Understanding the Pricing and Distinction Between GEFORCE 7800 & 7900 cards

[Starbuck1975]

I am in the process of configuring a system build, and have hesitated on making the ATI X1900 series plunge largely because of the cost.

I thought I had my heart set on the eVGA 7800GT as the best bang for the buck option, and then the 7900 series came out.

The problem is, I am having trouble differentiating between the different 7900 series cards and their 7800 naming convention counterparts.

I would assume that the new series implies a performance boost over the 7800s.

A vanilla 7900GT is priced competitively to the 7800GT, but the 7800GTX is still a bit overpriced.

So of the 7800 and 7900 series eVGA cards, what is the best bang for the buck option for a gamer who owns Half Life 2, FEAR, and a few others, but can't play any of them on his current system.

Also, I plan on doing an entire RAM, MOBO, processor, power supply swap with this upgrade, with the intent of investing in a video card that will be able to play the latest and greatest games for at least the next 2 years.

 

[Azndude2190]

Get the 7900GT

 

[Matthias99]

VERY roughly:

7900GT = 7800GTX
7900GTX = 7800GTX 512MB
An OCed 7900GT is usually somewhere in between there.

There are about eighteen zillion benchmark articles out there if you want to see direct comparisons.

Currently, unless you can get a used 7800GT for a song, the 7900GT is probably the best option. The X1800XTs at ~$290 are also looking pretty good, especially given that it has been hard to find 7900GTs for under MSRP lately.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I kind of figured that the 7900GT is the way to go...as I am not in too much of a rush to upgrade, I can wait a month or two for supply to meet demand and for the MSRP to stabilize.

Next question, of the eVGA 7900GT family, you have three options: vanilla, CO and CO superclocked.

Which of the 7900GTs should I be looking at specifically?

 

[Azndude2190]

IMO just get the Vanilla cheapest out of all the others...you can still squeeze some ocing in with coolbits.You'll have absolutely no problem playing the games you mention.What res do you play at?

 

[namityadav]

OP, It's not fair to talk about 7800 / 7900 with 1900xt. From the ATI department, you should look at the 1800xt .. which is at the same price point (In fact is selling for a bit cheaper right now), and is arguably slightly better in terms of performance than a 7900gt (Not considering power requirements / heat / noise)

 

[lopri]

Umm.. I think - suggesting an X1800 now is like suggesting a 7800GT when you can get a 7900GT. To top that off, R520 isn't the most successful core in ATI's history and many people dislike it due to... many things. He should get a 7900GT, or better yet, an X1900XT with a little more investment. Yeah you might need to lay out $50~100 more, but it'll be worthwhile. It has 48 shader processors and alot more features going for it. I'd rather spend $50~100 more than wasting $300~350. GTX is much more expensive now and hard to find now so it's out of question. I just don't get why X1800 is even recommended at all? Many compared it to NV30 and I kind of agree to it.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: lopri
Umm.. I think - suggesting an X1800 now is like suggesting a 7800GT when you can get a 7900GT.

If they were the same price, I'd agree. But you can get an X1800XT for $289 right now, while it is hard to find even a 'stock' 7900GT under $330.

To top that off, R520 isn't the most successful core in ATI's history and many people dislike it due to... many things.

Uh... what?

I just don't get why X1800 is even recommended at all?

Because it performs about the same as a stock 7900GT, and currently costs less and is more available. At the same price it would be a tossup (7900 runs cooler, X1800XT has a better stock cooler and better IQ), but unless you want to OC heavily (which would probably require replacing the stock cooler on the 7900GT as well), I can't see spending 10-20% more to get a 7900GT over the X1800XT.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Given that I am not in a rush, I may wait for prices to settle a bit into the various market segments.

I know that X1900XT is the big boy on the block right now, but is the price premium worth the performance jump over say a 7900 series or even X1800 series card?

I realize that there are plenty of benchmarking reports out there, but unfortunately, I dont always understand what those benchmarks mean in terms of bang for buck performance/price matching.

For instance, is a 5 or even 10 fps boost worth $100 to $200...not sure.

 

[nitromullet]

R520 isn't the most successful core in ATI's history and many people dislike it due to the fact that is was really late to market.

Fixed for ya... The only thing disappointing about the X1800XT was that is took too long to get to market. Had it come out on time to compete with the 7800GTX 256, I think it would have been extremely successful. Now that it's widely available in a 256MB version for ~$300, it competes very nicely against the 7900GT.

I know that X1900XT is the big boy on the block right now, but is the price premium worth the performance jump over say a 7900 series or even X1800 series card?

At ~$440 at newegg and monarch (AMIR) for an X1900XT, I think it's worth it over any $300 card. It takes two 7900GT's to beat an X1900XT in most situations.

 

[Starbuck1975]

It takes two 7900GT's to beat an X1900XT in most situations.

True, but how much slower is a 7900GT compared to the X1900XT.

I guess the question remains...if a 7900GT is more then capable of performing for the most demanding of current games and those in the near future...interestingly enough, Morrowind is what forced my last video card upgrade, and Oblivion is somewhat motivating my current upgrade...along with HL2, Fear, Far Cry and a few others I cant play on my current system.

I dont necessarily need to play games at the highest possible resolution...but I am tired of having to turn down all of the graphics features on games, and having them still stutter, as is the case with my current card.

So again, is the price point of the 7900GT a sufficient entry point for current games and future proof for say the next 18months to 2 years.

