Rollo's Doom3/6800NU/6800GT/GT@NU Benchmarks

[user1234]

I raise you by 2 K on aqua

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: RacerX
my 'disappointing' 6800 runs the D3 demo1 benchmark at 83.1fps @ 1024 high detail. [sys specs in sig]

(double that of a certain 9800XT above) :roll:

Don't be silly RacerX. For $300 whole dollars, the 6800 should out perform last gen's best by 5X as much! And cook you breakfast! Not just any breakfast either- blueberry muffins with real butter, bacon, a Bellgian waffle with strawberries and whipped cream on top, coffee, and atall glass of fresh squeezed OJ.

It has to include Doom3 and HL2 in the box, no coupons!

Then, and only then, it MIGHT be an acceptable deal.

Graphics Cards with a Recommended Price of around $299

The GeForce 6800 stands somewhat aloof from the row of new-generation solutions. With its 12 pipelines, this GPU should have been pitted against the RADEON X800 Pro, but NVIDIA equipped it with slow memory clocked at 700MHz. Thus they reduced the cost of the product but also reduced its performance. As a result, the GeForce 6800 doesn?t suit well for high resolutions and hard modes since its good NV40 architecture is hamstringed by the slow memory and less efficient methods of using it. Sometimes the GeForce 6800 even loses to the GeForce FX 5950 Ultra, not mentioning the RADEON 9800 XT and the X800 Pro. In new games, however, this graphics card feels at ease, especially if you don?t do full-screen anti-aliasing. At a recommended price of $299 it can make a good buy.

:roll:



Rollo, How does your 4-year-old like his 6800Standard? I guess you really do prefer the GT you bought a month after your "standard" became SubStandard for you.

At least i didn't spend $700 on TWO new video cards to run a mediocre game [that i can play very satisfactorily IN GAME - my 45FPS vs. your 'capped' 60fps or have you figured a way to 'play' the timedemo yet?

:roll:



ROTFL and really off to play Doom

 

[GeneralGrievous]

The guy with $300 who's getting a bad game experience in Doom3 is in a little different position.

That's kind of funny, actually, considering the 5800 U offered a horrendous gaming experience at the time you owned it. So now the 1024x768 8xAF performance that a 9800 offers is "unacceptable"?

Another thing odd is that one of the 6800s weakness is antialiasing performance, something you seem to prefer using in game. Given this, I'm surprised you aren't scrambling to get your hands on an XTPE, which offers the best AA/AF performance hands down.

You also have a certain disdain for buying multiple versions of ATI cores that doesn't extend to Nvidia. Don't take offense at this, but you are certainly a bit strange to say the least.

 

[nRollo]

Apoppin(fresh):

Rollo, How does your 4-year-old like his 6800Standard? I guess you really do prefer the GT you bought a month after your "standard" became SubStandard for you.

At least i didn't spend $700 on TWO new video cards to run a mediocre game [that i can play very satisfactorily IN GAME - my 45FPS vs. your 'capped' 60fps or have you figured a way to 'play' the timedemo yet?

The thing is Apoppin, the cheapest price for a 9800XT on Pricewatch is $47 higher than MSRP for the 6800NU, a card that beats it in almost every benchmark, often by 20% or more.

My four year old said to me just tonite,"Dad, why doesn't Apoppin' have nearly as good of a video card as I do? Should I take it easy on him if I meet up with him online?" So I guess he likes it fine.

Again, you have no idea what I spent on my two nV40 cards, and I didn't just obtain them to play Doom 3. The nV40s are all about future games and 2004 tech SM3 Apoppin'. Check out the XBIT summer cards review, the 6800s are all about Stalker and HL2 as well.

It's nice you can get your 45fps at 10X7 High Q. Of course, my four year old gets that at 16X12 High Q, and I get that at 16X12 Ultra Q with 2X AA, but what the heck? If you're happy watching the jaggies shift and bristle on railing and doors, good for you.

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous

The guy with $300 who's getting a bad game experience in Doom3 is in a little different position.

That's kind of funny, actually, considering the 5800 U offered a horrendous gaming experience at the time you owned it. So now the 1024x768 8xAF performance that a 9800 offers is "unacceptable"?

Another thing odd is that one of the 6800s weakness is antialiasing performance, something you seem to prefer using in game. Given this, I'm surprised you aren't scrambling to get your hands on an XTPE, which offers the best AA/AF performance hands down.

You also have a certain disdain for buying multiple versions of ATI cores that doesn't extend to Nvidia. Don't take offense at this, but you are certainly a bit strange to say the least.

