• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

X700 preview!!!

I've seen the review, but i'm still buying nVidia, simply for the feature set. I don't want last years technology, even if it does perform slightly better now. Because I just have this gut feeling that nVidia's driver team will be able to do more with the 6 series.
 
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
still id side with nvidia for having the newer tech......ati still floggin that artx r300 design

It's all they can do Otis- they forgot to come up with a new core in 2003 and 2004.....
 
lol...that's kind of funny, if only because it's halfway true.

Personally, I'm leaning Nvidia as well, but I always haver because of their better driver stability. That said though, the X700 looks like a very solid contender. The mid-range seems the same as the high end this time around - equal performance, base your purchase on other factors.
 
Originally posted by: SneakyStuff
I've seen the review, but i'm still buying nVidia, simply for the feature set. I don't want last years technology, even if it does perform slightly better now. Because I just have this gut feeling that nVidia's driver team will be able to do more with the 6 series.


Even if the X700/X800 is simply a refresh of an older core design, it makes Nvidia look that much worse since they can barely keep up to it with their latest and greatest. Just because something is newer doesn't automatically mean it is better.
 
From this initial bench, it doesn't look like there's a whole lot of overall performance difference between the X700XT and the X700Pro. They're certainly closer in performance to each other than the 6600GT/6600 are.


X700 XT - 8139 3DMark03
X700Pro - 7187 3DMark03

Difference - 11.7%


6600GT - 8042 3DMark03
6600 - 5035 3DMark03

Difference - 37.4%





X700 XT - 21781 3DMark01SE
X700Pro - 20335 3DMark01SE

Difference - 6.6%


6600GT - 18839 3DMark01SE
6600 - 15262 3DMark01SE

Difference - 19.0%





X700 XT - 50.05 FPS Aquamark 3
X700Pro - 45.53 FPS Aquamark 3

Difference - 9.0%


6600GT - 53.62 FPS Aquamark 3
6600 - 35.42 FPS Aquamark 3

Difference - 33.9%
 
Originally posted by: Creig
From this initial bench, it doesn't look like there's a whole lot of overall performance difference between the X700XT and the X700Pro. They're certainly closer in performance to each other than the 6600GT/6600 are.

all that means is that the 6600 is crap. 6600GT>x700xt>x700pro>>>>6600
GT has SLI going for it, so that is still tops in my book.


 
Boy, I want to say I remember seeing that the the X700XT MSRP is going to be $249 and the X700 Pro will debut at $199, but I can't remember where.
 
Originally posted by: Creig
Boy, I want to say I remember seeing that the the X700XT MSRP is going to be $249 and the X700 Pro will debut at $199, but I can't remember where.

That is what the Inq said 2 weeks ago. They are now saying $200 for 700XT, $180 for 700Pro and $150 for 700. Not really any reason to think too much about this though since we will have the official info tomorrow.



 
Originally posted by: Creig
From this initial bench, it doesn't look like there's a whole lot of overall performance difference between the X700XT and the X700Pro. They're certainly closer in performance to each other than the 6600GT/6600 are.

That's because ATi will have three cards in this space and nVidia will have 2.

The x700 is the direct competitor to the 6600, not the x700 Pro. The x700 Pro just kind of hangs out in-between where the x700/6600 and x700 XT/ 6600 GT are.

The x700 Pro better have a significant performance advantage over the 6600 if it stands a chance in it's market segment.
 
Originally posted by: Concillian
That's because ATi will have three cards in this space and nVidia will have 2.

The x700 is the direct competitor to the 6600, not the x700 Pro. The x700 Pro just kind of hangs out in-between where the x700/6600 and x700 XT/ 6600 GT are.

The x700 Pro better have a significant performance advantage over the 6600 if it stands a chance in it's market segment.


I guess it comes down to pricing. From what I've read, the MSRP of the 6600GT is $199 and the 6600 is $179. That would put the 6600GT vs X700XT and the 6600 vs X700Pro.
 
What im thinking is ATI are tying to do what nVidia did in the mainstream,

Like the X700pro being the 6800GT, its performance is near the top model, maybe it can be overclocked, while being cheaper and better than the competitor.
 
I just hope we see AGP versions right off the bat. I can't justify $275+ for a video card even though I game everyday, so a $200 X700XT would be viable if it at least kicks some previous gen butt.
 
6600GT or X700XT would be a nice mainstream card to have. Really powerful. Why not spend 20-50 bucks more and have one of them instead of X700/pro or 6600?
 
Its really weird how they dont even tell us what drivers they are using... doesn't it make you wonder? Also remember ATI's PCI-E cards are generally on par with a little better performance than AGP. Nvidias on the other hand are still working out kinks so we might see this get even closer.

-Kevin
 
yes the x700pro looks at this point the mid range card to get. Most will likely oc fairly well. Still too early to make predictions and it looks like the mid range pci express market will be well served. The plain 6600 looks like the only fly in the ointment, along of course with the x600 line.
 
Originally posted by: otispunkmeyer
still id side with nvidia for having the newer tech......ati still floggin that artx r300 design

The X700 is an R300 design? 😛
I know what you meant though, I'm just teasing 🙂
 
Back
Top