Tomshardware review is up and giving ATI the Crown...
- Thread starter Luthien
- Start date
Nice performance but pathetic features. Basically combined two R300s and slapped higher performance memory on it. While I give the performance crown to ATI when AA+AF is enabled it leaves a rather hollow feeling in my gut doing it.
GTaudiophile
Lifer
- Oct 24, 2000
- 29,767
- 33
- 81
Pathetic?
Sorry, but the X800s will work in a Shuttle SFF box while I doubt the 6800U will. That is a feature!
Anyone want to bet the X800 enjoys more OEM wins from the likes of DELL?
What do you think it is? Feature wise it is almost identical to the R300.
BTW this card is produced on a .13 Low K vs .15 for the R300. That can account for some power reduction.
BTW this card is produced on a .13 Low K vs .15 for the R300. That can account for some power reduction.
Keysplayr
Elite Member
- Jan 16, 2003
- 21,211
- 50
- 91
Umm guys, Nobody is owning anyone here. Its either ATI edging out NV or vice versa. The only thing
ATI rules in right now is Far Cry by a large margin and that needs to be addressed by both NV and Crytek. AF goes to ATI but not in all games. Image quality goes to nvidia (unbelievable isn't it?) except for Far Cry. These cards are a dead heat. The 6800 needs a bigger power supply (con) but offers many more features than does ATI. There are trade-offs everywhere. I myself was waiting for the fastest card to make my purchase decision, but since they are so close, I will be sticking with nvidia as they have always been good to me. The first BFG card to hit the streets is mine. Luvin that lifetime warranty.
So, I wont be able to enjoy Far Cry at this time but that will be fixed eventually and if I ever decide to buy that game. Wasn't thrilled with the demo but thats just my view on it.
:::::Applause to ATI for hitting back very hard::::: Keep em competitive boys!!! pricewar will ensue.
ATI rules in right now is Far Cry by a large margin and that needs to be addressed by both NV and Crytek. AF goes to ATI but not in all games. Image quality goes to nvidia (unbelievable isn't it?) except for Far Cry. These cards are a dead heat. The 6800 needs a bigger power supply (con) but offers many more features than does ATI. There are trade-offs everywhere. I myself was waiting for the fastest card to make my purchase decision, but since they are so close, I will be sticking with nvidia as they have always been good to me. The first BFG card to hit the streets is mine. Luvin that lifetime warranty.
So, I wont be able to enjoy Far Cry at this time but that will be fixed eventually and if I ever decide to buy that game. Wasn't thrilled with the demo but thats just my view on it.
:::::Applause to ATI for hitting back very hard::::: Keep em competitive boys!!! pricewar will ensue.
The features are pathetic, and so is the performance on a per clock basis. Considering ATi has a 30% advantage in core clock, it's certainly not showing up in the tests. Also, note that ATi cards this time around are running at FP24 still while Nvidia is at FP32, and that NV cards have much more overclocking.
It is nice that the X800 series have lower power draw however.
Also, these reviews are very contradictory - notice that here at Hardware Analysis:
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1710.3/
Nvidia spanks ATI on all the stuff that ATI supposedly won over at Toms. I'm having trouble finding consistency here.
If I were buying, it'd be Nvidia for several reasons:
- Better feature set
- Better driver stability
- ATi is canadian
- Better $/performance
But of course, that's just me. Here's hoping a future driver release puts Nvidia ahead by a good margin.
It is nice that the X800 series have lower power draw however.
Also, these reviews are very contradictory - notice that here at Hardware Analysis:
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1710.3/
Nvidia spanks ATI on all the stuff that ATI supposedly won over at Toms. I'm having trouble finding consistency here.
If I were buying, it'd be Nvidia for several reasons:
- Better feature set
- Better driver stability
- ATi is canadian
- Better $/performance
But of course, that's just me. Here's hoping a future driver release puts Nvidia ahead by a good margin.
Anyone want to bet the X800 enjoys more OEM wins from the likes of DELL?
