Whats with the hype of the X1900's?

[Pete]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
I'm sorry if this has already been discussed, I didn't take the time to read all 100+ posts. But I did read some of it. One thing I want to bring up is that someone stated that the only real advantage of the X1900 vs the 7900 is shader intensive games ie F.E.A.R. . Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't shader intensive games the future of gaming?

Also I see the X1900 as something like AMD is for CPU's. Does alot of shader work per clock. So if these things are true, wouldn't the ATI card seem to be more future proof?

There is no such thing.

I've been trying to psot this where I can in these X1900XT/X threads.

HDR+AA is the main example. HDR+AA runs great on the X1900XT/X on all FIVE games that support HDR (one of which, Far Cry, every PC gamer should have beat a long time ago). Even then the benches arent all that impressive.

I highly doubt by the time that HDR becomes mainstream in games, the X1900XT/X will able to do HDR+AA at high resolutions or with all the eye candy turned up in the newest, most demanding games.

At this point HDR+AA is a tech showcase by ATI just like HDR was for Nvidia when G70 was released. By the time HDR+AA is really needed, you'll need R600/G80 to do so at a decent resolution.

Buying a X1900XT/X purely because of HDR+AA is just as silly as buying a 6800GT for SM 3.0 or a 7800GTX for HDR was.

Um, Matt, were you answering a different post? B/c none of what you said applied to PC Surgeon's post.

But I agree that buying a X1900 just to AA your HDR in future games is not a wise move.

As for PC Surgeon's actual post, yes, you will see more shaders and so more pixels being shaded more in future games. It's inevitable. In that respect, you can't fault having more shaders on your card--which is why NV doubled up on complete ALUs in their pixel shaders, and why ATI bet the farm (or at least this year's harvest) on more pixel shaders.

Comparing GPUs to CPUs is a bit of a stretch. Comparing X1900 to A64 is moreso, b/c X1900 is geared toward future games more than current ones, whereas A64 is so popular b/c it just kicks ass in everything current.

If we were talking X1800 vs. 7800, you'd have to think a X1800 is more like a P4 and a 7800 is more like an A64 in terms of ops/clock and clock speeds. X1900 really complicates things, enough so that I'm not sure how to compare it to a CPU. Maybe multi-core?

 

[Starbuck1975]

What is the better upgrade path...purchasing a 7800GT now with the intent of upgrading it in a year or two, or paying the price premium now for the X1900?

 

[Alaa]

i think mid-range products will always give u the chance to upgrade at any time sooner or later and u wont have to worry about the future and ppl saying the future is for ati or that, so i'd go for a midrange like 7800gt and upgrade when needed

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
What is the better upgrade path...purchasing a 7800GT now with the intent of upgrading it in a year or two, or paying the price premium now for the X1900?

A year or two to me is a long time. For $180 (approximate difference between 7800GT and X1900XT) it seems worth it to have higher IQ and/or faster performance. Plus the X1900XT will be worth more in a year or two compared to the 7800GT, even though it will depreciate more.

Look at it this way. Say the X1900XT depreciates at twice the rate of the 7800GT. So you pay $180 extra now but you're only able to sell it for $90 more in a year or two. So total cost to have the X1900XT over the 7800GT is $90. If you divide that $90 up over time it ends up costing you $7.50 a month if you sell in a year or $3.75 a month if you sell in two years. Obviously the numbers aren't dead on but you get the gist. You just have to ask yourself if $3.75-7.50 a month is worth the huge performance boost.

 

[Pete]

If you'll be happy with 7800GT performance for a year or two, then it's cheaper and so better. But if you're unsatisfied from the start, maybe it's wiser to get the X1900: trade some extra $ to be happy throughout its working life.

If you mean to say you'd upgrade a GT in a year or two but a X1900 in three or four, then definitely get the GT. I really doubt the X1900 will be great for that long. If it's longevity you're after, I'd counsel scraping by until we see ATI's and NV's next-gen, their unified shader DX10 parts, both or which are supposedly due by the end of this year or alongside Vista (whichever happens later ).

 

[nycdude]

Originally posted by: munky
The cycle ALWAYS continues. What if after the release of the g71 there's rumors of a higher clocked r590, and people wait even longer. And then soon after that we're looking at r600/g80 right around the corner, so you could potentially postpone your upgrade indefinitely. If the g71 was scheduled for launch a week or 2 from now, I'd be willing to wait, but since it's at least another month away, maybe even 2 months, I would just buy whatever I need right now.

nicely said.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Since my upgrade path is typically 3 years, guess I will go with the X1900.

My Radeon 9800 Pro has actually held up rather well...games as recent as 2004 run fairly well on my system, paired with 512MB of RAM and my Athlon XP 1900+. Deus Ex 2 was the first game that I had to start turning down graphic rendering features, and play at lower resolutions...although the screen load times were more frustrating then loss of frame rate...then Far Cry, HF2 and other such games came out, and even at low resolutions and all the shiny graphical goodness set to the lowest setting, the game sputters along...plus those games were made to play in all their glory, not watered down...so that is usually my benchmark for upgrading.

However, upgrades rarely consist of a video card alone...usually means a new MOBO, processor and RAM thrown into the mix...and now a new PSU as well...but if I can do it for under $1500, that is a reasonable price to pay for a 3 year upgrade path, even if it means a possible GPU swap 18 months down the line.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: nycdude

Originally posted by: munky
The cycle ALWAYS continues. What if after the release of the g71 there's rumors of a higher clocked r590, and people wait even longer. And then soon after that we're looking at r600/g80 right around the corner, so you could potentially postpone your upgrade indefinitely. If the g71 was scheduled for launch a week or 2 from now, I'd be willing to wait, but since it's at least another month away, maybe even 2 months, I would just buy whatever I need right now.

nicely said.

Too bad I already found proof of monkey telling people to wait a month or more for the R580 last year, even though at the time you could have saved the wait and got a pair of GT's that perform on par or better than the XTX which was still a month away.

 

[nib95]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: nycdude

Originally posted by: munky
The cycle ALWAYS continues. What if after the release of the g71 there's rumors of a higher clocked r590, and people wait even longer. And then soon after that we're looking at r600/g80 right around the corner, so you could potentially postpone your upgrade indefinitely. If the g71 was scheduled for launch a week or 2 from now, I'd be willing to wait, but since it's at least another month away, maybe even 2 months, I would just buy whatever I need right now.

nicely said.

Too bad I already found proof of monkey telling people to wait a month or more for the R580 last year, even though at the time you could have saved the wait and got a pair of GT's that perform on par or better than the XTX which was still a month away.

Yes, but that's sticking with old hardware. Whats the point in that?
X1900 and G71 are new, hense more future proof. So either one of these would do fine.

X1900 over 2 GT's anyday. X1900 could be crossfired in a few months so naturally its a longer lasting set up.

I personally recommend UK buyers to just go with the X1900 XT, it's selling for a minute £360, for what you get thats a phenomenal price, considering the 7800 GTX 512mb sells for £580 and the 7800 GT sells for £240. So for an extra £120 you get next gen, new architecture. Chances are it'd be an extra £360 over the GT to get Nvidias new card (G71).

Go figure? What here is the best value for money?

In theory in the UK at least you could buy nearly 2 X1900 XT's (£720) against the G71 which is likely to be priced at £600 here.