INQ reviews overclocked eVGA 7900 GTX vs Stock X1900 XTX

[5150Joker]

Their conclusion:

My only issue is that ATI Radeon X1900 XTX is getting to close and wins in at least half of the cases. I have to say that R580, Radeon X1900 XTX can support HDR rendering with FSAA while Nvidia's G70 and G71 cards can not. ATI has an advantage with its video features so it is really close call.

EVGA card win definitely run quieter as Nvidia has superior heath pipe cooler. ATI wins with FSAA and Aniso on and trust me it will be silly to own this card and not to use FSAA and Aniso at high resolutions. If you have ?650 or $ card you should at least afford a ?400 20.1 inch TFT display that can run 1600x1200 or 1680x1080 resolutions and turn the all effects on.

If you prefer Nvidia you go ahead and buy EVGA Geforce 7900 GTX CO Superclocked, 512MB but it will cost you some ?700 in the Euroland. The only issue is that the cheapest available Radeon X1900 XTX costs ?487. This is a huge difference but the answer is always yours. µ

So:
For ATi using a stocked clocked card:

-Beats or ties the overclocked 7900 GTX with AA/AF turned on in most of the tests.
-Costs ?213 less than the 7900 GTX.
-Supports HDR+AA in games like Oblivion.
-Has HQ AF (angle independent)

For nVidia:

-Slightly faster OGL performance in Quake 4.
-Runs quieter and cooler.

A prospective customer could simply buy an X1900 XTX and stick an aftermarket cooler on it and still come out a lot cheaper than that overclocked 7900 GTX.


Source: http://theinquirer.net/?article=30856

 

[tuteja1986]

err ... this thread is about bombed , shelled , flamed

Also WW2 style : )

King Tiger = X1900XTX Crossfire vs T-35 7900GTX SLI
Tiger = X1900XTX vs T-34 7900GTX

 

[nib95]

I'm confused.

I just looked at the article, looks to me like the only game ATI won in benchmarking terms was Battlefield 2.
Also, it's a well known fact that ATI does better AF then Nvidia, and can do in most games AA+HDR and Nvidia cant.

But, ATI's best AA is not better then Nvidias best AA. So I wonder how they came to that conclusion about the FSAA?

Interesting article none-the-less.

On another side note, I'm shocked to see that the 7900 GTX is actually besting the X1900 XTX at FEAR. A shader heavy game, which in the past ATI has always beaten Nvidia at by some margin.
Nvidia is winning here not just by 1 or 2 fps either, but in some cases 5-10+.
Though with FSAA and Anisotropic filtering this lead lessens.

 

[5150Joker]

nib you're looking at pure speed. Look at the FSAA/AF benchmarks, like INQ pointed out, these cards are meant for AA/AF use. Also keep in mind this is an OC'd GTX, not a stock one.

 

[Madellga]

The INQ writer smoke ******.

You cannot go cherry picking: cheapest on one side against most expensive on the other. Pick both cheapest

I live in Euroland and the difference is more like 80 Euros (GTX x XT) if you don't shop around.

If you do, you can find this:

Cheapest X1900XT (Powercolor) = 444
Cheapest X1900XTX (Club3D) = 499

Cheapest 7900GTX (Gigabyte) = 499

You have 55 bucks difference for a cooler (based a XT). ZERO for a XTX.

BTW, most people buy the XT or GTX and o/c.

I bought a Vanilla XFX and it does 715/1800 out of the box, using just coolbits. Didn't try higher, that's enough for me.

EDITED: Prices are based on EUROS

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: Madellga
The INQ writer smoke ******.

I live in Euroland and the difference is more like 80 Euros if you don't shop around.

If you do, you can find this:

Cheapest X1900XT (Powercolor) = 444
Cheapest X1900XTX (Club3D) = 499

Cheapest 7900GTX (Gigabyte) = 499

You have 55 bucks difference for a cooler (based a XT). ZERO for a XTX.

BTW, most people buy the XT or GTX and o/c.

I bought a Vanilla XFX and it does 715/1800 out of the box, using just coolbits. Didn't try higher, that's enough for me.

EDITED: Prices are based on EUROS

INQ is comparing a factory overclocked model to a stock card because according to their results, that's what it takes to match a stock XTX. Pointing out the fact that you can buy a stock GTX and OC it is irrelevant because the same can be done with an XT/XTX except much easier since it has software voltage control support.

 

[Madellga]

Add also to your calculation a more expensive PSU.

Quoted from XBits:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/geforce7900gtx_28.html

"So, we can?t say the GeForce 7900 GTX is a clear winner today, but it has done at least no worse than the Radeon X1900 XTX in 14 out of 18 tests. And it has the advantage of lower price: $499 against $549."

"Talking about the GeForce 7900 GTX it is impossible to omit its very low power consumption (for a top-end graphics card), which is about 85 watts under load. A SLI configuration with two such cards is going to consume 170W as opposed to 240W consumed by a Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire system. Particularly it means that a lower-wattage and less expensive power supply will be required for a computer with a GeForce 7900 GTX SLI graphics subsystem than for a Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire."

 

[Madellga]

One more thing, XBits is European based....

 

[otispunkmeyer]

weeeee..... keep up the good work joker

you should really think about contacting ATi, if i were you id be wanting some kind of payment for the wonderful ad work your doing


dont get me wrong, the x1900 is the A) the fastest card you can buy B) has the richest feature set but C) i couldnt care less.

both are capable of playing any game, both cost a pretty penny and pretty much everyone knows this. we dont need another blatantly biased post attempting to prove the already proven.

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: Madellga
Add also to your calculation a more expensive PSU.

Quoted from XBits:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/geforce7900gtx_28.html

"So, we can?t say the GeForce 7900 GTX is a clear winner today, but it has done at least no worse than the Radeon X1900 XTX in 14 out of 18 tests. And it has the advantage of lower price: $499 against $549."

"Talking about the GeForce 7900 GTX it is impossible to omit its very low power consumption (for a top-end graphics card), which is about 85 watts under load. A SLI configuration with two such cards is going to consume 170W as opposed to 240W consumed by a Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire system. Particularly it means that a lower-wattage and less expensive power supply will be required for a computer with a GeForce 7900 GTX SLI graphics subsystem than for a Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire."

The fact that they think the GTX is cheaper than a XT/X is just pathetic............

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: Madellga
The INQ writer smoke ******.

I live in Euroland and the difference is more like 80 Euros if you don't shop around.

If you do, you can find this:

Cheapest X1900XT (Powercolor) = 444
Cheapest X1900XTX (Club3D) = 499

Cheapest 7900GTX (Gigabyte) = 499

You have 55 bucks difference for a cooler (based a XT). ZERO for a XTX.

BTW, most people buy the XT or GTX and o/c.

I bought a Vanilla XFX and it does 715/1800 out of the box, using just coolbits. Didn't try higher, that's enough for me.

EDITED: Prices are based on EUROS

INQ is comparing a factory overclocked model to a stock card because according to their results, that's what it takes to match a stock XTX. Pointing out the fact that you can buy a stock GTX and OC it is irrelevant because the same can be done with an XT/XTX except much easier since it has software voltage control support.

well the x1900 is already a pretty toasty card, if i was stuck with air cooling, i would at least want a VF900 on there before upping voltages, since i reckon the stock cooler just couldnt handle the heat. and if you wanna overclock it makes sense to buy the xtx.....they have much more leg room than the XT's....worth the extra £££ IMO

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: Madellga
Add also to your calculation a more expensive PSU.

Quoted from XBits:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/geforce7900gtx_28.html

"So, we can?t say the GeForce 7900 GTX is a clear winner today, but it has done at least no worse than the Radeon X1900 XTX in 14 out of 18 tests. And it has the advantage of lower price: $499 against $549."

"Talking about the GeForce 7900 GTX it is impossible to omit its very low power consumption (for a top-end graphics card), which is about 85 watts under load. A SLI configuration with two such cards is going to consume 170W as opposed to 240W consumed by a Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire system. Particularly it means that a lower-wattage and less expensive power supply will be required for a computer with a GeForce 7900 GTX SLI graphics subsystem than for a Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire."

The fact that they think the GTX is cheaper than a XT/X is just pathetic............

yeah, here in the UK X1900XTX can be had for around £370 (this is at overclockers.co.uk) the 7900GTX can be had for anywhere between £380 and £440 depending on "trim" if you like. alot of the factory overclocked models are the ones that are over 400. (again from overclockers.co.uk)

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/acatalog/X1900_Series.html

scroll to the bottom.....thats the most expensive X1900.....but for nearly an extra £100 it comes with its own liquid cooling system!..looks well mad

 

[yacoub]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
For nVidia:

-Runs quieter and cooler.