Sure it will in the .5% of dell computers that ship with a highend card
Sure it will in the .5% of dell computers that ship with a highend card
Not at all! If u look at the end of firingsquad's review, the cards are mixed on who wins. Personally, I say its a price war! There is no clear winner. There are still variables to consider here. First off, ATI's drivers are probably better for this round due to it being based on the previous archetecture so nv prob has more tweaking then ati does. Next to consider, is temoral AA. Who knows what this will bring to image quality. On the other hand, PS3.0 may give some to image quality, but probably more to performance then image quality. And then of course there is the psu req to consider. (~65 vs ~120)
Then there is the biggest picture. Most people wont spend 500+ on a gpu. They simply wont when the slightly worse model is cheaper and 90% as good. So what im saying, is that both have their ups and downs and u wont go wrong buying into any of them!
Personally, i find it rediculous how everyone is just bumping up their cards by so little in clock speeds (ati's platinum and nv's extreme)
Originally posted by: crsgardner
I like that one. Good reason for not buying from a company.
With their beady eyes and big flappy heads.
Originally posted by: Genx87
Anyone want to bet the X800 enjoys more OEM wins from the likes of DELL?
Sure it will in the .5% of dell computers that ship with a highend card
A major reason as to why companies like nVidia and ATI spend so much time and money into R&D of flagship cards is because they give you the reputation of having the fastest cards, which means more sales with the slow cards that actually bring in the highest profit margin. If ATI does indeed steal another crown this makes them king for two straight generations. Not like nVidia isn't guilty of merely majorly beefing up previously successful cores in order to win performance. GF4s are basically just really fast GF3s, DX8 only whereas the Radeon 8500 is generally slower than the GF4 line but supports DX8.1. More features, slower card, ATI loses.
Does this help at all fanboy?? Seriously, if they both stay almost dead even and just top one another back and forth, then we will win with prices. So i say keep em as even as u possibly can to cause a price war!
Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
Originally posted by: Genx87
Anyone want to bet the X800 enjoys more OEM wins from the likes of DELL?
Sure it will in the .5% of dell computers that ship with a highend card
A major reason as to why companies like nVidia and ATI spend so much time and money into R&D of flagship cards is because they give you the reputation of having the fastest cards, which means more sales with the slow cards that actually bring in the highest profit margin. If ATI does indeed steal another crown this makes them king for two straight generations. Not like nVidia isn't guilty of merely majorly beefing up previously successful cores in order to win performance. GF4s are basically just really fast GF3s, DX8 only whereas the Radeon 8500 is generally slower than the GF4 line but supports DX8.1. More features, slower card, ATI loses.
More features? Really!? I thought gf4's were 8.1. any other opinions on this matter pplz?
Wrong
From the Hard Ocp conclusion:
When it comes right down to it the X800Pro matches or beats the GeForce 6800Ultra in game performance and IQ. Compare the price, performance, and IQ of the ATI Radeon X800Pro with the GeForce 6800Ultra, and the X800Pro definitely stacks up as the better value than the 6800Ultra
Seeing as both cards perform basically within a few percentage points of one another. I dont think its an accurate description to call the X800 "pathetic".
Oh boy, so now to have competing graphics cards we should be doing it on a clock for clock basis? Those same arguments seemed to hollow doing P4 vs Athlon comparisons. Why don't you go tell both ATI and NVidia's engineers that they have to agree on an identical way of getting their performance?
I'm not sure I put much faith in either review. Tom is using a custom timedemo for his UT2K4 benchmarks (which for all we know could involve staring at a wall), and HA is doing a botmatch. I do find one thing troubling, how is it that in Tom's review at 4xAA/0xAF the cards are all scoring sub-100FPS at 1600x1200, but on the HA review ATI scores ~110, and the 6800 is almost 130? That and the odd ~30FPS drop that the X800XT takes when going from 1280x1024 to 1600x1200. Does that make ANY sense? Esp. when its counterpart 6800U only seems to be losing 3FPS?
That is simply childish.
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 Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter