X-Bit Labs - Modern Games and Modern GPUs:

[Leper Messiah]

Rollo, why are you so quick to dismiss the fact that the ATi card, might...might! just actually be competive. You say that you only go for performance, but now that ATi is starting to actually compete with nVidia, you still refuse to acknowledge that fact.

 

[crazydingo]

I think you all should start ignoring Wreckage now, its pretty obvious.

 

[Bull Dog]

Originally posted by: Rollo

That's if you believe XBit and take their word as gospel. I don't, from what I've seen they do what they can to make ATI look good.

Funny how the reviews here paint a MUCH different picture.
[/quote]

drivers rollo, drivers.

 

[Sunrise089]

To me as a user with a limited budget this whole contest is over in about 2 seconds:

"Would you like a 256 GTX or a 512 GTX - the 512 is a good deal faster, but the 256 is largely playable at any resolution you will use and costs half as much" - take the 256 GTX

"Would you like an X1800XT or a 512 GTX - the GTX is a good deal faster, but the XT is larely playable at any resolution you will use and costs half as much" - take the XT

"Would you like an X1800XT or a 256 GTX - the XT is a good deal faster more often than it is slower and takes a smaller penalty for enabling AA/AF. In exchange it costs $50-100 more" - Take the XT

I question anyone in TODAY's market who does not have near unlimited funds to spend on a video card choosing otherwise.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: munky
What's your point? I know the 512gtx is the fastest single card so far. But as has been shown earlier in this thread, in most games its lead over the XT is a lot smaller than the lead of the XT over the 256gtx, not to mention the ridiculous price it goes for if you're lucky to find one.

I agree the price is high and it's tough to find, I was only using the articles to counter the FUD that it was not the overall fastest card.

Would I rather pay $50-100 more for the XT

Other than one "bulk" card on the internet you will end up paying $100 - $150 more.

And why would anyone pay extra for retail? The shiny new box isnt worth all that much

for 20-50% more performance

A pure exaggeration on your part as the XT even fell behind the GTX256 in some benchmarks.

And in SOME other benchmarks the 256gtx fell behind the x1800xl and the x850, but that doesnt change the overall picture thet the gtx is faster. Likewise, it doesnt matter if the 1800xt is behind the 256gtx at 12x10 0x0x in some cases, because those settings are retarded for a $500+ card, and in general dont stress the card much. When looking at the overall performance at maxed out settings the xt is way ahead of the 256gtx

Your definition of OWNAGE is laughable. :laugh:

You said I was not backing my claims with links and in 2 minutes I found 4, from some of the top sites that backed my statements.

If by OWNAGE you mean a lousy 0-15% lead that will cost you a $200-500 extra, then yeah, you sure did.

 

[BGuardian75]

I think the first point is, if you already own an x850XT you don't need to upgrade. The second point is, the 512MB GTX is an absolute waste of silicon at it's now 600-1000 dollar price point. Lastly, the X1800 is a good buy if you like high IQ at high resolutions and no one here has said the GTX isn't the overall best performing card. It is a bit amusing to see the usual nVidia fanboys react to X-bit labs unbiased and well done article which was very helpful to me in the way they are.

My last GPU was an x800 Pro and now I'm going to get the 7800GT CO from eVGA after Christmas. nVIDIA definitely owns ATI price/performance wise with that card.

 

[Leper Messiah]

Originally posted by: BGuardian75
I think the first point is, if you already own an x850XT you don't need to upgrade. The second point is, the 512MB GTX is an absolute waste of silicon at it's now 600-1000 dollar price point. Lastly, the X1800 is a good buy if you like high IQ at high resolutions and no one here has said the GTX isn't the overall best performing card. It is a bit amusing to see the usual nVidia fanboys react to X-bit labs unbiased and well done article which was very helpful to me in the way they are.

My last GPU was an x800 Pro and now I'm going to get the 7800GT CO from eVGA after Christmas. nVIDIA definitely owns ATI price/performance wise with that card.

When I get out of work today, I'm buying that newegg evga NF4 mobo+ 7800GT deal for 380.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Originally posted by: munky
What's your point? I know the 512gtx is the fastest single card so far. But as has been shown earlier in this thread, in most games its lead over the XT is a lot smaller than the lead of the XT over the 256gtx, not to mention the ridiculous price it goes for if you're lucky to find one.