SOLD!

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: Madellga
Add also to your calculation a more expensive PSU.

Quoted from XBits:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/geforce7900gtx_28.html

"So, we can?t say the GeForce 7900 GTX is a clear winner today, but it has done at least no worse than the Radeon X1900 XTX in 14 out of 18 tests. And it has the advantage of lower price: $499 against $549."

Too bad you can't really find a 7900 GTX cheaper than the cheapest X1900 XTX. Not to mention it takes an overclocked GTX just to match the XTX: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1945660,00.asp

"Talking about the GeForce 7900 GTX it is impossible to omit its very low power consumption (for a top-end graphics card), which is about 85 watts under load. A SLI configuration with two such cards is going to consume 170W as opposed to 240W consumed by a Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire system. Particularly it means that a lower-wattage and less expensive power supply will be required for a computer with a GeForce 7900 GTX SLI graphics subsystem than for a Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire."

That's about all the 7900 has going for it, lower power usage and a better fan. Most enthusiasts already have a decent PSU and if they don't, they should so that's pretty irrelevant.

 

[Extelleron]

Originally posted by: yacoub

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
For nVidia:

-Runs quieter and cooler.

SOLD!

If running quiet/cool is the only thing you care about then........... wow.

Anyway, price comparison, cheapest XT/X I can find vs. cheapest GTX:

HIS X1900XT $428 AR
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814161168

eVGA 7900GTX 650/1600 $539
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814130279

X1900XT is slightly faster overall, has better features such as HDR+AA/HQAF, AND is $111 cheaper than the cheapest GTX I can find.

 

[TraumaRN]

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
weeeee..... keep up the good work joker

you should really think about contacting ATi, if i were you id be wanting some kind of payment for the wonderful ad work your doing


dont get me wrong, the x1900 is the A) the fastest card you can buy B) has the richest feature set but C) i couldnt care less.

both are capable of playing any game, both cost a pretty penny and pretty much everyone knows this. we dont need another blatantly biased post attempting to prove the already proven.

And consider who posted the review by the Inq...I mean why does this matter SO much to you Joker? Seriously, honest question.

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
weeeee..... keep up the good work joker

you should really think about contacting ATi, if i were you id be wanting some kind of payment for the wonderful ad work your doing


dont get me wrong, the x1900 is the A) the fastest card you can buy B) has the richest feature set but C) i couldnt care less.

both are capable of playing any game, both cost a pretty penny and pretty much everyone knows this. we dont need another blatantly biased post attempting to prove the already proven.

And consider who posted the review by the Inq...I mean why does this matter SO much to you Joker? Seriously, honest question.

What's funny is the hypocrisy of some of you guys. Did you point out the same thing when CookieMonster made this thread: http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1837711&enterthread=y

Or how about Wreckage's blatant trolling: http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1831703&enterthread=y
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1828522&enterthread=y


Of course you don't because it's only "advertising" and a bad thing when positive ATi news is posted. Your motives are far too transparent.

 

[TraumaRN]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
weeeee..... keep up the good work joker

you should really think about contacting ATi, if i were you id be wanting some kind of payment for the wonderful ad work your doing


dont get me wrong, the x1900 is the A) the fastest card you can buy B) has the richest feature set but C) i couldnt care less.

both are capable of playing any game, both cost a pretty penny and pretty much everyone knows this. we dont need another blatantly biased post attempting to prove the already proven.

And consider who posted the review by the Inq...I mean why does this matter SO much to you Joker? Seriously, honest question.

What's funny is the hypocrisy of some of you guys. Did you point out the same thing when CookieMonster made this thread: http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1837711&enterthread=y

Or how about Wreckage's blatant trolling: http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1831703&enterthread=y
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1828522&enterthread=y


Of course you don't because it's only "advertising" and a bad thing when positive ATi news is posted. Your motives are far too transparent.

Actually it's just luck of the draw when I post on AT considering I work roughly 48 hours a week and still take 5 classes at university too, please dont assume my motives either, yea I have an Nvidia card bought in late August of 2005 when there was no other decent/equal offering from ATI but that doesnt instantly make me a fanboy. I am not saying you are any better or worse than Cookie or Wreckage, I think you are all on roughly the same level. So if you want me to be fair? Ok I can deal with that.

