Lets end it! 7900GTX or X1900XTX - Which is better?

[lein]

I personally like the x1900xt(x) over the 7900GTX in terms of functionality. However, nvidia does have a few nice perks going for it. More nvidia partners have lifetime warranty (I like that powercolor is now offering lifetime warranty) and evga has been really good to me. Also, I have noticed that nvidia cards tend to have better resale value than the ATI cards, so this could be important for those, such as myself, who pretty much upgrade their graphics cards so often. Basically, its because nvidia has better partners than ATI IMHO, that I owned a 7800GT.

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Until ATI drops thier bloat, .net, gives game profiles, Digital vibrance etc I consider them second rate.

Though I wouldn't say they are second rate, I do agree on all those counts EXCEPT .NET. I use .NET anyways (Paint.NET). But the CCC is dog slow even with .NET 2 which was supposed to accelerate .NET apps.

 

[BFG10K]

Who the cares how many they release?

Someone who is waiting for bug fixes.

Until ATI drops thier bloat, .net,

CCC/.NET certainly suck donkey balls but they're also optional. Just use the base ATi driver and any of the nice tweakers around like ATi Tray Tools.

gives game profiles,

CCC and the likes of ATi Tray Tools support game profiles.

 

[Thor86]

Happy with my XFX 7900GTX running at 700/880 on air, completely stable.

 

[nib95]

I'd personally give the X1900 XTX the win.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Who the cares how many they release? So instead of one piece or crap every six months I get a piece every month and burried in crap? Another way of looking at it is regualr fixes to thier bug master deluxe software.

Until ATI drops thier bloat, .net, gives game profiles, Digital vibrance etc I consider them second rate.

i believe its nv that had the crappy digitasl vibrance. i find no problems with the ati ccc except the minor slow load time for it to open up but thats the difference of what, 2 seconds? i can't imagine any better picture quality than from ati's 1900 series

 

[Wreckage]

GTX:
Less heat
Less noise
Less power draw
Better drivers
Better OpenGL support
Better Linux support
Better dual card solution
Better HSF
Better AA
More selection from vendors
Better warranties available
Purevideo with better H.264 support

 

[imported_Crusader]

Originally posted by: Soviet
I dont know, im biased towards ATI, and ive seen many threads where others dont know and more people come in and simply claim the card they own is better.

If you take into account *everything* noise, power consumption, performance, cost, warrenty, hell even how the thing looks. Which is better?

Easy win for the 7900s in basically all those categories. Has SLI as an option on many more motherboards than the Xfire can run on, and the hands down choice for a SFF PC due to power consumption/size/noise.
Not to mention, superior for those 3 reasons for a standard sized PC if you care about quality engineering and an overall good product that isnt JUST speed.

Problem with ATI is that they arent fast enough to be as loud, hot, noisey as they are.


Its damn near impossible to beat a Evga 7900GT or 7900GTX. Takes the crown easily.
Step-Up + Lifetime Warranty.

 

[JBT]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: BFG10K
For driver quality I'd definitely be voting ATi as superior. Monthly WHQL driver updates, rock solid drivers and any problems tend to be fixed very quickly.

nVidia seem to release drivers whenever they feel like it, beta drivers are generally useless and issues can remain for months or years without being fixed.

Who the cares how many they release? So instead of one piece or crap every six months I get a piece every month and burried in crap? Another way of looking at it is regualr fixes to thier bug master deluxe software.

Until ATI drops thier bloat, .net, gives game profiles, Digital vibrance etc I consider them second rate.

Acutally with the new X1000 series there is a form of Digital Vibrace I forget the name of it though. I will let you know later tonight when I get my X1900XT installed.

 

[nib95]

Originally posted by: Crusader

Originally posted by: Soviet
I dont know, im biased towards ATI, and ive seen many threads where others dont know and more people come in and simply claim the card they own is better.

If you take into account *everything* noise, power consumption, performance, cost, warrenty, hell even how the thing looks. Which is better?

Easy win for the 7900s in basically all those categories. Has SLI as an option on many more motherboards than the Xfire can run on, and the hands down choice for a SFF PC due to power consumption/size/noise.
Not to mention, superior for those 3 reasons for a standard sized PC if you care about quality engineering and an overall good product that isnt JUST speed.

Problem with ATI is that they arent fast enough to be as loud, hot, noisey as they are.


Its damn near impossible to beat a Evga 7900GT or 7900GTX. Takes the crown easily.
Step-Up + Lifetime Warranty.

Has everyone forgot that a GPU's performance and graphical abilities are the most important things? I own SLI 7900 GT and an X1900 XTX, and I wouldnt say the XTX was too loud, though I would say it gets too hot. But thats more of a mental worry.

The X1900 XTX is still the best single GPU solution out there, its fatser, has better IQ, is cheaper (in the UK) and more readily available. Is not very much louder then other solutions, and not a huge amount hotter either.
I feel these temp and noise arguments are a bit of a farce.
A GPU's abilities as a performer is what really counts. Not physical and cosmetic attributes that dont really affect gameplay.

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: nib95
I feel these temp and noise arguments are a bit of a farce.
A GPU's abilities as a performer is what really counts. Not physical and cosmetic attributes that dont really affect gameplay.

Try running one of those in a gaming HTPC. Would your wife really appreciate the noise one of those cards would put out in her entertainment center? I can tell you that mine sure as hell wouldn't.

My point is that noise and heat are a consideration for many people. Not everyone is oblivious to noise and heat just because you may be.

 

[imported_Crusader]

Originally posted by: nib95

Originally posted by: Crusader

Originally posted by: Soviet
I dont know, im biased towards ATI, and ive seen many threads where others dont know and more people come in and simply claim the card they own is better.

If you take into account *everything* noise, power consumption, performance, cost, warrenty, hell even how the thing looks. Which is better?

Easy win for the 7900s in basically all those categories. Has SLI as an option on many more motherboards than the Xfire can run on, and the hands down choice for a SFF PC due to power consumption/size/noise.
Not to mention, superior for those 3 reasons for a standard sized PC if you care about quality engineering and an overall good product that isnt JUST speed.

Problem with ATI is that they arent fast enough to be as loud, hot, noisey as they are.


Its damn near impossible to beat a Evga 7900GT or 7900GTX. Takes the crown easily.
Step-Up + Lifetime Warranty.

Has everyone forgot that a GPU's performance and graphical abilities are the most important things? I own SLI 7900 GT and an X1900 XTX, and I wouldnt say the XTX was too loud, though I would say it gets too hot. But thats more of a mental worry.

The X1900 XTX is still the best single GPU solution out there, its fatser, has better IQ, is cheaper (in the UK) and more readily available. Is not very much louder then other solutions, and not a huge amount hotter either.
I feel these temp and noise arguments are a bit of a farce.
A GPU's abilities as a performer is what really counts. Not physical and cosmetic attributes that dont really affect gameplay.

Ok so give up:
Less heat
Less noise
Less power draw
Better drivers
Better OpenGL support
Better Linux support
Better dual card solution
Better HSF
Better AA
More selection from vendors
Better warranties available
Purevideo with better H.264 support
StepUp+Lifetime Warranty

... just for a hot, noisey, dual slot card that eats more juice just to get a few more FPS? But doesnt have SLI or Quad SLI support? If you REALLY want to go fast.. thats what you need.
Not to mention the bloated CCC and less efficient drivers.

You also forgot to mention Nvidias superior multimonitor support.
Dual monitor support is much better than ATI due to no surroundgaming (vertical and horizontal span support), like Matrox and NV support.
Other than that they have much better overall dual monitor support link
As well, only NV has stereo 3D support.

 

[SolMiester]

Stereo 3D ?, whats that please?

 

[fire400]

Originally posted by: Soviet

Originally posted by: CKXP
looks wise, 7900GTX hands down
i'll keep the rest to myself...i see another flame war coming

I like the girl on ATI cards, shes curvier Im hoping people wont just vouch for the card they own or the company they like best because of its pretty logo or whatever, the best card needs to be found! Or at least a decent pros/cons list.

it's over. the thread is over.

the mascot for ATI is hotter in my opinion.. with the dual blades she's holdin', you can't go wrong with that, either.

both cards will give you the ripping edge of fast bleeding frame rates. but which one sounds cooler, nVidia or ATI? Geforce or Radeon?

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: Crusader

Ok so give up:
Less heat
Less noise
Less power draw
Better drivers
Better OpenGL support
Better Linux support
Better dual card solution
Better HSF
Better AA
More selection from vendors
Better warranties available
Purevideo with better H.264 support
StepUp+Lifetime Warranty

... just for a hot, noisey, dual slot card that eats more juice just to get a few more FPS? But doesnt have SLI or Quad SLI support? If you REALLY want to go fast.. thats what you need.
Not to mention the bloated CCC and less efficient drivers.

You also forgot to mention Nvidias superior multimonitor support.
Dual monitor support is much better than ATI due to no surroundgaming (vertical and horizontal span support), like Matrox and NV support.
Other than that they have much better overall dual monitor support link
As well, only NV has stereo 3D support.

Lol. Sometimes I just need a good laugh and your post did it for me.

Seriously though. First you quote Wreckage's post as fact because we all know how unbiased he is. Than you proceed to try and sound unbiased yourself with the sig that you have. It's like the guy with the Notre Dame shirt and green-painted face trying to explain why the Fighting Irish have the best team. Do you really think he's going to be objective on the subject? :roll:

 

[SolMiester]

Everyones allowed an opinion Elfear, the thread is a vote of preference, hes listing it.


As a side note, I favour Nnv cards over ati and thats my preference.

Its all good

Edit, I dont think the best card is always about just speed or IQ.

 

[CP5670]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: BFG10K
For driver quality I'd definitely be voting ATi as superior. Monthly WHQL driver updates, rock solid drivers and any problems tend to be fixed very quickly.

nVidia seem to release drivers whenever they feel like it, beta drivers are generally useless and issues can remain for months or years without being fixed.