I agree the price is high and it's tough to find, I was only using the articles to counter the FUD that it was not the overall fastest card.

Would I rather pay $50-100 more for the XT

Other than one "bulk" card on the internet you will end up paying $100 - $150 more.

And why would anyone pay extra for retail? The shiny new box isnt worth all that much

for 20-50% more performance

A pure exaggeration on your part as the XT even fell behind the GTX256 in some benchmarks.

And in SOME other benchmarks the 256gtx fell behind the x1800xl and the x850, but that doesnt change the overall picture thet the gtx is faster. Likewise, it doesnt matter if the 1800xt is behind the 256gtx at 12x10 0x0x in some cases, because those settings are retarded for a $500+ card, and in general dont stress the card much. When looking at the overall performance at maxed out settings the xt is way ahead of the 256gtx

Your definition of OWNAGE is laughable. :laugh:

You said I was not backing my claims with links and in 2 minutes I found 4, from some of the top sites that backed my statements.

If by OWNAGE you mean a lousy 0-15% lead that will cost you a $200-500 extra, then yeah, you sure did.

Lets take a look at certain game benchs from xbitlabs.

Chronicles of Riddick
16x12 4xAA 16xAF
7800GTX256 46FPS
X1800XT 36.3 FPS

Far Cry HDR bench
16x12 HDR
7800GTX256 mininum:33.3 avg:49.4
X1800XT mininum:0 avg:36.7

Pacific Fighters
16x12 4xAA 16xAF
7800GTX256 mininum:31 avg:59.6
X1800XT mininum:21 avg:41.3

AOE3
7800GTX256 mininum:22 avg:36.3
X1800XT mininum:16 avg:24.5

Lock On:Modern Air Combat
7800GTX256 mininum:9 avg:27.9
X1800XT mininum:8 avg:22.9

Pariah
7800GTX256 mininum:81 avg:109.2
X1800XT mininum:73 avg:91.8


Point to me a benchmark where a X850XT has a lead over the GTX 256mb. Because it doesnt in ANY bench. Point to me a benchmark where the X1800Xl has a lead over the GTX 256mb? Since xbitlabs can be trusted woth their reviews, go check out the latest reviews in xbitlabs and tell me then if there are any benchs where the X1800Xl leads the 7800GTX.

Edit-check out the lastest vr-zone's power color X1800XT review
Just look at the differences between a GTX256/XT.

From the performance charts, we could see that the PowerColor Radeon X1800XT has no problems leading the NVIDIA GeForce 7800GTX in most games - only with AA/AF settings turned on. With those quality settings turned off, we could only put this card on par, if not slightly slower then the GeForce 7800GTX. This might spell good news to gamers who are looking for a card, that allows them game a faster speed with such "eye candies" switched on. However, on the other hand, we cannot safely say the X1800XT is actually a more superior product as compared to the GeForce 7800GTX, since it only excelled in certain areas. Being such a case, it will all depend on the user, and their preference to judge if this is a card for them.

That is because as i said, the performance of the X1800XT is inconsistent. Im not doubintg its awesome performance but what i am trying to say is that this card only seems to perform well(thats a bit of a understatment actually ) in D3D FPS games, but lacks the performance in other areas, such as RTS, RPG(MMO), Simulators. The GTX doesnt however, as it performs well (i mean playable FPS at 16x12 4xAA 16xAF) in all categories.

Conclusion: For 50~100 dollars more, from the GTX you might get abit better IQ, AVIVO and 5~20 fps more in certain d3d games. In the consequence of lost performance ( we are talking about 5~20 fps decrease) in OpenGL (pacific fighters, Chronicles of riddick), RTS games (Dawn of war, AOE3), RPG games like Fable. You swap SLi for Crossfire.

btw If the X1800XT 512mb performed as it shouldve done in other categories, i would no doubt say the X1800XT is the better between 7800GTX512/256 in terms of performance, and price. But for 450 dollars or even lower through rebate, The 7800GTX still looks alot mroe attractive. You get to save 100 dollars or more, plus abit of OCing will help out d3d performance (although you dont even need to OC since according to xbitlabs, it performs mostly around 60fps at 16x12 4xAA 16xAF mode). The GTX doesnt stop from here. It has a much lower power consumption. It is less noisey. Its single slot.

