Why are people going crazy over the 512 MB GTX?

[cm123]

The MSI NX7800GTX-VT2D512E is in stock CLICK HERE

Price is only high right now since its very new and only just shipping direct from the manufacturers leaving only those compaines who are truely direct with stock to sell/ship from right now.

The 512MB GTX carries a $599 to $699 MSRP depending on which card you get...

 

[CP5670]

Originally posted by: Dribble
I have to stand up for hardocp - their reviews aren't so good if you want to bash the opposition with meaningless numbers but they are very useful for those who want to buy cards to play games instead of all this e-penis measuring.

If I have card X hardocp tells me what change to my actual game play going to card Y will make. If it's a small difference then doesn't matter how much faster some other sites time demo says it runs, when I actually play the game that's all the extra money will have bought me.

The problem with the HardOCP benchmarks is that everyone has a different idea of what playable is. Their "playable" settings are far from what I would consider so. I would rather get the standard list of framerates at different resolutions and AA settings and decide for myself what I want to use. Although on the other hand, their framerate graphs are way better than the single number averages that most other sites report.

 

[Genx87]

I love threads like this because you can see who the ATI fanbois are.
This is a funny thread from fanATIcs who cant hanle the truth ATI just got their doors blown off and will try to find any justification for why the x1800XT is equal to the 7800 512.

Once the supply picks up I am willing to bet the 7800 512 will be as much as the x1800XT yet be 10-25+% faster.

Simple fact is ATIs new high end card has been relegated to mid 400s pricing.

 

[GreyMittens]

Wow this thread went nuts (let me add to it!! haha)

Simple facts:

1 - Both are nice cards
2 - Both are expensive cards
3 - The 7800 *is* the card to have if you want the current best
4 - Who gives a sh?t how one person spends their own money and on what

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I love threads like this because you can see who the ATI fanbois are.
This is a funny thread from fanATIcs who cant hanle the truth ATI just got their doors blown off and will try to find any justification for why the x1800XT is equal to the 7800 512.

Once the supply picks up I am willing to bet the 7800 512 will be as much as the x1800XT yet be 10-25+% faster.

Simple fact is ATIs new high end card has been relegated to mid 400s pricing.

Haha what a load of balooney. (5150joker is suddenly a ATI fanboy?)

When he criticized ATI for their mistakes, he was "cool" but he isnt now. Reiterates my point that you "have to be in the sorority gang" and cant simply have a neutral opinion.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I love threads like this because you can see who the ATI fanbois are.
This is a funny thread from fanATIcs who cant hanle the truth ATI just got their doors blown off and will try to find any justification for why the x1800XT is equal to the 7800 512.

Once the supply picks up I am willing to bet the 7800 512 will be as much as the x1800XT yet be 10-25+% faster.

Simple fact is ATIs new high end card has been relegated to mid 400s pricing.

And we can also tell who the Nvidiots are because they simply make posts about "ATI fanboys" instead of adding anything meaningful to the discussion.

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: shiznit
512mb video ram is for real people, i've seen call of duty 2 tests where a 512mb x800xl beats a 7800gtx 256.

Where and at what settings?

FiringSquad just did this and as you can see, there isn't a huge benefit for the 512mb of ram on the GTX.

They also show the 512mb X800XL getting 17.2fps (the 256mb gets 12.3, so there is a good benefit on mid-range cards) compared to the GTX at 24.4fps. Not quite beating it.

I'm sure 512mb of vid ram will be useful soon, but, for right now, on settings at 16x12 4x/8x, with these high-end cards, with the current driver set, it just doesn't matter.

 

[MedicalEntropy]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: BFG10K

If you look at HardOCP's review, the performance delta between both in high IQ settings (e.g. HQ AF/TRSSAA vs HQ AF/Adaptive AA) is minimal yet the X1800XT is $150 cheaper

HardOCP's testing methodology is flawed for multiple reasons. Instead of testing apples vs apples benchmarks at a range of settings they simply present their opinion of what is playable. That's great and all but it severely restricts their ability to accurately test the cards.

Oh I agree, I'm not a huge fan of their methodology either. However, their review is one of the few that includes trssaa and adaptive aa from what I've seen. I'd mention driverheaven but then a lot of people would cry biased even though their reviews tend to be really good.

The owner of Driverheaven has quoted "Sorry I prefer the 7800 GTX"

http://www.driverheaven.net/showpost.php?p=706758&postcount=5


Wish people would stop buttmunching on Driverheaven. Especially the infamous excuse of ... actually, I'd rather not continue. It'll become a flame bait.

