Questions, now that my 6800GT is bought

[Schadenfroh]

well, i have not gotten a shipping number yet, but i got a confirmation that the payment was recieved and that the item is in stock and should be shipped out monday/tuesday at the latest.

1. Arnt all 6800GTs made by the same company right now and basically only differance is the sticker on the HS/f?
2. I got an XFX, their customer support better than ASSUS? BTW, how long is their warrenty? their site is vague.....
3. Are the fans on these things louder than 30db?
4. Do they feature that feature on the nv3x where the fan only speeded up in 3d?
5. How can people overclock this thing to ultra levels when it does not feature the 2nd molex connector?
6. How much will this thing raise my CPU temps (55C now) in a antec sonata with dual 120mm case fans.
7. Have i finally brought "balance" to my system, IE no bottlenecks, wasnt my 4200 holding it back by a good margin?


Current System
Athlon XP 3200+
Asus V9280TD (geforce4 TI4200 128mb 8x)
1 gb corsair XMS pc3200
A7N8X deluxe Rev2.0 (nforce2 ultra400)
WD Raptor 10,000 RPM HD
NEC 2510A

 

[FluxCap]

1.Yes, at this time but that might have just changed or might be changing soon as the original run of cards is depleted.
2.No idea.
3.It doesn't seem to be, sounds exactly like my 9800 Pro(which is good).
4.Nope. Just tested it with Far Cry and the fan speed stayed the same for the hour I played.
5.Not sure but it is easy.
6.Definitely higher than the 4200 but not probably more than 5C if I had to guess.
7.Now your CPU is the bottleneck, congrats on the new card! You will love it.

 

[John]

I read in a forum post that the XFW warranty was 2 years. I am not sure why the XFX website is so vague.

 

[Schadenfroh]

see for yourself
Text

Warranty

* Product warranty varies depending on Geographical region. For details warranty information for this product please contact the Pine branch in your area.

searched Pine's website, no info, they want me to call them to find out or something?

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
Have i finally brought "balance" to my system, IE no bottlenecks, wasnt my 4200 holding it back by a good margin?

You're still seriously CPU limited with that card, especially if you OC it to Ultra speeds. Gains are seen with these cards all the way up to an FX-53.

 

[user1234]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
Have i finally brought "balance" to my system, IE no bottlenecks, wasnt my 4200 holding it back by a good margin?

You're still seriously CPU limited with that card, especially if you OC it to Ultra speeds. Gains are seen with these cards all the way up to an FX-53.

say what ??
first of all, the cpu and gpu works concurrently, and communicate with each other (mostly cpu -> gpu) and dsometimes the gpu has to wait for the cpu to provide information for the next frame, and other times the cpu has to wait for the gpu to finish drawing the last frame. Obviously who waits more depends on the game, the resolution, graphic level detail, and quality enhancement processing. The term CPU limited is usually used to mean the GPU always waits for the CPU, therefore even if you use a faster gpu, it will not result in a faster frame rate.
This is definetly not the case here, especially if you run games at 1600x1200x32 with full AA/AF. While upgrading the CPU will increase the frame rate, so will upgrading the GPU, therefore the term CPU limited is inappropriate. Paradoxically, there is indeed a sort of balance here, but the exactly which component is the more significant bottleneck depends on the specifc usage scenario as I said above.

 

[Jeff7181]

1. Arnt all 6800GTs made by the same company right now and basically only differance is the sticker on the HS/f?

No, I don't believe so... each company makes their own, but they're all based on nVidia's reference design so far... so basically they just follow the directions to put it together.

4. Do they feature that feature on the nv3x where the fan only speeded up in 3d?

Yes, but people have been having some issues with the fan staying at high speed like it does in 3D mode, most likely because the single slot heatsink/fan isn't enough to keep an overclocked GT cool enough to make the fan speed drop for regular 2D operation.

5. How can people overclock this thing to ultra levels when it does not feature the 2nd molex connector?

The extra molex connector is not a necessity, it's a fail safe kinda thing the nVidia needs to make sure their Ultras run fine.