Yeah, it was tough for me to endure those two months without the higher AA/AF levels I could run on my 9800Pro while I played with the Ultra. :roll:

I had to actually make do with 10X7 2X4X for my UT2004! <gasp>

 

[GeneralGrievous]

Yeah, it was tough for me to endure those two months without the higher AA/AF levels I could run on my 9800Pro while I played with the Ultra.

I had to actually make do with 10X7 2X4X for my UT2004! <gasp>

Good for you. I see you understand how 9800 Pro owners are "making do" with their "lowly" cards.

Check out the XBIT summer cards review, the 6800s are all about Stalker and HL2 as well.

Indeed. Your 6800 is a whopping 12% over a 9800 Pro in the first Stalker test, and runs at 63% of the speed of a 9800 Pro in the 2nd stalker test.

 

[Rent]

Originally posted by: apoppin

At least i didn't spend $700 on TWO new video cards to run a mediocre game [that i can play very satisfactorily IN GAME - my 45FPS vs. your 'capped' 60fps or have you figured a way to 'play' the timedemo yet?

:roll:



ROTFL and really off to play Doom

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUCEMENT

Um, the game is NOT limited to 60fps. :disgust: The physics engine can only update 60 times in one second, NOT the graphics renderer.

This has been discussed to death on other forums.

 

[RacerX]

I raise you by 2 K on aqua

what's that supposed to mean? If it meant you wanted me to raise my score by 2000, then I just have (by adding in another 512mb stick).

My AquaMark3d score on 6800nu

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous

Yeah, it was tough for me to endure those two months without the higher AA/AF levels I could run on my 9800Pro while I played with the Ultra.

I had to actually make do with 10X7 2X4X for my UT2004! <gasp>

Good for you. I see you understand how 9800 Pro owners are "making do" with their "lowly" cards.

Check out the XBIT summer cards review, the 6800s are all about Stalker and HL2 as well.

Indeed. Your 6800 is a whopping 12% over a 9800 Pro in the first Stalker test, and runs at 63% of the speed of a 9800 Pro in the 2nd stalker test.

Are you smoking crack tonite General? Assuming the "Chernobyl" tests are "Stalker", the 6800NU beats the 9800s on 11/12 benchmarks?

Yes, it's a resounding triumph for ATI technologies:
Their card that costs $350 on Pricewatch can beat a nVidia card that cost $283 and includes Far Cry at 1/12 benchmarks.
You too kids, can pay 20% more money for 20% less performance, and be screwed for Doom3 instead of playing like the guys who paid $400 and up.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

Danger: 1600x1200 4x/8x
6800: 76.6 fps
9800 Pro: 68 fps

Escape: 1600x1200 4x/8x
6800: 48.8 fps
9800 Pro: 76.9 fps

Interesting how the cheaper card yields higher playable settings isn't it? And can you stop rambling on about the 9800 XT when it's a known fact that it's a ripoff?

 

[Jeff7181]

I don't belive the High Quality in game setting has anything to do with Anisotropic filtering. If someone has a link that proves, 100% without a doubt otherwise, I'd like to see it. Maybe it only does on nVidia cards... I don't know. But I know 8XAF is NOT enabled on my 9800 Pro in High Quality mode because when I force 8XAF in the drivers the average frame rate drops by almost 10 FPS.

 

[user1234]

rollo, what you are saying doesn't make any sense, and is full of inaccuracies and wrong facts. The 6800 nu is trash, in many benchmarks it only comes to 50% the performance of the gt, and in some it under performs the 9800 pro which costs less then 200 (brand new retail, less on ebay). It's defintely not what one might expect from a new generation card, in my opinion. Even though it might be in a unique price category all by itself, doesn't mean it's a good value. But feel free to go ahead and keep wasting your money on these cards until you finally find one, instead of doing the research first before spending the cash. You taste in games also seems weird, are you like the people that go to see movies based on what they see in the TV promotion clip ?

 

[BFG10K]

Interesting how you get 60.7 when its capped at 60?

The benchmarks aren't capped. As a side note I've seen as high as 63 FPS in actual gameplay.

I can't see how anyone can be "underwhelmed" by Doom 3.

Everything Doom III promised - graphics, performance and physics - has already been done better in existing games. The game is great but it's not the king of the hill that ID games usually are. As an engine for example, Far Cry delivers superior visuals and it runs faster too.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
Danger: 1600x1200 4x/8x
6800: 76.6 fps
9800 Pro: 68 fps

Escape: 1600x1200 4x/8x
6800: 48.8 fps
9800 Pro: 76.9 fps

Interesting how the cheaper card yields higher playable settings isn't it? And can you stop rambling on about the 9800 XT when it's a known fact that it's a ripoff?