As for the card, the GTX 512MB actually made my head turn the other way. Now, I don't like Nvidia, but that doesn't mean I don't like the cards. Actually liked the GT and 256 GTX, but this just made me wonder if I should consider buying one in the future.

 

[jiffylube1024]

If resolution is all that matters, why bother with AA/AF at all?

That's nothing more than a ridiculous strawman. You're the one that demanded "best possible IQ" but then started arguing the resolution doesn't count because it doesn't fit into your delusional idea of image quality.

1280x1024 is not "best possible IQ".
4xTrAA/4xAAA is not "best possible IQ".

This entire thread was constructed around the basis of the reasoning level of that of a six year old, and your arguments since have done nothing but follow that trend.

Where is this argument going, aside from proving that 5150Joker is wrong from a semantic point of view?

I'd say Joker is on the right path with his "highest IQ possible," even if the way he wrote it doesn't pass your strict standards for nitpicking, I for one found his argument pretty clear 😉 .

When he is saying "highest IQ possible," he obviously means "best IQ possible at playable framerates," or even more precisely, at frames he considers playable for himself. Sort of like what HardOCP does, only using his own personal criteria of playability, like we all do when we judge what is playable to us.

I'd agree with this methodology too: 2048X1536 is all fine and good as an estimate of future game performance, but at the end of the day, I'm primarily looking at 1600X1200 tests (with and without AA, and with AF all the time), because that's what I use and I want to know what IQ settings I can run and maintain playable framerates with.


These kinds of normative discussions seem to go nowhere; setting a new standard with 1280X960 (or 1280X1024; yes many people do run LCD's at this resolution) as a low resolution or a medium resolution... Other than to make the person feel like crap because their shiny new LCD is now considered a "low" resolution, what purpose do arguments like this serve?

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Oh, and on the original topic, with the price points where they are right now, SLI GTX 256mb has a better price/performance ratio than a single 512GTX, since the 512GTX is being gouged and the 256GTX is showing up on FS/FT for $400.

Once the 512GTX drops to $650, it will be spot on with SLI 256GTX for an even price/performance ratio*. The absolute best price/performance ratio right now would be SLI 7800GTs. Considering you can grab them on FS/FT (or a hot deal) for $300 each, they cost less and perform better than the 512GTX. The 512GTX would have to drop down to $550ish for them to be on equal ground, price/perf wise.

*according to the numbers I've averaged from 4 different website benchmarks, with prices effective right this second.

 

[Paktu]

Originally posted by: M0RPH
The GTX 512 is a nice card but I can see why someone would be underwhelmed by it's performance/price ratio right now. It beats the XT by 10-20% on average but costs 20-25% more. And the XT is a little more feature-rich and boasts somewhat better IQ. The GTX 512 has a nice cooler on it that is reportedly quieter than the XT, however the GTX is more power hungry. So in the end, at it's current pricing, I don't think it's the slam dunk everyone is making it out to be. This could change if the price goes down and the price of the XT remains the same. But I have a feeling the GTX 512 is always going to cost 20-25% more than an XT.

So, uh, M0RPH, when are you going to admit (as you promised) that you were wrong about this card's clocks? I have yet to see it.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: Genx87
I love threads like this because you can see who the ATI fanbois are.
This is a funny thread from fanATIcs who cant hanle the truth ATI just got their doors blown off and will try to find any justification for why the x1800XT is equal to the 7800 512.

Once the supply picks up I am willing to bet the 7800 512 will be as much as the x1800XT yet be 10-25+% faster.

Simple fact is ATIs new high end card has been relegated to mid 400s pricing.

Haha what a load of balooney. (5150joker is suddenly a ATI fanboy?)
.

In this thread yes.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

Originally posted by: Genx87
I love threads like this because you can see who the ATI fanbois are.
This is a funny thread from fanATIcs who cant hanle the truth ATI just got their doors blown off and will try to find any justification for why the x1800XT is equal to the 7800 512.

Once the supply picks up I am willing to bet the 7800 512 will be as much as the x1800XT yet be 10-25+% faster.

Simple fact is ATIs new high end card has been relegated to mid 400s pricing.

And we can also tell who the Nvidiots are because they simply make posts about "ATI fanboys" instead of adding anything meaningful to the discussion.

I know you are but what am I? :disgust:

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Matt2
also, I think Nvidia's AA looks a lot better than ATI's. Just look at the IQ comparison in the BFG 7800GT SLI review at Rage3D.

That depends on the monitor you're using. On an LCD NV's 2x and 4x AA look smooth and Ati's looks like a chain link on every polygon edge. On a CRT Ati's AA looks crisp and clean, while Nv's looks like a smudged mess.