6. How much will this thing raise my CPU temps (55C now) in a antec sonata with dual 120mm case fans.

Tell us after you've got it installed and running

7. Have i finally brought "balance" to my system, IE no bottlenecks, wasnt my 4200 holding it back by a good margin?

I believe a Ti4200 will hold back pretty much anything faster than an XP2200/P42.4b.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: user1234

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
Have i finally brought "balance" to my system, IE no bottlenecks, wasnt my 4200 holding it back by a good margin?

You're still seriously CPU limited with that card, especially if you OC it to Ultra speeds. Gains are seen with these cards all the way up to an FX-53.

say what ??
first of all, the cpu and gpu works concurrently, and communicate with each other (mostly cpu -> gpu) and dsometimes the gpu has to wait for the cpu to provide information for the next frame, and other times the cpu has to wait for the gpu to finish drawing the last frame. Obviously who waits more depends on the game, the resolution, graphic level detail, and quality enhancement processing. The term CPU limited is usually used to mean the GPU always waits for the CPU, therefore even if you use a faster gpu, it will not result in a faster frame rate.
This is definetly not the case here, especially if you run games at 1600x1200x32 with full AA/AF. While upgrading the CPU will increase the frame rate, so will upgrading the GPU, therefore the term CPU limited is inappropriate. Paradoxically, there is indeed a sort of balance here, but the exactly which component is the more significant bottleneck depends on the specifc usage scenario as I said above.

due to my small monitor, i run 1024x768 and only want to use AF, because text in Desertcombat/1942 is screwed up with FSAA

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

Originally posted by: user1234

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
Have i finally brought "balance" to my system, IE no bottlenecks, wasnt my 4200 holding it back by a good margin?

You're still seriously CPU limited with that card, especially if you OC it to Ultra speeds. Gains are seen with these cards all the way up to an FX-53.

say what ??
first of all, the cpu and gpu works concurrently, and communicate with each other (mostly cpu -> gpu) and dsometimes the gpu has to wait for the cpu to provide information for the next frame, and other times the cpu has to wait for the gpu to finish drawing the last frame. Obviously who waits more depends on the game, the resolution, graphic level detail, and quality enhancement processing. The term CPU limited is usually used to mean the GPU always waits for the CPU, therefore even if you use a faster gpu, it will not result in a faster frame rate.
This is definetly not the case here, especially if you run games at 1600x1200x32 with full AA/AF. While upgrading the CPU will increase the frame rate, so will upgrading the GPU, therefore the term CPU limited is inappropriate. Paradoxically, there is indeed a sort of balance here, but the exactly which component is the more significant bottleneck depends on the specifc usage scenario as I said above.

due to my small monitor, i run 1024x768 and only want to use AF, because text in Desertcombat/1942 is screwed up with FSAA

In which case you will be severely CPU limited, not that it matters since you'll get 60+FPS in every game that will be out in the next few months.

User1234, I said that he would be CPU limited because a faster CPU would show gains for him all the way up to 1600x1200. Most modern graphics cards are CPU limited at 1024x768 these days; the newest 6800's and X800's require massive CPU power to realize their true potential.

 

[Schadenfroh]

does the 6800gt have the built in temp diode that you can read in the drivers? i imagine it does not have a feature simlilar to "overdrive"

 

[SynthDude2001]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
does the 6800gt have the built in temp diode that you can read in the drivers? i imagine it does not have a "overdrive" feature

Yes, it has the temperature diode - not sure what the "overdrive" feature you're talking about is, though.

 

[Megatomic]

He's talking about the Overdrive feature found in ATI XT products. It's a manuafacturer-provided overclock that you can enable/disable in the control panel.

 

[Schadenfroh]

well, its a miracle, its on its way, got the tracking number, fed ex express saver, shipped yesterday, you guys think that it is one of the first that is manufactured by nvidia (or the country they contracted to build the first batches for all the board makers to stick their sticker on)

 

[vshah]

you lucky fvcker

i gotta get to CUSA one of these days and grab one. they're in stock every few days there...


i've heard its pretty quiet, probably more than a 4200 (thats what i have right now too)

yes, there are different fan speeds for 2d and 3d.

the 2nd molex apparently isn't so important after all. 6800 ultra will run at stock speeds on one connector.

no way of knowing effect on cpu temps. probably not more than 2-3 degrees.

yes, your system will seem 100x faster in games. i remember how i felt going from a gf2ultra to a 4200, and i think the gt is a much bigger jump..

enjoy, you lucky bastard

-Vivan

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: vshah
yes, your system will seem 100x faster in games. i remember how i felt going from a gf2ultra to a 4200

With my current system i went from a Celeron 333@550mhz, 512mb of PC133 ram, abit BM6 and a Voodoo5 5500, aureal vortex2

to a

A7N8X deluxe, 1 gb corsair XMS PC3200, Athlon XP 3200, and a geforce4 TI4200 128mb 8x, audigy2 zs.

now that was a upgrade playing BF1942 before and after...........

