Quantitative and qualitative comparison of overclocked ATi X1900XT and nVidia 7900GT

[imported_ST]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986
ST you were an total NVIDIA fanboy a month ago. You had a NVIDIA SIG , your 1st thread on this bs was typed in fav to NVIDIA. Why should i even believe you did fair testing.

you don't have to believe anything, that is your perogative, especially if you are biased...just read the review, which i think is the first one which compares a volt modded overclocked 7900gt. if you actually read it, most of it is actually in favor of ati....hehe. and correction, i had a sarcastic sig to make fun of ati fanbois

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: ST

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Once again you side step the issue. You left out HQ AF numbers due to a ridiculous subjective claim. Those are the facts.

"Preface: Although there have been vast comparisons between X1900XT and 7900GT offerings, most of them have involved just plain performance numbers without much insight into image quality, which can be equally important. This brief post does not attempt to corral the endless number of configurations on overclocks and image options that are available for both solutions, but rather attempt to classify the performance from a visual standpoint in terms of framerates and quality with the more simplistic and achievable clocks and settings."

Note I left out ATI AAA numbers as well, which to say was anemic at best, and that was being kind. I will however reconsider looking at it again, if you Paypal my some of your ATI money.

Great review!

don't mind Joker, he is just here to troll as always.

not his fault though, its his job to crap NV and promote ATI.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
I already expected b.s. from you but now everyone can see it for themselves.

Funny how much that quote applies to you. The irony is so think.

You bash any review that does not show ATI in a good light. You cry about old drivers, biased reviewers, alien abductions, etc. Anything to further your paranoia and denial.

Go back to Rage3D where that sort of thing is more appreciated.

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: ST

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Oh I think your nVidia sponsors pay you enough, I don't need to paypal you anything. ATi's AAA numbers wouldn't be anymore "anemic" than nVidia's if you used TRSSAA since Oblivion uses alpha textures heavily outside. Your thread title says, "Quantitative and qualitative comparison..". Clearly that's b.s. because you're leaving out crucial information to put the nVidia card in a better light - I already expected b.s. from you but now everyone can see it for themselves.

I'm sorry to hear about your paranoia...I guess all the reviews, including AT's own, are B.S. also paid by nVidia You're ALWAYS welcome to buy a 7900GT yourself or inquire with other folks ANYTIME. I have new found respect for ATI's solution by doing so myself...too bad their paid BSers still have no clue - its rather intersting you keep on commenting on nVIDIA, yet don't even approach the subject say why ATI's HQ AF doesn't do much in OBlivion....intersting.

I guess all of us that have noticed your b.s. excuse for leaving out HQ AF in favor of Quality AF are paranoid. :roll:

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
I already expected b.s. from you but now everyone can see it for themselves.

Funny how much that quote applies to you. The irony is so think.

You bash any review that does not show ATI in a good light. You cry about old drivers, biased reviewers, alien abductions, etc. Anything to further your paranoia and denial.

Go back to Rage3D where that sort of thing is more appreciated.

This coming from the troll that tried to claim nVidia's TRSSAA was superior to AAA.

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

I don't care if you add perf. vs. perf. numbers. Problem is you purposely neglected to use HQ AF on the 7900 GT because you probably noticed it's framerate took a nosedive so you came up with your "no discernable IQ difference between quality and HQ AF" b.s. So much for your unbiased "review".

how can you accuse ST's review as b.s when you don't have any first hand experience on these cards?

So how did you enjoy your ban?

 

[BenSkywalker]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: ST

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Once again you side step the issue. You left out HQ AF numbers due to a ridiculous subjective claim. Those are the facts.

"Preface: Although there have been vast comparisons between X1900XT and 7900GT offerings, most of them have involved just plain performance numbers without much insight into image quality, which can be equally important. This brief post does not attempt to corral the endless number of configurations on overclocks and image options that are available for both solutions, but rather attempt to classify the performance from a visual standpoint in terms of framerates and quality with the more simplistic and achievable clocks and settings."

Note I left out ATI AAA numbers as well, which to say was anemic at best, and that was being kind. I will however reconsider looking at it again, if you Paypal my some of your ATI money.

Oh I think your nVidia sponsors pay you enough, I don't need to paypal you anything. ATi's AAA numbers wouldn't be anymore "anemic" than nVidia's if you used TRSSAA since Oblivion uses alpha textures heavily outside. Your thread title says, "Quantitative and qualitative comparison..". Clearly that's b.s. because you're leaving out crucial information to put the nVidia card in a better light - I already expected b.s. from you but now everyone can see it for themselves.