Totally and completely untrue. Why would you state such garbage? AA/TAA looks pristine on my CRT. Its a 19" Dell. I truly don't know how LCD's look, but it looks terrific on my CRT. 7800GTX.

It's been discussed before at b3d, as well as in a thread poset here about a month ago. This applies to Alpha textures AA, not regular polygon MSAA. Regular MSAA could be argued either way, show me proof that it looks better on Nv. But I have seen myself the difference in alpha AA on a LCD and a CRT, and it looks exactly as I stated in my post above.

 

[Pabster]

What do we have here?

A bunch of ATi fanboys trying to explain how nVidia's monster is "too expensive" when it stomps the XT and just happens to be available on launch day unlike a certain ATi card.

 

[g3pro]

Originally posted by: M0RPH
The GTX 512 is a nice card but I can see why someone would be underwhelmed by it's performance/price ratio right now. It beats the XT by 10-20% on average but costs 20-25% more. And the XT is a little more feature-rich and boasts somewhat better IQ. The GTX 512 has a nice cooler on it that is reportedly quieter than the XT, however the GTX is more power hungry. So in the end, at it's current pricing, I don't think it's the slam dunk everyone is making it out to be. This could change if the price goes down and the price of the XT remains the same. But I have a feeling the GTX 512 is always going to cost 20-25% more than an XT.

In a few weeks the GTX 512 will be around $500, which is less than what the X1800XT is at right now.

So 20% performance over the TOP OF THE LINE ATi product is definitely worth it.

 

[reever]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

Originally posted by: Genx87
I love threads like this because you can see who the ATI fanbois are.
This is a funny thread from fanATIcs who cant hanle the truth ATI just got their doors blown off and will try to find any justification for why the x1800XT is equal to the 7800 512.

Once the supply picks up I am willing to bet the 7800 512 will be as much as the x1800XT yet be 10-25+% faster.

Simple fact is ATIs new high end card has been relegated to mid 400s pricing.

And we can also tell who the Nvidiots are because they simply make posts about "ATI fanboys" instead of adding anything meaningful to the discussion.

I know you are but what am I? :disgust:

So I'm guessing you don't actually have a REAL response to what he said? You're both right you know, you need to accept that

 

[g3pro]

Originally posted by: Pabster
What do we have here?

A bunch of ATi fanboys trying to explain how nVidia's monster is "too expensive" when it stomps the XT and just happens to be available on launch day unlike a certain ATi card.

Wanna know what's hilarious? Those are the same people who said that when the X1800XT was priced at $600 and the GTX 256 at $450, the X1800XT will decrease in price, so it's a non-factor.

 

[Steelski]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Matt2
also, I think Nvidia's AA looks a lot better than ATI's. Just look at the IQ comparison in the BFG 7800GT SLI review at Rage3D.

That depends on the monitor you're using. On an LCD NV's 2x and 4x AA look smooth and Ati's looks like a chain link on every polygon edge. On a CRT Ati's AA looks crisp and clean, while Nv's looks like a smudged mess.

Can you explain this further as this is something i dont know about. Should make a nice article by someone.

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: jiffylube1024

If resolution is all that matters, why bother with AA/AF at all?

That's nothing more than a ridiculous strawman. You're the one that demanded "best possible IQ" but then started arguing the resolution doesn't count because it doesn't fit into your delusional idea of image quality.

1280x1024 is not "best possible IQ".
4xTrAA/4xAAA is not "best possible IQ".

This entire thread was constructed around the basis of the reasoning level of that of a six year old, and your arguments since have done nothing but follow that trend.

Where is this argument going, aside from proving that 5150Joker is wrong from a semantic point of view?

I'd say Joker is on the right path with his "highest IQ possible," even if the way he wrote it doesn't pass your strict standards for nitpicking, I for one found his argument pretty clear 😉 .

When he is saying "highest IQ possible," he obviously means "best IQ possible at playable framerates," or even more precisely, at frames he considers playable for himself. Sort of like what HardOCP does, only using his own personal criteria of playability, like we all do when we judge what is playable to us.

I'd agree with this methodology too: 2048X1536 is all fine and good as an estimate of future game performance, but at the end of the day, I'm primarily looking at 1600X1200 tests (with and without AA, and with AF all the time), because that's what I use and I want to know what IQ settings I can run and maintain playable framerates with.