9800XT "a ripoff?"

i got mine the month b4 last - it was $223 shipped from NewEgg . . .

. . . of course i had to 'work' a couple of minutes doing the flash from an ATI 256/256MB Pro into an XT.
. . . and of course i spent the $15 for an Arctic-Cooling VGA Silencer - i'd do that for ANY hot card just to keep my case cooler; the "silence" is a plus.

if you do your research instead of just throwing money away . . . well, maybe some people just like to bragg about how MUCH they spend (waste).

:roll:

as i said, i don't mind "making do" at 10x7 HiQ and even a little AA (2x) - so no (or minimal) "jaggies" for me . . .

. . . did i mention i got my Overdrive working and got a few extra FPS to "play" with.

And FPS in Diii IS capped at 60FPS.

:roll:

PS: i'm only back 'cause i'm bored with Doom and don't have time to sneak around on a new level in Thief III



EDIT: Howdy BFG10K . . . i still haven't got around to benching my Radeon 8500-128 . . . i still say it'll be "playable" tho

. . . probably right after i finish doom.

 

[vshah]

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
Danger: 1600x1200 4x/8x
6800: 76.6 fps
9800 Pro: 68 fps

Escape: 1600x1200 4x/8x
6800: 48.8 fps
9800 Pro: 76.9 fps

Interesting how the cheaper card yields higher playable settings isn't it? And can you stop rambling on about the 9800 XT when it's a known fact that it's a ripoff?

"a ripoff?"

i got mine month b4 last - it was $223 shipped from NewEgg . . .

. . . of course i had to 'work' a couple of minutes doing the flash from a 256/256MB Pro into an XT.
. . . and of course i spent the $15 for an Arctic-Cooling VGA Silencer - i'd do that for ANY hot card just to keep my case cooler; the "silence" is a plus.

if you do your research instead of just throwing money away . . . well, maybe some people just like to bragg about how MUCH they spend (waste).

:roll:

as i said, i don't mind "making do" at 10x7 HiQ and even a little AA (2x) - so no (or minimal) "jaggies" for me . . .

. . . did i mention i got my Overdrive working and gor a few extra FPS to "play" with.

And FPS in Diii IS capped at 60FPS.

:roll:

PS: i'm only back 'cause i'm bored and don't have time to sneak around on a new level in Thif III

so many smileys...

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: GeneralGrievous
Danger: 1600x1200 4x/8x
6800: 76.6 fps
9800 Pro: 68 fps

Escape: 1600x1200 4x/8x
6800: 48.8 fps
9800 Pro: 76.9 fps

Interesting how the cheaper card yields higher playable settings isn't it? And can you stop rambling on about the 9800 XT when it's a known fact that it's a ripoff?

The better fps at one of the twelve settings doesn't make the 9800Pro a better buy General. Most people want the card that's better 90% of the time, not 10%?

I'll stop rambling about the XT when you stop telling people how they have to spend $400 and up on a video card, when you live at home with your parents for free and don't really know what it's like to have to pay rent/mortgage, and buy your own Frosted Flakes.

 

[blurredvision]

Originally posted by: RacerX
Why would I lie? Look at my signature ... this is the Chaintech card w/ 2.2ns ram (for $286 Rollo not 300).
it runs at 400/900 and has a much better hsf than either of the two GT's I owned previously.
Actually I was going to say I think your benchmarks are off. Just for a point of reference, what are you getting in 3dMark03? I am getting ~10,000 (and 56,970 in Aquamark).

I was't accusing you of lying, just trying to figure this out .

As for your card, you're getting a much better overclock than I, but I can't see it netting you that many more frames a second. My 3DMark03 score is 10,194 with my A64 oc'ed and 6800 oc'ed. Any tricks you've done to your comp?

 

[nRollo]

Originally posted by: user1234
rollo, what you are saying doesn't make any sense, and is full of inaccuracies and wrong facts. The 6800 nu is trash, in many benchmarks it only comes to 50% the performance of the gt, and in some it under performs the 9800 pro which costs less then 200 (brand new retail, less on ebay). It's defintely not what one might expect from a new generation card, in my opinion. Even though it might be in a unique price category all by itself, doesn't mean it's a good value. But feel free to go ahead and keep wasting your money on these cards until you finally find one, instead of doing the research first before spending the cash. You taste in games also seems weird, are you like the people that go to see movies based on what they see in the TV promotion clip ?

Read the review here at AT User 1234. The 6800NU beats the 9800XT (last gens fastest card) by 20% or more in 17/25 benchmarks there is a difference in. It wins 23/25 benchmarks.

