Sell 7900GT's in SLI for a X1950??

TheRyuu

Diamond Member
Dec 3, 2005
5,479
14
81
Just what the title says.
I've been thinking about it. I'm looking to move to a single card. I know we don't have THAT much info on how the X1950XTX performs, but I figure I can get one with the money I can get selling both of my 7900GT's.

How would performce be? I figure it would be slightly less to about the same. But I like Oblivion :p

My 7900GT's are at 690/1700. Am I better off keeping them, or selling and using the money to get a X1950??

(BTW, the price is suppose to be $399 for XT, $499 for XTX right?)

(and temps/noise won't be a problem since I have watercooling and it'll go right into my loop with a shiny new Maze4)
 

akshayt

Banned
Feb 13, 2004
2,227
0
0
For a majority of games currently, you will loose performance.

But you should still manage 1600*1200 with AA and AF with 1950XTX in most games or higher, with decent fps, get better iq, hdr+aa. but 1950XT for 399$ will turn out pretty cheap for new buyers
 

Kromis

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2006
5,214
1
81
I'm gonna say what I have said in past threads.

If you have high-end SLI, I don't think you should upgrade your cards. In fact, I think you should never upgrade ever again unless games are really giving your cards a hard time.

And I don't think there is an XT. Theres XTX and Pro versions of the X1950. Correct me if I'm wrong on that.
 

Polish3d

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2005
5,501
0
0
dude, at those clocks you have gtx sli, which IS faster than a single X1950xtx AFAIK. I would stick with it, no reason to upgrade at all. Wait for next gen
 

CaiNaM

Diamond Member
Oct 26, 2000
3,718
0
0
Originally posted by: akshayt
For a majority of games currently, you will loose performance.

But you should still manage 1600*1200 with AA and AF with 1950XTX in most games or higher, with decent fps, get better iq, hdr+aa. but 1950XT for 399$ will turn out pretty cheap for new buyers

based on what, your testing? :roll:

i think i'd wait to see more evalutations. 2 reviews with briefly made the 'net, and one stated it was slightly slower than a gx2, and another stated it was slightly faster. either way, seems it would be pretty comparable to sli gt's.
 

zendari

Banned
May 27, 2005
6,558
0
0
Originally posted by: CaiNaM
Originally posted by: akshayt
For a majority of games currently, you will loose performance.

But you should still manage 1600*1200 with AA and AF with 1950XTX in most games or higher, with decent fps, get better iq, hdr+aa. but 1950XT for 399$ will turn out pretty cheap for new buyers

based on what, your testing? :roll:

i think i'd wait to see more evalutations. 2 reviews with briefly made the 'net, and one stated it was slightly slower than a gx2, and another stated it was slightly faster. either way, seems it would be pretty comparable to sli gt's.

His GTs are way over stock though.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
I'd keep what you have. The performance you're getting has got to be spectacular as it is. If anything the difference would be very slight.

Of course if you can find a buyer first for your cards and can make up the difference sure why not.
 

akshayt

Banned
Feb 13, 2004
2,227
0
0
you will loose performance, it is like going from a 95% of a 7900GTX SLi to 1950XTX. also, 95% because they are 256mb each, else it ould have been > 150% or so
 

Polish3d

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2005
5,501
0
0
Originally posted by: CaiNaM
Originally posted by: akshayt
For a majority of games currently, you will loose performance.

But you should still manage 1600*1200 with AA and AF with 1950XTX in most games or higher, with decent fps, get better iq, hdr+aa. but 1950XT for 399$ will turn out pretty cheap for new buyers

based on what, your testing? :roll:

i think i'd wait to see more evalutations. 2 reviews with briefly made the 'net, and one stated it was slightly slower than a gx2, and another stated it was slightly faster. either way, seems it would be pretty comparable to sli gt's.


yeah but not SLI GTs at GTX speeds. Although I suppose he could sell both and get an x1950 for the money he makes, add a hundred bucks or two hundred and get x1950xtx crossfire
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
Originally posted by: akshayt
you will loose performance, it is like going from a 95% of a 7900GTX SLi to 1950XTX. also, 95% because they are 256mb each, else it ould have been > 150% or so



Until you have tested both side by side how can you say that?