These kinds of normative discussions seem to go nowhere; setting a new standard with 1280X960 (or 1280X1024; yes many people do run LCD's at this resolution) as a low resolution or a medium resolution... Other than to make the person feel like crap because their shiny new LCD is now considered a "low" resolution, what purpose do arguments like this serve?

Admittedly I should have been more consistent by sticking to "high IQ" as my word of choice but after posting benchmarks and defining my criteria for high IQ as a basis for my argument, BFG decided that resolution should take precedence over TRSSAA/AAA HQ AF and that I am a "simpleton", "idiot", "troll" for not counting resolution as the largest factor of IQ. What good is a 2048x1536 resolution if nobody can use it? Sure it may be a good measure for overall GPU power but that's it - it doesn't mean a whole lot to a gamer that will buy this card.

Second, BFG contradicted himself by flaming HardOCP claiming their methods of testing are flawed then later in the thread he advocates using the highest settings possible with the best playable framerates (something HardOCP does). Pretty funny.

Lastly, the benchmarks I chose are selective, I never denied that or tried to present them as anything but that. The reason they are selective is because it is hard to find benchmarks with settings that use TRSSAA/AAA HQ AF, hence the entire basis of this thread. There's no denying the 512 GTX is the best card on the market, however given it's price right now it isn't worth the extra $150 over the XT when you take into account TRSSAA/AAA HQ (this is what I consider high IQ) numbers. Mentioning resolution and MSAA/low quality AF has no basis in this discussion - BFG knows this but decided to nitpick and resort to childish insults anyway.

 

[CP5670]

Admittedly I should have been more consistent by sticking to "high IQ" as my word of choice but after posting benchmarks and defining my criteria for high IQ as a basis for my argument, BFG decided that resolution should take precedence over TRSSAA/AAA HQ AF and that I am a "simpleton", "idiot", "troll" for not counting resolution as the largest factor of IQ. What good is a 2048x1536 resolution if nobody can use it? Sure it may be a good measure for overall GPU power but that's it - it doesn't mean a whole lot to a gamer that will buy this card.

Well I'm considering getting this card (in a month or so, once the price falls a bit) and it certainly means a lot to me. Out of the people buying this card (a very small subset of all gamers), I think it's a safe bet that a significant percentage will be interested in performance at that resolution, especially since it's one of the 7800 architecture's strongest points over all the other cards.

 

[compcons]

I stopped by my local Compute warehouse place where they have a pair of the 512MB 7800GTX's in an FX-55 system. They say they can't the SLI rig to work at all. I trust the technical competancy of the person who did it so i have some doubts about how "good" the SLI is.

Anyone seen any actual reviews (not rpeviews - but BENCHES) of the 512's in SLI? Do they actually work in SLI? Not debating ATi vs Nvidia (lord know i haven;t seen a working crossfire X1800XT setup either).

EH

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: Genx87
I love threads like this because you can see who the ATI fanbois are.

Haha what a load of balooney. (5150joker is suddenly a ATI fanboy?)
.

In this thread yes.

Why because he's opinion doesnt chime with yours. :roll:

Originally posted by: g3pro
Wanna know what's hilarious? Those are the same people who said that when the X1800XT was priced at $600 and the GTX 256 at $450, the X1800XT will decrease in price, so it's a non-factor.

Sorry, that point was covered already:

Originally posted by: 5150Joker
It's funny, now nVidia fans are sounding like ATi fans did on X1800XT's release, "it just got released, just you wait, it will get cheaper, I promise!". Yeah so will the X1800XT over time and I doubt the 512 GTX will ever have price parity with the X1800XT let alone be cheaper. For the cost, the 512 GTX is simply not worth the price of admission, especially since it brings nothing new technologically over the 256 mb version.

 

[solofly]

Originally posted by: RampantAndroid
Wow...another thread about this....we didn't need it.

5150, I've read this thread and it seems to be you saying all the time that the 7800 just sucks....you darn well look like a fanbiotch to me. This thread is really going nowhere, proving nothing other than that people here can create USELESS threads, and abuse the quote button....

This whole thread is flawed, simply because you want to bash ATi, when they are just as bad on launch day. If you want to bash them, wait for the prices to stabilize, then see if you can still come on here and post random crap.

Can we get a lock?

Joker should sell his Nvidia card and go back where he belongs, a 100% certified fanatic. (as he called himself inthe past)

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: solofly
Joker should sell his Nvidia card and go back where he belongs, a certified fanatic. (as he calls himself)

Please don't post personal attacks, or posts that 'call out' a particular member. This sort of thing is not needed, and contributes to a lot of the negativity that has been in this forum lately.

Stick with discussing the hardware, not the other people.