The X1900XT may be faster, but if that performance increase is not really of benefit now and in the near future, it is not worth the price premium IMOP.

 

[Starbuck1975]

shameless bump...see questions in previous posting

 

[Matthias99]

Your question is pretty vague, and 'future-proofness' is very hard to quantify.

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
So again, is the price point of the 7900GT a sufficient entry point for current games and future proof for say the next 18months to 2 years.

My answer to this would be "Yes, as long as you don't need to run everything at uber-high resolution and maxed settings." A (single) 7900GT (or an X1800XT) will have problems even today trying to run very demanding games at resolutions 1600x1200 and up with all the details and IQ features cranked up. But it should be capable of running new games over the next few years without a problem, as long as you are willing to scale back settings somewhat, or you are running at a lower resolution like 1280x1024.

The X1900XT is a significant step up in performance from a 7900GT -- at least in terms of pixel shader output. It roughly doubles the pixel shader capabilities of a high-end GF7 card, which may provide a big performance boost when trying to run high-IQ settings in upcoming titles. In today's games, the 7900GT/X1800XT is pretty fast, and the X1900XT/7900GTX are very fast. That gap may widen in the next two years... or it might stay about the same.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: Matthias99

Because it performs about the same as a stock 7900GT, and currently costs less and is more available.

With all due respect, X1800XT beats 7900GT in most games since it beats 7800GTX in most games by 15-20%. If we were to look at FEAR, Far Cry, Oblivion, COD2, X1800XT is far superior. In fact the only time I would recommend anyone get a 7900GT card is if they are going to be overclocking.

Digit-Life
X1800XT 512mb vs. 7900GT=7800GTX stock
Far Cry
FEAR
COD2

Firingsquad
Oblivion
BF2
Quake 4
COD2
FEAR
Serious Sam 2

Originally posted by: lopri
I just don't get why X1800 is even recommended at all? Many compared it to NV30 and I kind of agree to it.

Ok let's see, it's faster (in 90% of major games above), combine that with better quality AF, more ram for those who want to keep it for longer than 1 year and it hardly makes sense how anyone can recommend 7900GT without overclocking involved......where is the relevance to NV30? Not to mention ATI has better video hardware acceleration. X1800XT is by far better than a stock 7900GT. You cant even argue that 7900GT is quiet .....It even loses to ATI in Quake 4, an OpenGL game!

 

[russki]

7800gt<7800gtx<7900gt<7800gtx 512mb<7900gtx

you can o/c the 7900gt card easily, mine is @ 535/1568 and i've been playing half life 2 all day without any incident!

 

[Starbuck1975]

Your question is pretty vague, and 'future-proofness' is very hard to quantify.

Probably because I have no idea what the hell I am talking about half the time when it comes to hardware. I know enough about the tech to put a system together, but not enough to make an argument either way for certain components.

In today's games, the 7900GT/X1800XT is pretty fast, and the X1900XT/7900GTX are very fast. That gap may widen in the next two years... or it might stay about the same.

I think this is the answer I was looking for. I remember 2 or 3 years back, there was always a enthusiast surge to purchasing the latest and greatest cards, even if the performance increase was negligeable.

It appears that in terms of current game requirements and future proofing my system, the X1900XT might be the best decision.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

I think this is the answer I was looking for. I remember 2 or 3 years back, there was always a enthusiast surge to purchasing the latest and greatest cards, even if the performance increase was negligeable.

It appears that in terms of current game requirements and future proofing my system, the X1900XT might be the best decision.

I disagree. In 2 years X1900XTX/7900GTX will be far too slow. From that perspective, unless you resell high-end cards to recoup the cost right before next generation comes out (like sell 7800Gt before 7900GT comes out, so upgrade cost is low, etc), you'd be better off buying mid-range cards more often than keeping $500 card for 2-3 years. I think if you are that concerned about future proofing, you'd be better off getting X1800XT for $290 and then G80 or R600 (7800GT style) card for $290 in 1 year.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I disagree. In 2 years X1900XTX/7900GTX will be far too slow. From that perspective, unless you resell high-end cards to recoup the cost right before next generation comes out (like sell 7800Gt before 7900GT comes out, so upgrade cost is low, etc), you'd be better off buying mid-range cards more often than keeping $500 card for 2-3 years. I think if you are that concerned about future proofing, you'd be better off getting X1800XT for $290 and then G80 or R600 (7800GT style) card for $290 in 1 year.

Good point, although there is a question of what I mean by future proofing. The trend in recent years is that the strain placed on systems by games is always a step behind the capabilities of current hardware. That dynamic is starting to shift a bit.

As I mentioned earlier, I fully expect that regardless of my card choice, the technology is moving so quickly that while I may be able to play current games maxed out with the recent generation cards, that won't necessarily hold true a year from now. Similarly, I dont have a problem with scaling back graphics settings on games to squeeze more life out of whatever card I get...I have simply reached that breaking point where even scaling everything back does not ensure smooth gameplay on most current games.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Another thought...part of my upgrade is going to be either a Viewsonic VX922 or VX2025wm LCD...the native resolution and even max resolutions for either monitor will not push the boundaries of a my video card...as I wont be able to play at super high resolutions regardless.

So maybe the 7800GT is the price point solution given my monitor constraint. At 1280x1024 or 1680x1050, the 7800GT or 7900GT should be more then sufficient?