-
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.
Newegg has X1800XT back in stock for $579
- Thread starter crazydingo
- Start date
CalamitySymphony
Banned
I'd go for it if its GTX256 prices
Zenoth
Diamond Member
I'd be surprised, but it might happen one day (price going down).
But, technically, the X1800 XT is better than any 256 MB versions of the GTX, in most situations and settings, especially in Direct 3D, which the majority of games are rendered with.
And ... usually you pay more when it's better.
But, technically, the X1800 XT is better than any 256 MB versions of the GTX, in most situations and settings, especially in Direct 3D, which the majority of games are rendered with.
And ... usually you pay more when it's better.
Matthias99
Diamond Member
Yes (well, almost). The HardOCP review had it against a 460/1300 GTX. The X1800XT was even or slightly ahead in their estimation. link
Digit-Life's latest 3Digest includes both stock and OCed 7800GTX 256MB cards (and a 7800GTX SLI). They're from September, though, so the drivers are a few months behind. Again, the cards are pretty close; it does get butchered in Chronicles Of Riddick, though.
There's a review on xbitlabs using the asus extreme gtx at 490
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/asus-en7800gtx.html
They both win some and lose some, but I think that was before the 5.11 drivers gave the x1800 a nice boost in performance.
Zenoth
Diamond Member
I based my saying mostly on XBit Labs' review on ASUS Extreme N7800 GTX TOP, versus stock speeds X1800 XT.
The Extreme N7800 is over-clocked at 486/1350.
In Battlefield 2 at 1600 x 1200, with 4 x FSAA and 16 x Aniso:
ASUS Top - 72.8
X1800 XT - 85.7
In Far Cry -Research-, at 1600 x 1200 with 4 x FSAA and 16 x Aniso:
ASUS Top - 78.1
X1800 XT - 83.1
In F.E.A.R. Multiplayer Beta, at 1024 x 768, with 4 x FSAA and 16 x Aniso:
ASUS Top - 33 (max)
X1800 XT - 41 (max)
Etc.
No, of course, the X1800 XT isn't faster everywhere, in every game.
Is it a perfect card ? Hell no, far from that. Is any of the GeForce 7 series GPU perfect ? Nope.
Does nVidia offers perform better in OpenGL ? Sure thing, as usual.
Are the best known games rendered in OpenGL ? So far, no. Doom III ? Please ...
Am I saying that because it is more expensive that it's worth to buy a X1800 XT anyway, just because it's just a little faster in most situations ? Hell no.
What I'm saying is that, technically speaking, the X1800 XT is a faster solution. Not everywhere ... yes, I know. Not everytime, yes, I know. But the fact that it performs better just by 1 frames-per-second means it is, technically, faster.
And to be honest, to see that the GTX 256 MB version needs to be over-clocked to perform as well or just a little more than the X1800 XT shouldn't be taken into consideration.
Because no web-sites so far reviewed extensively a X1800 XT over-clocked at 690+ / 1600+ ...
P.S/ Here's the article in question from XBit Labs: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/asus-en7800gtx.html
And I am sorry to turn this into a potential debate. It wasn't my intention. I thought most people, including the most-informed Rollo would know all this by now
The Extreme N7800 is over-clocked at 486/1350.
In Battlefield 2 at 1600 x 1200, with 4 x FSAA and 16 x Aniso:
ASUS Top - 72.8
X1800 XT - 85.7
In Far Cry -Research-, at 1600 x 1200 with 4 x FSAA and 16 x Aniso:
ASUS Top - 78.1
X1800 XT - 83.1
In F.E.A.R. Multiplayer Beta, at 1024 x 768, with 4 x FSAA and 16 x Aniso:
ASUS Top - 33 (max)
X1800 XT - 41 (max)
Etc.
No, of course, the X1800 XT isn't faster everywhere, in every game.
Is it a perfect card ? Hell no, far from that. Is any of the GeForce 7 series GPU perfect ? Nope.
Does nVidia offers perform better in OpenGL ? Sure thing, as usual.
Are the best known games rendered in OpenGL ? So far, no. Doom III ? Please ...
Am I saying that because it is more expensive that it's worth to buy a X1800 XT anyway, just because it's just a little faster in most situations ? Hell no.
What I'm saying is that, technically speaking, the X1800 XT is a faster solution. Not everywhere ... yes, I know. Not everytime, yes, I know. But the fact that it performs better just by 1 frames-per-second means it is, technically, faster.
And to be honest, to see that the GTX 256 MB version needs to be over-clocked to perform as well or just a little more than the X1800 XT shouldn't be taken into consideration.
Because no web-sites so far reviewed extensively a X1800 XT over-clocked at 690+ / 1600+ ...
P.S/ Here's the article in question from XBit Labs: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/asus-en7800gtx.html
And I am sorry to turn this into a potential debate. It wasn't my intention. I thought most people, including the most-informed Rollo would know all this by now
Powermoloch
Lifer
Lol was the 7800GTX was priced very high when it was released? I'm not sure why ppl is moaning when X1800XT is priced @ 579?
1Dark1Sharigan1
Golden Member
Well partly because it didn't come out on the official release day, like the 7800GTX did, but rather a month later . . .
From the look of things, the 256MB version will probably be around $500 when they come out . . . which would make it "only" $50 more than a GTX . . .
crazydingo
Golden Member
40 Connect3D X1800XTs in stock at the egg
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814142054
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814142054
Right.. because the Inq is always right? The X1800XL is well below MSRP, at about $360 right now. In fact, I think ATi did drop the XL's MSRP, because CompUSA, Bestbuy and CircuitCity all have it for $399.99... I really, really doubt NV or ATi care that their cards are sold at lower than MSRP prices. If anything, they should care when screwegg and others raise the price $100+ over MSRP.
deadseasquirrel
Golden Member
While I agree, on average, it performs better than the 256GTX, I don't think the performance increase is worth another $120. Plus, the fact that you can buy FS/FT GTXs at or below $400 now, makes it even more difficult to compare. I realize that ATI was late getting them out the door, but if you're going to be comparing your top end card to a competitor's card that was out almost 5 months prior, you're fighting a losing battle unless you can get those prices down near the same level FAST (while still giving yourself a premium for the better performance).
These days I think we're far more concerned with actual game FEAR demos (which shows the cards more even) than BETA Zenoth.
As far as Doom3 goes, we're more concerned with Quake4, which rocks, and Quake Wars, Prey, and RTCW2? (so no "puh-leeze" OpenGL is alive and well)
I'm actually playing Quake 4 (single and multi) more than anything, by far. And I have SSII and FEAR as well.
As far as Doom3 goes, we're more concerned with Quake4, which rocks, and Quake Wars, Prey, and RTCW2? (so no "puh-leeze" OpenGL is alive and well)
I'm actually playing Quake 4 (single and multi) more than anything, by far. And I have SSII and FEAR as well.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