Look at any pre "magic driver" benchmarks of Doom 3. The 6800NU plays Doom 3 as well as a X800XT PE. Even with new "magic drivers", that may be reducing IQ, it's still a good deal faster than a X800P at Doom 3.

Note the value graphs in the AT review, and how the 6800NU is either first or second on almost every one. Note how in every review they say it's a great value at $300.

Then we have User1234. Some unknown guy on the internet, might be 8 years old, saying "Wah. The 6800NU doesn't offer as good of performance as cards that cost $100 more. It's a bad deal IMO"

What is your opinion actually worth User1234? You haven't backed it up with any facts, and have you actually used a nV40 anything?
What card do you have?

Here's what my opinion is worth:
I can provide many links to the reviews I just referenced where trusted reviewers share my opinions.
I have owned a 9800Pro for 8 months, own a 6800NU I used for over a month, and now own/use a 6800GT, so I can give a first hand account of how well each works.

How about you Big Chief? What's your IMO worth?

Edit:
My bad. I see in this very thread you have an ancient 9700Pro. While that card IS a good buy for $150, I would guess the 6800NU pretty much owns it. If it's 20% faster than a 9800XT in 66% of ATs benches, you know it's at least 30% faster than a 9700P in the same benches. While I'm sorry you only get 30% more performance for 50% more money, as others have noted, sometimes that's the difference between playable and not.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: user1234
rollo, what you are saying doesn't make any sense, and is full of inaccuracies and wrong facts. The 6800 nu is trash, in many benchmarks it only comes to 50% the performance of the gt, and in some it under performs the 9800 pro which costs less then 200 (brand new retail, less on ebay). It's defintely not what one might expect from a new generation card, in my opinion. Even though it might be in a unique price category all by itself, doesn't mean it's a good value. But feel free to go ahead and keep wasting your money on these cards until you finally find one, instead of doing the research first before spending the cash. You taste in games also seems weird, are you like the people that go to see movies based on what they see in the TV promotion clip ?

Note how in every review they say it's a great value at $300.



Here's what my opinion is worth:

Your opinion = ZERO (same as most of us). You claim you like to throw money away and you are clearly a blow-hard bragger.

Every review?!:

The GeForce 6800 stands somewhat aloof from the row of new-generation solutions. With its 12 pipelines, this GPU should have been pitted against the RADEON X800 Pro, but NVIDIA equipped it with slow memory clocked at 700MHz. Thus they reduced the cost of the product but also reduced its performance. As a result, the GeForce 6800 doesn?t suit well for high resolutions and hard modes since its good NV40 architecture is hamstringed by the slow memory and less efficient methods of using it. Sometimes the GeForce 6800 even loses to the GeForce FX 5950 Ultra, not mentioning the RADEON 9800 XT and the X800 Pro. In new games, however, this graphics card feels at ease, especially if you don?t do full-screen anti-aliasing. At a recommended price of $299 it can make a good buy.

X-bit labs clearly doesn't share the same opinion as you . . . i don't think they live with THEIR parents.

:roll:

What did eVGA reply to you about THEIR claim that their 6800Standard is only "at least a full 12%" faster than the 9800XT? i'm sure they are talking "overall" and not focusing on a single snapshot bench as the "end all" comparison.



:roll:

 

[CU]

I believe the 6800NU is good at resolutions below 1600x1200. Once you get get to 1600x1200 or 1280x1024@4AA it does start to slow down allowing the 9800XT to catch up to it and pass it on some games. The reason is because it only has 128meg where the 9800XT has 256meg. If it had 256meg I think it would stay ahead of the 9800XT at the higer resolution just like it does at the lower resolutions. If your monitor doesn't do 1600x1200 at a decent refresh rate then the 6800NU looks very good to me. That is why I am looking at getting one. Now if ATI would release a similar priced card I would be happy because this price range is to empty right now to drive prices down.

 

[GeneralGrievous]

The better fps at one of the twelve settings doesn't make the 9800Pro a better buy General. Most people want the card that's better 90% of the time, not 10%?

It does when both cards give playable speeds at that settings. Who cares about low resolution, non eye candy tests? Most people want to play at the highest settings possible that gives them playable framerates.

Someone who is cost conscious (sp?) is even more likely to go for the best price/performance ratio, even if they have to spend a bit more money to make sure their investment lasts a couple years, as opposed to, say, a month?

 

[rbV5]

What did eVGA reply to you about THEIR claim that their 6800Standard is only "at least a full 12%" faster than the 9800XT?