Wreckage, CookieMonster and 5150Joker why is this(ati vs nvidia) all SO important to you? And please answer the question in a form that doesnt flame me.

 

[Madellga]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: yacoub

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
For nVidia:

-Runs quieter and cooler.

SOLD!

If running quiet/cool is the only thing you care about then........... wow.

Anyway, price comparison, cheapest XT/X I can find vs. cheapest GTX:

HIS X1900XT $428 AR
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814161168

eVGA 7900GTX 650/1600 $539
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814130279

X1900XT is slightly faster overall, has better features such as HDR+AA/HQAF, AND is $111 cheaper than the cheapest GTX I can find.

The thread was about an article quoting prices in Euros = Europe. USA prices (Newgg) do not apply here.

 

[the Chase]

But I think a lot of AT members (myself included) live in the USA....

Edit-Holy cow has Nvidia done a good job with Fear performance. Both these cards are so close. I think the 1900 so more OC'ing room left but cooling comes into play. Best to leave the stock HS/F on and crank the fan if overvolting. Or use watercooling. Price would be the determining factor for me on the choice.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
weeeee..... keep up the good work joker

you should really think about contacting ATi, if i were you id be wanting some kind of payment for the wonderful ad work your doing


dont get me wrong, the x1900 is the A) the fastest card you can buy B) has the richest feature set but C) i couldnt care less.

both are capable of playing any game, both cost a pretty penny and pretty much everyone knows this. we dont need another blatantly biased post attempting to prove the already proven.

And consider who posted the review by the Inq...I mean why does this matter SO much to you Joker? Seriously, honest question.

What's funny is the hypocrisy of some of you guys. Did you point out the same thing when CookieMonster made this thread: http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1837711&enterthread=y

Or how about Wreckage's blatant trolling: http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1831703&enterthread=y
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=31&threadid=1828522&enterthread=y


Of course you don't because it's only "advertising" and a bad thing when positive ATi news is posted. Your motives are far too transparent.

lets see, you were doing the same thing in that thread highlighting numbers an all.....and i picked you up on it

the other two threads i didnt even bother going in due to the nature of the titles...i knew they were flamebait threads so stayed out

you how ever jus titled yours as a review of the 2 cards....so i checked out and found yet again your posts with certain key points highlighted....its like reading those magazines full of adverts

i mean honestly your post wouldnt of bothered me at all if you just quoted bits of the review, but you took the time to go through and highlight all the ATi friendly bits and make one sided pro/con list. i mean come on man it looks like your peddaling the ATi PR bike, tone it down

 

[Wreckage]

Well with the 7900 cards outselling the 1900's by 4 to 1, your attempts at advertising for ATI are failing Joker. :roll:


EDIT: Joker also posted this at Rage3D and they are slamming him for it there as well :laugh:
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33851695

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Wreckage
Well with the 7900 cards outselling the 1900's by 4 to 1, your attempts at advertising for ATI are failing Joker. :roll:

and the XTX is, of course, nothing more than a binned XT gpu that's "overclocked" from the factory.

and while i certainly disdain joker's highly biased interpretation of several recent articles/reviews, the impartial reality is that while the 7900's have been selling well, it's created a rather "spotty" availability situation. that coupled with ati having to drop their prices in order to compete have made for some damn good value cards from ati (well, not necessarily from ati, rather the good deals have been from their partners).

the 7900's are great cards, but if the whole power/heat thing is not a huge deal to someone, ati is generally as fast/faster, has more features (aa+hdr in oblivion is really cool, and in many cases HQAF offers noticeable image quality improvement), and due to current street prices is a better value. in fact, due to the tight supply of nv cards and high street prices, the ati is generally a "significantly" better value right now.

 

[shabby]

I didnt know ati had an aeg program...

 

[darXoul]

lol... So predictable. I didn't even have to open this thread seeing the poster's nick.

Anyway, like it has been said 10000000000000000 times, ATi has its advantages (slightly to significantly better performance in eye candy modes in shader heavy games, better AF, slightly lower prices, AA+HDR) but nVidia also has some clear strengths (power, noise, OpenGL performance, better multi GPU solution).

As for AA+HDR in Oblivion, someone please post some numbers in single card and CF mode. I'm wondering whether the game maintains really smooth frame rates in high resolutions and with AA/HDR activated. I doubt it but prove me wrong.