Who the cares how many they release? So instead of one piece or crap every six months I get a piece every month and burried in crap? Another way of looking at it is regualr fixes to thier bug master deluxe software.

Until ATI drops thier bloat, .net, gives game profiles, Digital vibrance etc I consider them second rate.

Yeah, this is why I'm rather hesitant to get an X1900 card. This shimmering on the 7800 cards is quite annoying (I have to just live with HQ mode's performance hit) and SLI's vsync problems make it unusable in old games, but I really don't like the prospect of the memory hogging drivers I keep hearing about.

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: SolMiester
Everyones allowed an opinion Elfear, the thread is a vote of preference, hes listing it.


As a side note, I favour Nnv cards over ati and thats my preference.

Its all good

I agree with you and I'm sorry if I came off like I don't think people are allowed to voice their opinions. I tend to believe that while most of us lean slightly one way or another we can also fairly objectively talk about things as they really stand. It's not so annoying when someone's opinion differs vastly from the review sites and most users experience. We have all been ignorant about something before that required some education to get us heading in the right direction. What's annoying is the arrogant attitude that accompanies the ignorance.

Originally posted by: CP5670

Yeah, this is why I'm rather hesitant to get an X1900 card. This shimmering on the 7800 cards is quite annoying (I have to just live with HQ mode's performance hit) and SLI's vsync problems make it unusable in old games, but I really don't like the prospect of the memory hogging drivers I keep hearing about.

Try ATI Tray Tools. It really works as well or better than CCC and uses very little memory.

 

[imported_Crusader]

Originally posted by: SolMiester
Stereo 3D ?, whats that please?

Link

 

[moonboy403]

another thread of ati vs nv

*yawn*

 

[letdown427]

Originally posted by: darXoul
Performance: pretty much equal. Availability now: X1900. Features (HDR+AA): X1900. Noise: 7900. Power & heat: 7900. Driver maturity and quality (IMO): 7900. Image quality (AF): slightly X1900. Price: roughly equal in my country. Dual card solution (SLI vs. CF): 7900.

I'd agree with that mainly. My gtx just arrived at home, but hey, it's 9am here so i'm at work. DAMN. lol.

And yeah, I think the 7900 looks better ATI reference cooler is loud n ugly, and accelero is fugly IMO.

I went for the 7900 because the performance is in all fairness pretty equal, and the 7900 will be cooler and quieter. And it was £345 delivered, which is about what I was finding x1900xtx's for, if not slightly less.

Just my opinion.

From a strictly fps POV, x1900xtx is best. (although for some reason, it always seems that the 7900 does better than x1900xtx at 1280x1024? meh)

 

[DeathReborn]

Originally posted by: munky
Here's how I see the winner in each category:

Availability: xtx
Performance: xtx
Features, IQ: xtx
Noise: gtx
Linux support: gtx
Power consumption: you spend $500+ on a card and you're worried about power consumption?
Drivers: tie, if you're smart enough not to install CCC and use ATT instead. Otherwise, gtx

There should be a poll in this thread...

That pretty much sums it up really. I'd like a X1900 but I use Linux a bit too much, even though for me a X1900 would be overkill for Linux, it's just more hassle to me.

Even though the OP doesn't mention SLI/CF my vote there would have to go with SLI, just.

 

[SolMiester]

Originally posted by: Crusader

Originally posted by: SolMiester
Stereo 3D ?, whats that please?

Link

Now thats a gimmick!....LOL

 

[Jazzatola]

The noise and heat benefits of the new NVida card win it for me. I'm running an old 9800 Pro right now but I've decided my next card is going to be a 7900 GTX. Or maybe two.

 

[RichUK]

Originally posted by: letdown427

Originally posted by: darXoul
Performance: pretty much equal. Availability now: X1900. Features (HDR+AA): X1900. Noise: 7900. Power & heat: 7900. Driver maturity and quality (IMO): 7900. Image quality (AF): slightly X1900. Price: roughly equal in my country. Dual card solution (SLI vs. CF): 7900.

I'd agree with that mainly. My gtx just arrived at home, but hey, it's 9am here so i'm at work. DAMN. lol.

And yeah, I think the 7900 looks better ATI reference cooler is loud n ugly, and accelero is fugly IMO.

I went for the 7900 because the performance is in all fairness pretty equal, and the 7900 will be cooler and quieter. And it was £345 delivered, which is about what I was finding x1900xtx's for, if not slightly less.

Just my opinion.

From a strictly fps POV, x1900xtx is best. (although for some reason, it always seems that the 7900 does better than x1900xtx at 1280x1024? meh)

Is that right?

I am asking because i am looking to replace my card for a new PCI-e card with my soon to be acquired motherboard, and this thread is quite useful reading for me. Anyway ... I am stumped at a max native res of 1280x1024 with my 19 inch TFT, so if this statement is true i would be more partial to an nVidia 7900 series card.