Just wanted to quote this for when Joker edits it. Making such accusations has been bannable in the past.

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: ST

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Once again you side step the issue. You left out HQ AF numbers due to a ridiculous subjective claim. Those are the facts.

"Preface: Although there have been vast comparisons between X1900XT and 7900GT offerings, most of them have involved just plain performance numbers without much insight into image quality, which can be equally important. This brief post does not attempt to corral the endless number of configurations on overclocks and image options that are available for both solutions, but rather attempt to classify the performance from a visual standpoint in terms of framerates and quality with the more simplistic and achievable clocks and settings."

Note I left out ATI AAA numbers as well, which to say was anemic at best, and that was being kind. I will however reconsider looking at it again, if you Paypal my some of your ATI money.

Oh I think your nVidia sponsors pay you enough, I don't need to paypal you anything. ATi's AAA numbers wouldn't be anymore "anemic" than nVidia's if you used TRSSAA since Oblivion uses alpha textures heavily outside. Your thread title says, "Quantitative and qualitative comparison..". Clearly that's b.s. because you're leaving out crucial information to put the nVidia card in a better light - I already expected b.s. from you but now everyone can see it for themselves.

Just wanted to quote this for when Joker edits it. Making such accusations has been bannable in the past.

Well Ben then I'd advise you to take off your green nVidiot glasses and read what ST wrote - my reply was a retort to his usual b.s. accusations of me being an ATi shill. :roll: Funny how all the nVidiots are coming to ST's rescue with spin and attacks to deflect attention from the holes in his "review". ST, your agenda failed, you screwed up by leaving out HQ AF for the nVidia card while using it on the XT and then giving us a b.s. excuse for it. Accusing me of being a shill won't help your case here nor will having your fellow nVidiots flock to your rescue.

 

[thilanliyan]

ST if you have the time then do put in the performance numbers as well as the HIGHEST quality setting numbers. That way no one can claim extreme bias one way or another.

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: thilan29
ST if you have the time then do put in the performance numbers as well as the HIGHEST quality setting numbers. That way no one can claim extreme bias one way or another.

That's all we've asked him to do from the start. Why he refuses to do so and go in circles is beyond me unless he's worried about showing the HQ AF numbers. I reserved judgement of his "review" until this point was brought up. I was going to give him the benefit of the doubt and see if he'd go back and test for it until he made up lame excuses for it. Lastly, ST you should release the save files + methods to duplicate your tests so it can be verified/refuted by others with 7900 GT/X1900 cards.

 

[imported_ST]

Originally posted by: thilan29
ST if you have the time then do put in the performance numbers as well as the HIGHEST quality setting numbers. That way no one can claim extreme bias one way or another.

Thilan, thanks for asking in a civilized manner. I took the time to add it accordingly because you did that

 

[1Dark1Sharigan1]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Problem is you purposely neglected to use HQ AF on the 7900 GT because you probably noticed it's framerate took a nosedive...

From my experience taking off the AF optimizations don't really decrease framerates by all that much. But that's just from my experience.

I'll have my X1900XT by Friday so I'll do some subjective comparisons on my own . . .

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: Extelleron

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer

Originally posted by: Extelleron
Not bad, but I can see ALOT of inconsistencies there, so it's not quite accurate to the frame.

thought there might of been

cant have anything nvidia coming close to ATI right?

what if there were tons of inconsistencies, but ATI was shown to be dominating completely? i dont think you would be saying what you just said if that was the case

If you look at some of the results, you'll see the nVidia 7900GT overclocked w/ voltage sometimes BEHIND the regular OC'd one..... an inconsistency. In the end, this benchmark is not 100% vaild because of the fact that SOMETIMES you do things slightly differently/ run in a different direction, swing sword at a different time, etc. There is no way to ensure 100% validity. Therefore this benchmark should be considered, at the very least, to have a margin of error around 5-6 FPS.

that fair enough i guess, i havent read the review in detail, i jus glossed over the numbers, oblivions never really got me wanting to buy it, though i will buy it for my brother at somepoint coz he likes it. benching with FRAPS is always subject to errors, but it does offer abit more realistic idea of performance because its acutall gameplay

sorry for calling you out dude :thumbsup:

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: thepd7

Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer

Originally posted by: Extelleron
Not bad, but I can see ALOT of inconsistencies there, so it's not quite accurate to the frame.

thought there might of been

cant have anything nvidia coming close to ATI right?

what if there were tons of inconsistencies, but ATI was shown to be dominating completely? i dont think you would be saying what you just said if that was the case

Obvously your an nvidia fanboy since he is obviously an ATI one and he didn't say a single thing about it. Since you disagre with him you are nvidia. And since I think you are an idiot for making ASSumptions I am obviously and ATI fanboy. This is all quite clear even if you never mention ATI, nvidia, or anything else.

whatever....im just trying to get him abit steamed up for fun, i couldnt care less who wins, and i couldnt care less who powers my graphics, so long as the price is right and the performance is right. extelleron and joker do like to pick at nvidia when they get the chance, i was just stirring the pot

im not saying anything about the review, since oblivion doesnt interest me, its not my type of game.

you've not been here long, so ill let you off. you can be any fanboy you want, but im certainly not a fanboy of either, i just buy the best i can afford at the time.

yes i have 7800s in SLI, and yes ived enjoyed them, but its not gonna stop me buying ATI next time

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Dman877
Except every hardware review site shows the X1900XT dominating the competition...

Did you even read the OP? its volt modded and overclocked beyond GTX speeds.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: BenSkywalker

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: ST

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
Once again you side step the issue. You left out HQ AF numbers due to a ridiculous subjective claim. Those are the facts.

"Preface: Although there have been vast comparisons between X1900XT and 7900GT offerings, most of them have involved just plain performance numbers without much insight into image quality, which can be equally important. This brief post does not attempt to corral the endless number of configurations on overclocks and image options that are available for both solutions, but rather attempt to classify the performance from a visual standpoint in terms of framerates and quality with the more simplistic and achievable clocks and settings."

Note I left out ATI AAA numbers as well, which to say was anemic at best, and that was being kind. I will however reconsider looking at it again, if you Paypal my some of your ATI money.

Oh I think your nVidia sponsors pay you enough, I don't need to paypal you anything. ATi's AAA numbers wouldn't be anymore "anemic" than nVidia's if you used TRSSAA since Oblivion uses alpha textures heavily outside. Your thread title says, "Quantitative and qualitative comparison..". Clearly that's b.s. because you're leaving out crucial information to put the nVidia card in a better light - I already expected b.s. from you but now everyone can see it for themselves.

Just wanted to quote this for when Joker edits it. Making such accusations has been bannable in the past.

Well Ben then I'd advise you to take off your green nVidiot glasses and read what ST wrote - my reply was a retort to his usual b.s. accusations of me being an ATi shill. :roll: Funny how all the nVidiots are coming to ST's rescue with spin and attacks to deflect attention from the holes in his "review". ST, your agenda failed, you screwed up by leaving out HQ AF for the nVidia card while using it on the XT and then giving us a b.s. excuse for it. Accusing me of being a shill won't help your case here nor will having your fellow nVidiots flock to your rescue.

You are obviously an unpaid ATi shill. The lowest form of shill.

Great review, ive really been wondering how the volt modded GTs do against the big boys. Any chance of any other games coming up in this review?

 

[beggerking]

QFT! great review

as well as

joker is obviously an unpaid ATi shill. The lowest form of shill.

 

[Sable]

Should have HQ AF on the nv card. But that's just my opinion.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Sable
Should have HQ AF on the nv card. But that's just my opinion.

He updated the results to include HQAF.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Sable
Should have HQ AF on the nv card. But that's just my opinion.

He updated the results to include HQAF.

ST

something i'd like to bring to your attentention regarding ati's HQAF mode. the reason you don't see a difference is it's probably not working.

changing the setting in the control panel and restarting the game is not enough(took me awhile to figure this out - i also thougth hqaf didn't work, and for the record, this happened to joker as well). for whatever reason, the mode doesn't change unless you reboot it. you can work around this by downloading and installing ati traytools. there's a "reset driver" in there which will change modes w/o a reboot.

anyway, try that and you'll see the difference HQ mode makes.

 

[imported_ST]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: Sable
Should have HQ AF on the nv card. But that's just my opinion.

He updated the results to include HQAF.

