out--I am implementing the same plan with a 9800 Pro I just picked up cheap.

ASW

 

[prozpris]

Originally posted by: Epsil0n00

Originally posted by: beach2nd1
Wow! I certainly didn't expect to come home from work and find this many replies! A lot of good discussion, but I think I am going to go with a 6800 over the 9800 Pro. The main reason is that I only upgrade every few years and it seems like it will last me longer (plus the fact that the 6800 GT is too rich for my blood). I also plan on playing Doom 3 a lot and the nvidia cards seem to be where its at for that title. It also doesn't hurt that the 6800 comes with Far Cry, so that is $40-$50 I would have ended up spending anyway. Thanks everyone for all the help!

P.S. Please keep arguing, its very good reading.

Beach (or anyone else), Where did you end up purchasing your 6800 from and where did you find it that comes with FarCry? I would like to buy a 6800 also (instead of the 9800Pro) and I want to get FarCry with it.

Thanks!
Epsil0n

Epsilon,

As long as you get the eVGA 6800, it should come with it. I ordered mine from ZipZoomFly on Wednesday (with free second day) got it on Friday, and it had FarCry inside the eVGA video card box, not the zipzoomfly shipping box.

 

[Epsil0n00]

So as long as I buy THIS 6800 I should be good with some free Far Cry?

Thanks for the info!
Epsil0n

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Epsil0n00
So as long as I buy THIS 6800 I should be good with some free Far Cry?

Thanks for the info!
Epsil0n

Yeah, but I'd rather get in on that buy.com XFX card for like $265 and more games...then buy Far Cry off EBay for $20 and have the same card with more games for the same money.

 

[Epsil0n00]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Epsil0n00
So as long as I buy THIS 6800 I should be good with some free Far Cry?

Thanks for the info!
Epsil0n

Yeah, but I'd rather get in on that buy.com XFX card for like $265 and more games...then buy Far Cry off EBay for $20 and have the same card with more games for the same money.

Do you happen to have a link to this deal?

 

[Epsil0n00]

Hello? Anyone know what this XFX deal for $265 and more games from Buy.com is all about?
Thanks!

EDIT: NM, found what I was lookin for over at ChubbyBillfold

 

[RussianSensation]

Fastest Cards of Summer 2004 - Testing of 35 games
Doom 3 Performance

Now considering future games will support PS3.0, will be more shader intensive and heavier on the graphics card, a 6800 will definately last longer. It all depends how often you upgrade and how intensive the games you like to play are.

If you are looking longterm (like 1-2 years), sure the 6800's price difference is worth it over the 9800Pro. If you can afford it, pick up a 6800GT.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: Mik3y
um, not really. the gt is stronger then the x800 pro and is about 30% faster then the 9800 pro, so i'm assuming that the normaly 6800 is only 15-20% faster then the 9800 pro. note that the 9800 xt is 5-10% faster hten the 9800 pro also. unless you're willing to spend the extra money on that, go for it. if not, get the 9800 pro. anyways, i think anything faster then a 9800 xt will bottleneck on your system thats only 2500mhz.

1. His computer is an Athlon 64 that has a shorter pipeline, ondie memory controller, and other improvements which means you don't need high mhz of p4 to stay competitive. ***He also did mention he is getting an A64 at the same time as this videocard purchase

2. Since X800xt is about 100-125% faster than 9800Pro and x800pro is roughly 75% of the x800xt's speed, and you said yourself 6800GT is faster than x800pro, how can GT be 30% faster than 9800Pro?

Oh yeah, once you enable AA/AF regular 6800 often doubles 9800pro's performance, especially in Doom 3. And you can bet that in Half Life 2 it will SMOKE a 9800Pro. Obviously 6800 is not very close to 6800GTs speeds in higher quality modes, but it is still a notch better in shader intensive games like Halo, Far Cry, etc.

Half Life 2 beta - 1600x1200 with anisotropy

but... thats super idiotic settings. not everyone has 4 bajillion Ghz PCs and 58" monitors.
dont forget, youre CPU tied with the 6800's until AMD 64 3000+/P4 3.2 so it wouldnt matter with a 9800 or 6800 until you hit such high resolutions in most games (unless its doom 3 or far cry). I myself wouldnt consider a X800 or 6800 until I wasn't cpu tied. (I currently use a XP 1800+, planning to go to a 64 3200+) true the 12 pipes and extra memory beef will help with FSAA (especially above 1280x1024) the fact remains though, 9800 pros are still great performers for a) the price and b) the games

Now if only you just had some data to back up your opinion...

A 2.4ghz P4 and X800Pro is actually faster than a 3.2ghz p4 with 9800xt. The cpu limited talk on these forums only applies to 640x480, 800x600 and 1024x768, resolutions most enthusiasts DO NOT play at. Read the benchmarks I posted Here

And if you do not think 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 are resolutions a gamer should play at, what is the point of upgrading period? I am sure GF2 can play 99% of games at 640x480

Besides are you being contradictory, because the original poster has A64 3200+ and overclocked, so I doubt he will be that much cpu limited (not to mention that with the top end videocards, any cpu will not be fast enough)

EDIT: It seems he has already made his choice, and I am sure it was much easier if he planned to buy Far Cry.