And yes, most XTs are selling for $550ish and up.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Lets take a look at certain game benchs from xbitlabs.

lol

By that logic, people could have pulled up 8500 benchmarks (before Nvidia's detonators boost) and conclude the 8500 as a faster card. :laugh:

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: crazydingo

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Lets take a look at certain game benchs from xbitlabs.

lol

By that logic, people could have pulled up 8500 benchmarks (before Nvidia's detonators boost) and conclude the 8500 as a faster card. :laugh:

Whats your point?

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Lets take a look at certain game benchs from xbitlabs.

Chronicles of Riddick
16x12 4xAA 16xAF
7800GTX256 46FPS
X1800XT 36.3 FPS

Far Cry HDR bench
16x12 HDR
7800GTX256 mininum:33.3 avg:49.4
X1800XT mininum:0 avg:36.7

Pacific Fighters
16x12 4xAA 16xAF
7800GTX256 mininum:31 avg:59.6
X1800XT mininum:21 avg:41.3

AOE3
7800GTX256 mininum:22 avg:36.3
X1800XT mininum:16 avg:24.5

Lock On:Modern Air Combat
7800GTX256 mininum:9 avg:27.9
X1800XT mininum:8 avg:22.9

Pariah
7800GTX256 mininum:81 avg:109.2
X1800XT mininum:73 avg:91.8


Point to me a benchmark where a X850XT has a lead over the GTX 256mb. Because it doesnt in ANY bench. Point to me a benchmark where the X1800Xl has a lead over the GTX 256mb? Since xbitlabs can be trusted woth their reviews, go check out the latest reviews in xbitlabs and tell me then if there are any benchs where the X1800Xl leads the 7800GTX.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/games-2005_12.html
How about in FEAR at 10x7 or 12x10 with AA+AF - the XL is faster

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/games-2005_15.html
Quake4 10x7 0x0x - the XT PE is faster

These are cherry picked benches, so likewise anyone can cherry pick benches where the 256gtx beats out the XT, but overall it's slower in the majority of games.

Edit-check out the lastest vr-zone's power color X1800XT review
Just look at the differences between a GTX256/XT.

From the performance charts, we could see that the PowerColor Radeon X1800XT has no problems leading the NVIDIA GeForce 7800GTX in most games - only with AA/AF settings turned on. With those quality settings turned off, we could only put this card on par, if not slightly slower then the GeForce 7800GTX. This might spell good news to gamers who are looking for a card, that allows them game a faster speed with such "eye candies" switched on. However, on the other hand, we cannot safely say the X1800XT is actually a more superior product as compared to the GeForce 7800GTX, since it only excelled in certain areas. Being such a case, it will all depend on the user, and their preference to judge if this is a card for them.

That is because as i said, the performance of the X1800XT is inconsistent. Im not doubintg its awesome performance but what i am trying to say is that this card only seems to perform well(thats a bit of a understatment actually ) in D3D FPS games, but lacks the performance in other areas, such as RTS, RPG(MMO), Simulators. The GTX doesnt however, as it performs well (i mean playable FPS at 16x12 4xAA 16xAF) in all categories.

Conclusion: For 50~100 dollars more, from the GTX you might get abit better IQ, AVIVO and 5~20 fps more in certain d3d games. In the consequence of lost performance ( we are talking about 5~20 fps decrease) in OpenGL (pacific fighters, Chronicles of riddick), RTS games (Dawn of war, AOE3), RPG games like Fable. You swap SLi for Crossfire.

btw If the X1800XT 512mb performed as it shouldve done in other categories, i would no doubt say the X1800XT is the better between 7800GTX512/256 in terms of performance, and price. But for 450 dollars or even lower through rebate, The 7800GTX still looks alot mroe attractive. You get to save 100 dollars or more, plus abit of OCing will help out d3d performance (although you dont even need to OC since according to xbitlabs, it performs mostly around 60fps at 16x12 4xAA 16xAF mode). The GTX doesnt stop from here. It has a much lower power consumption. It is less noisey. Its single slot.

All valid points, however dont forget the r520 is still a relatively new core, and has a lot of room for improvement. The hardware is certainly capable of faster performance, but with each game designed differently, the drivers need some time to mature before the hardware can be used to it's full potential. And with a programmable mem controller, we've already seen how it can significantly improve performance in certain games when it's used correctly.

And yes, most XTs are selling for $550ish and up.

As long as the cheaper ones are in stock, why would anyone buy the more expensive ones?