ST

something i'd like to bring to your attentention regarding ati's HQAF mode. the reason you don't see a difference is it's probably not working.

changing the setting in the control panel and restarting the game is not enough(took me awhile to figure this out - i also thougth hqaf didn't work, and for the record, this happened to joker as well). for whatever reason, the mode doesn't change unless you reboot it. you can work around this by downloading and installing ati traytools. there's a "reset driver" in there which will change modes w/o a reboot.

anyway, try that and you'll see the difference HQ mode makes.

thanks cai - i noticed this during my gameplay as well since even standard AF settings wasn't applied at times, forcing me to do countless reboots (that's why this endeaver took so darn long) This is one of the misc. things i was going to mention concerning the driver stability / feature set. And yes, i did the played w/ these options under cat 6.3 + chuck, cat 6.4 w/ chuck, and cat 6.4 with chuck, utilizing both ccc as well as ati tray tools. please see a difference in oblivion at hi res, because maybe i'm still doing something wrong

i'm presently trying out the new beta patch, which is buggy as hell still, but i'll try it again at a later time. =/

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: Sable
Should have HQ AF on the nv card. But that's just my opinion.

they cant do HQ AF can they? the best you can do is turn all optimizations of and run in thehigh quality mode. its still not as good to look at, but since ive starting playing all my games with that setting the IQ difference is actually quite notable, BF2 doesnt shimmer at all now, and neither does CS:S performance decrease is a moot point for me though, being stuck on 1280x1024 with 7800GT SLI

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
So how did you enjoy your ban?

what are you talking about? Either way I don't care what kind of "special relationships" you have with the mods. You should have been banned a long long time ago for your ATI AEG crap and trolling.

 

[nib95]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: Sc4freak
I'm completely unfamiliar with Nvidia's control panel settings, but itsn't there a "High Quality" setting as well, in addition to "Quality"?

If so, what's the performance hit by turning that on?

Yes there is and I'm wondering as well why he didn't use it if this is an apples-apples review. HQ AF takes a noticeable hit on G70/G71 based cores from my experience. Once he's done with the review, there should be a breakdown on what it would cost someone to go from a stock 7900 GT to a fully modded one with the assumption that they do not have any of the supplies on hand. From what I calculated in other posts, it drives the cost up by about $100 (includes an aftermarket cooler which is required if you're going to run at 1.5v+).

$100?

How did you come to that conclusion.
As far as I was aware you could pick up an NV silencer 5 for about $20.
Even the more expensive VF900 is $50.
VF700 being about $25. Factor in about $15-$20 (or less) for a conductive pen and it's not really anywhere near the $100 you mentioned.
I'd say closer to $50 on average or less.
Plus a conductive pen doesnt necessarily have to be factored in the cost as this is something you can use in everyday life spanning much further then just with a video card.

In other words, the cost could be considered as low as $20.
A far cry from $100.

 

[Ackmed]

What a mess of a "review". Appreciate the work, but the different settings, and lack of direct comparisons does not help. I wasnt expecting much though.

 

[tuteja1986]

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/nvi...rce_7900_gt_gtx_performance/page10.asp

Battlefield 2 2048x1536x32 4xAA/16xAF

X1800XT : 70.3FPS
7900GT : 31.7FPS

Quake 4 Ultra Quality 2048x1536x32 4xAA/16xAF

X1800XT : 49
7900GT : 40.1

Lock On Modern Air Combat 2048x1536x32 4xAA/16xAF

7900GT : 57.6
x1800xt : 47.9

Pacific Fighters 2048x1536x32 4xAA/16xAF

7900GT : 45.7
X1800XT : 41.5

FEAR 2048x1536x32 4xAA/16xAF

X1800XT : 25
7900GT : 20

Call of Duty 2 2048x1536x32 4xAA/16xAF

x1800xt : 23.2
7900GT : 16.7

Serious Sam 2 2048x1536x32 4xAA/16xAF

X1800XT : 36.9
7900GT : 34.5


IQ/Peformance/HDRwithAA/AVIVO = X1800XT
Cool/less power consumption = 7900gt

Now ST :! i know your an NVIDIA fanboy , I know how bad you wanted to makes these bad thread so you could put forward the NVIDIA name in High Regards , I know after the way you were flamed that you go from making the last horrible thread that made you change your Sig to something non Nvidia fanboyish and also made you think the way write your thread up in professional manner but some of us know you can't change since your emotionally attached to NVIDIA.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

This coming from the troll that tried to claim nVidia's TRSSAA was superior to AAA.

And I backed up my statements with several links.