 

TheRyuu

Diamond Member
Dec 3, 2005
5,479
14
81
Originally posted by: akshayt
you will loose performance, it is like going from a 95% of a 7900GTX SLi to 1950XTX. also, 95% because they are 256mb each, else it ould have been > 150% or so

The only modern game that really uses 256+ of vram is Oblivion.

Your posts really don't make sense sometimes, lol :p

Anyway, I was planning on waiting for reviews anyway. Hopefully some will be based on the FX-60/62 since thats pretty much what CPU I have and not all of them based on Conroe.

I was looking at the X1950 because of several reasons. HDR+AA is one of them and so is the increase IQ and the 512MB of vram. Sometimes SLI gives me a few problems but that doesn't happen that often.

Crossfire really isn't an option unless ATI wants to make it run on my A8N32-SLI Nforce4 board. Which I really don't see happening. ;)

Anywho, only time will tell I guess.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
Originally posted by: wizboy11
Originally posted by: akshayt
you will loose performance, it is like going from a 95% of a 7900GTX SLi to 1950XTX. also, 95% because they are 256mb each, else it ould have been > 150% or so

The only modern game that really uses 256+ of vram is Oblivion.

Your posts really don't make sense sometimes, lol :p

Anyway, I was planning on waiting for reviews anyway. Hopefully some will be based on the FX-60/62 since thats pretty much what CPU I have and not all of them based on Conroe.

I was looking at the X1950 because of several reasons. HDR+AA is one of them and so is the increase IQ and the 512MB of vram. Sometimes SLI gives me a few problems but that doesn't happen that often.

Crossfire really isn't an option unless ATI wants to make it run on my A8N32-SLI Nforce4 board. Which I really don't see happening. ;)

Anywho, only time will tell I guess.


Unless I'm wrong...and correct me if I am. Doom3 and Quake4 have Ultra settings that were made for 512MB of memory on a Video card no? However they just give higher resolution textures. Is that right?
 

TheRyuu

Diamond Member
Dec 3, 2005
5,479
14
81
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Originally posted by: wizboy11
Originally posted by: akshayt
you will loose performance, it is like going from a 95% of a 7900GTX SLi to 1950XTX. also, 95% because they are 256mb each, else it ould have been > 150% or so

The only modern game that really uses 256+ of vram is Oblivion.

Your posts really don't make sense sometimes, lol :p

Anyway, I was planning on waiting for reviews anyway. Hopefully some will be based on the FX-60/62 since thats pretty much what CPU I have and not all of them based on Conroe.

I was looking at the X1950 because of several reasons. HDR+AA is one of them and so is the increase IQ and the 512MB of vram. Sometimes SLI gives me a few problems but that doesn't happen that often.

Crossfire really isn't an option unless ATI wants to make it run on my A8N32-SLI Nforce4 board. Which I really don't see happening. ;)

Anywho, only time will tell I guess.


Unless I'm wrong...and correct me if I am. Doom3 and Quake4 have Ultra settings that were made for 512MB of memory on a Video card no? However they just give higher resolution textures. Is that right?

Yea except those games run fine on my machine. 256mb vram and all. I doubt there really that much bigger. I don't notice any performance difference. Ram usage goes up from 50% to 75%+ so the textures are bigger.

Let me rephrase it. The only Modern Game that really makes use of 512mb of vram, is Oblivion in all of it's modded glory.
 

CelSnip

Member
Jun 27, 2006
188
0
0
Originally posted by: wizboy11
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Originally posted by: wizboy11
Originally posted by: akshayt
you will loose performance, it is like going from a 95% of a 7900GTX SLi to 1950XTX. also, 95% because they are 256mb each, else it ould have been > 150% or so

The only modern game that really uses 256+ of vram is Oblivion.

Your posts really don't make sense sometimes, lol :p

Anyway, I was planning on waiting for reviews anyway. Hopefully some will be based on the FX-60/62 since thats pretty much what CPU I have and not all of them based on Conroe.

I was looking at the X1950 because of several reasons. HDR+AA is one of them and so is the increase IQ and the 512MB of vram. Sometimes SLI gives me a few problems but that doesn't happen that often.

Crossfire really isn't an option unless ATI wants to make it run on my A8N32-SLI Nforce4 board. Which I really don't see happening. ;)

Anywho, only time will tell I guess.


Unless I'm wrong...and correct me if I am. Doom3 and Quake4 have Ultra settings that were made for 512MB of memory on a Video card no? However they just give higher resolution textures. Is that right?

Yea except those games run fine on my machine. 256mb vram and all. I doubt there really that much bigger. I don't notice any performance difference. Ram usage goes up from 50% to 75%+ so the textures are bigger.

Let me rephrase it. The only Modern Game that really makes use of 512mb of vram, is Oblivion in all of it's modded glory.

Graw as well. But it's not nearly as good.

 

Cookie Monster

Diamond Member
May 7, 2005
5,161
32
86
690/1700 :Q

Nice OC wizboy. Those OCed 7900Gt SLi is WAY faster than the X1900XTX. Presuming that the X1950XTX (clocked at 650mhz core) is maybe 10~% faster in memory bandwidth hungry situations, and some other little negligable performance boost here and there, i dont think its such a good idea.

I think you should wait for G80 (although at the Q2 conference meeting for NV, they said there will be lots of G7x variants), and the X1950XTX review.
 

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Originally posted by: wizboy11
Originally posted by: akshayt
you will loose performance, it is like going from a 95% of a 7900GTX SLi to 1950XTX. also, 95% because they are 256mb each, else it ould have been > 150% or so

The only modern game that really uses 256+ of vram is Oblivion.

Your posts really don't make sense sometimes, lol :p

Anyway, I was planning on waiting for reviews anyway. Hopefully some will be based on the FX-60/62 since thats pretty much what CPU I have and not all of them based on Conroe.

I was looking at the X1950 because of several reasons. HDR+AA is one of them and so is the increase IQ and the 512MB of vram. Sometimes SLI gives me a few problems but that doesn't happen that often.

Crossfire really isn't an option unless ATI wants to make it run on my A8N32-SLI Nforce4 board. Which I really don't see happening. ;)

Anywho, only time will tell I guess.


Unless I'm wrong...and correct me if I am. Doom3 and Quake4 have Ultra settings that were made for 512MB of memory on a Video card no? However they just give higher resolution textures. Is that right?

Not even higher resolution, it stops using a near lossless compression algorithm. So you get the exact same textures with no compression.

I cant tell the difference side by side.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
Originally posted by: wizboy11
Originally posted by: akshayt
you will loose performance, it is like going from a 95% of a 7900GTX SLi to 1950XTX. also, 95% because they are 256mb each, else it ould have been > 150% or so

The only modern game that really uses 256+ of vram is Oblivion.

Your posts really don't make sense sometimes, lol :p

Anyway, I was planning on waiting for reviews anyway. Hopefully some will be based on the FX-60/62 since thats pretty much what CPU I have and not all of them based on Conroe.

I was looking at the X1950 because of several reasons. HDR+AA is one of them and so is the increase IQ and the 512MB of vram. Sometimes SLI gives me a few problems but that doesn't happen that often.

Crossfire really isn't an option unless ATI wants to make it run on my A8N32-SLI Nforce4 board. Which I really don't see happening. ;)

Anywho, only time will tell I guess.


Unless I'm wrong...and correct me if I am. Doom3 and Quake4 have Ultra settings that were made for 512MB of memory on a Video card no? However they just give higher resolution textures. Is that right?

Not even higher resolution, it stops using a near lossless compression algorithm. So you get the exact same textures with no compression.

I cant tell the difference side by side.


So then the question becomes...do you lose FPS for enabling it and get no difference? that would be very dumb :D