 

[5150Joker]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
, but lacks the performance in other areas, such as RTS, RPG(MMO), Simulators. The GTX doesnt however, as it performs well (i mean playable FPS at 16x12 4xAA 16xAF) in all categories.

I don't know how you can say it lacks in MMO games when the only one tested was FF XI and the difference between the two cards was very small. True it lacks in some RTS games like AOE3 but it certainly does not lack in simulators, third person games and popular OpenGL titles:

Simulator:
Colin McRae Rally 2005
X1800XT:
Min: 51
Max: 81.9

7800 GTX:
Min: 46
Max: 68.4

3rd person games:
Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory
X1800XT:
Min: 38.1
Max: 51.2

7800 GTX:
Min: 27.9
Max: 39.6

Prince of Persia 2
X1800XT:
Min: 106
Max: 131.3

7800 GTX:
Min: 105
Max: 120.3

OpenGL games:
Quake 4
X1800XT:
FPS: 95.4

7800 GTX:
FPS: 81.7

Doom 3
X1800XT:
FPS: 47.4

7800 GTX:
FPS: 46.2


Keep in mind, none of these numbers even take into account HQ AF or TRSSAA/Adaptive AA because if they did, you'd see a much bigger hit for nVidia cards using high quality IQ. Maybe a decent reviewer will come along one of these days and include high quality AF/AA numbers in their benchmarks. If both cards have these features, why not test them right? Anyway, despite the X1800XT being a nice card, ATi was still too little too late with the release and the win goes to nVidia regardless of how close the numbers are since the GTX was out way earlier and in quantity (which we can't say the same for the overpriced 512 GTX Press Edition). The final DX9 fight between R580/G71 should be really interesting since I think both cards will be out in quantity and should be very comparable.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: 5150Joker

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
, but lacks the performance in other areas, such as RTS, RPG(MMO), Simulators. The GTX doesnt however, as it performs well (i mean playable FPS at 16x12 4xAA 16xAF) in all categories.

I don't know how you can say it lacks in MMO games when the only one tested was FF XI and the difference between the two cards was very small. True it lacks in some RTS games like AOE3 but it certainly does not lack in simulators, third person games and popular OpenGL titles:

Simulator:
Colin McRae Rally 2005
X1800XT:
Min: 51
Max: 81.9

7800 GTX:
Min: 46
Max: 68.4

3rd person games:
Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory
X1800XT:
Min: 38.1
Max: 51.2

7800 GTX:
Min: 27.9
Max: 39.6

Prince of Persia 2
X1800XT:
Min: 106
Max: 131.3

7800 GTX:
Min: 105
Max: 120.3

OpenGL games:
Quake 4
X1800XT:
FPS: 95.4

7800 GTX:
FPS: 81.7

Doom 3
X1800XT:
FPS: 47.4

7800 GTX:
FPS: 46.2


Keep in mind, none of these numbers even take into account HQ AF or TRSSAA/Adaptive AA because if they did, you'd see a much bigger hit for nVidia cards using high quality IQ. Maybe a decent reviewer will come along one of these days and include high quality AF/AA numbers in their benchmarks. If both cards have these features, why not test them right? Anyway, despite the X1800XT being a nice card, ATi was still too little too late with the release and the win goes to nVidia regardless of how close the numbers are since the GTX was out way earlier and in quantity (which we can't say the same for the overpriced 512 GTX Press Edition). The final DX9 fight between R580/G71 should be really interesting since I think both cards will be out in quantity and should be very comparable.

Guess you have a point. QFT though. (although it still lacks in OpenGl titles, because it only excels in doom3 engine based games. Such as Pacific fighters (openGl plus simulator), dawn of war, chronicles of riddick where even the new OpenGL fix doesnt help much, etc) I guess when "prey" comes out with other new games, than we we will truely see which card performs the best in terms of which can handle S.M3.0 plus DX9 the best.

Anyways, if those settings are used, besically apple to apple comparisons cant be made. IQ would be different, HQ for NV is different for HQ AF for ATi, Transparecy is different to adaptive because the two produces different IQ.

btw some of us dont want apple to apple comparisons right?
Derek has told me he would do the benchmarks using those settings and hopefully the article is out by this month.

 

[nts]

Down of War is a directX game, not OpenGL.

 

[crazydingo]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster
Whats your point?

That you are looking at an old review.