Get this! ASUS is saying

Over 25% faster than other competitors with 6800GPU

Link :Q

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: blurredvision

Originally posted by: RacerX
Why would I lie? Look at my signature ... this is the Chaintech card w/ 2.2ns ram (for $286 Rollo not 300).
it runs at 400/900 and has a much better hsf than either of the two GT's I owned previously.
Actually I was going to say I think your benchmarks are off. Just for a point of reference, what are you getting in 3dMark03? I am getting ~10,000 (and 56,970 in Aquamark).

I was't accusing you of lying, just trying to figure this out .

As for your card, you're getting a much better overclock than I, but I can't see it netting you that many more frames a second. My 3DMark03 score is 10,194 with my A64 oc'ed and 6800 oc'ed. Any tricks you've done to your comp?

It's his chipset and settings combined with the excellent overclock his 6800 achieves I'd wager. He has awesome ram speed and 2-2-2 timings with 245HTT/LDT, and it's even possible that D3 benefits from the forceware performance tweaks with the 6800series *I would like to see this explored by tech report*

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: rbV5

What did eVGA reply to you about THEIR claim that their 6800Standard is only "at least a full 12%" faster than the 9800XT?

Get this! ASUS is saying

Over 25% faster than other competitors with 6800GPU

Link :Q

That is a trick card&amp;bundle, but will it also be 25% more expensive?

 

[user1234]

Originally posted by: Rollo

Originally posted by: user1234
rollo, what you are saying doesn't make any sense, and is full of inaccuracies and wrong facts. The 6800 nu is trash, in many benchmarks it only comes to 50% the performance of the gt, and in some it under performs the 9800 pro which costs less then 200 (brand new retail, less on ebay). It's defintely not what one might expect from a new generation card, in my opinion. Even though it might be in a unique price category all by itself, doesn't mean it's a good value. But feel free to go ahead and keep wasting your money on these cards until you finally find one, instead of doing the research first before spending the cash. You taste in games also seems weird, are you like the people that go to see movies based on what they see in the TV promotion clip ?

Read the review here at AT User 1234. The 6800NU beats the 9800XT (last gens fastest card) by 20% or more in 17/25 benchmarks there is a difference in. It wins 23/25 benchmarks.

Look at any pre "magic driver" benchmarks of Doom 3. The 6800NU plays Doom 3 as well as a X800XT PE. Even with new "magic drivers", that may be reducing IQ, it's still a good deal faster than a X800P at Doom 3.

Note the value graphs in the AT review, and how the 6800NU is either first or second on almost every one. Note how in every review they say it's a great value at $300.

Then we have User1234. Some unknown guy on the internet, might be 8 years old, saying "Wah. The 6800NU doesn't offer as good of performance as cards that cost $100 more. It's a bad deal IMO"

What is your opinion actually worth User1234? You haven't backed it up with any facts, and have you actually used a nV40 anything?
What card do you have?

Here's what my opinion is worth:
I can provide many links to the reviews I just referenced where trusted reviewers share my opinions.
I have owned a 9800Pro for 8 months, own a 6800NU I used for over a month, and now own/use a 6800GT, so I can give a first hand account of how well each works.

How about you Big Chief? What's your IMO worth?

Edit:
My bad. I see in this very thread you have an ancient 9700Pro. While that card IS a good buy for $150, I would guess the 6800NU pretty much owns it. If it's 20% faster than a 9800XT in 66% of ATs benches, you know it's at least 30% faster than a 9700P in the same benches. While I'm sorry you only get 30% more performance for 50% more money, as others have noted, sometimes that's the difference between playable and not.

To your information, I recently upgraded to the 6800 GT and get great performance in every game and benchmark (60.5K aqua, 12K 3dmark3). I'm sure my rig (a64 3200+) owns yours.

My opinion is based on doing my own research, and I'm convinced my decision was the right one, as you can see if you walk into any computer store, there will be stacks of 6800 NU piled up like yesterday's garbage, while the 6800 GT is nowhere in sight. Now, what do you think the reason for that is ?

Your opinion, as commented by other users, is worthless based on your erratic mind changing and conflicted decisions. Face it, the 6800 nu is a disappointing next-gen card with it's middling performance, which is overall only a little better than prev gen cards. So even though it's pretty much the only $300 card, I think people are reluctant to spend that much because the alternatives (9800pro for 200, or 6800gt for 400) represent better value for money. I think it should be at least 50 less, or keep this price but increase the memory size and speed so the card has a decisive advantage over 9800 pro.

The 6800 reminds me of 9800se, which is a seriously cut down version of 9800 making it slower than 9600pro, but I guess the marketing people over at ati thought it would sell based on the 9800 name, so they priced it higher than 9600 pro.