 

[Concillian]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

due to my small monitor, i run 1024x768 and only want to use AF, because text in Desertcombat/1942 is screwed up with FSAA

Not with an ATi it isn't.

I know EXACTLY what you're talking about because if I use my 5900XT with 4xAA, my name looks like Concllllan

But with my 9700 Pro, it looks just fine with 4xAA on, and EVERYTHING else in the game looks way better with FSAA.

BTW, that card is WAY overkill for running DC at 1024x768, and BF1942/DC is not tremendously CPU dependent, even BFV isn't very CPU dependent. I think you'll easily see an 80+ FPS minimum with your CPU in BF1942

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: Concillian

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh

due to my small monitor, i run 1024x768 and only want to use AF, because text in Desertcombat/1942 is screwed up with FSAA

Not with an ATi it isn't.

I know EXACTLY what you're talking about because if I use my 5900XT with 4xAA, my name looks like Concllllan

But with my 9700 Pro, it looks just fine with 4xAA on, and EVERYTHING else in the game looks way better with FSAA.

BTW, that card is WAY overkill for running DC at 1024x768, and BF1942/DC is not tremendously CPU dependent, even BFV isn't very CPU dependent. I think you'll easily see an 80+ FPS minimum with your CPU in BF1942

one of my friends played it on his 9800 pro for me, the text was terrible with fsaa, might be differant drivers tho. he was running latest cats at the time, early july this year. The AF did not affect it, but when you turned on FSAA on that 9800 pro, the text became unreadable, same with my 4200. he thought it was a issue with his system untill i showed him my 4200 did the same thing. damn DICE/EA whoever is to blame.

what do you think for a minimum FPS in vietnam, max detail, max AF, no FSAA, 1024X768

 

[Concillian]

Vietnam SUCKS at highest 'graphics', with my 9700 Pro, I see rates in the TEENS if I zoom in on something with a sniper rifle at 'highest'. Seting it to high is MUCH MUCH BETTER.

Through my own benchmark loop I see around a minimum of ~38-40 at 1024x768 medium-high-high 4xAA 8xAF... BUT I see about the same framerates with my 5900XT at the same settings (1024 m-h-h) with no AA/AF, so the nVidia cards clearly don't handle BFV as well as the ATi cards.

Lemme see what I got at 1024x768 8xAF with the 5900XT....
Average 44.4
Minimum 23
That was at medium - high - high. And I capped it at 80 FPS, so the very high FPS regions didn't skew the average too much.

Just as an example of how much different it was with highest, at 1024 NOAA NOAF at Highest-High-High, the 5900xt was:
Average 43.6
Minimum 10

Yep, 10. Average looks good, similar to the m-h-h 8xAF, but the minimum totally changes things.

It's hard to say, but the GT is more than twice as fast as the 5900XT, so you'll probably be fine at least at high-high-high 16xAF at 1024. No telling about 'highest' though. That zooming SUCKS. Other areas can be in the 50s and 60s, but zooming with the sniper TANKS the rates to the freaking TEENS. You'll probably still be well above 40s when zooming on 'highest' with the 6800 pro at 1024, but there's no telling with how erratic BFV is at highest. It would be interesting info to know.

In fact your system is so similar to mine (A7N8X-E instead of deluxe, pretty much everything else the same except for graphics) It would be very interesting to see where you end up with the GT.

You can see all my benchmarks in this thread on planetbattlefield forums:
http://www.forumplanet.com/planetbattlefield/topic.asp?fid=6341&tid=1390486

The 5900XT benchmarks are in the beginning. I got my 9700 in the middle of the second page.