X800 Pro vs X800 XL vs 6600 GT

[AnnoyedGrunt]

Originally posted by: Darth Farter
6600gt is a mainstream card: MAINSTREAM!!

the X700pro/9800pro are comparable to it. the purpose of this thread is completely dumb with some of the ppl who play along in it too.
you could've told the guy already to stop insulting all our intelligence and at least compare apples to apples.

price segment (msrp according to ATi & nVidia) matchups:
x700 / x600xt - 6600
x700pro / 9800pro - 6600gt
6800 - x800
6800GT - X800pro (and after a 8month refresh the cheaper X800XL on pci-e, the X800XL agp = still $350)
6800U - X800XT (later X850 series which are newer & cheaper/performance)

so... What are we comparing again?
the vice versa of a 6800GT and a x700pro?

that's like comparing a ferrari with a tricycle.. or did you really find a X800XL for $149?
according to www.pricewatch.com the cheapest 6600gt's are at $149 the cheapest x800pro's at $273 and the cheapest x800XL at $273.

that's why this thread's purpose seems completely retarded, try making a valid comparison next time.

Comic Book Guy: "WORST POST EVER"

The question was not which was better, but instead if the extra cost of the XL was worth it. As such, it is a perfectly valid question.

I used to have a 9700pro, and when I made the switch to PCIe I felt the 6600GT was not enough of an upgrade @ any price. Therefore I waited for several months until the X800XL was available for $300, and @ that price I think it is a great purchase.

I personally think it is better to spend the extra $100-150 now, instead of getting a 6600GT now and then upgrading when next gen stuff arrives. Mainly I feel this way for a couple reasons:
1. Look how long it took the current gen of cards to get sorted. For many months, the high end cards from both ATI and NV were in very short supply and very expensive. If you were willing to spend the money, you could find cards, but since you are on a budget I think you will have to wait several months after the launch of next gen cards before you'll feel comfortable buying one.
2. Also look at the cost of cards. I think the next gen cards will be very expensive. They are far more complex than current ones, and will be significantly faster. I think that the best you could hope for are the current high end cards getting less expensive.

So, I think the X800XL will last longer than the 6600GT and will give you a more time to wait and see how the next gen stuff develops. Also, you will get significantly better performance today, and while you wait.

OTOH, if the price difference makes you uncomfortable, than the 6600GT is still a great card, especially if you are used to something slower than a 9700pro.

That's my take.

-D'oh!

 

[user1234]

agreed. btw the 9700pro was a superb card when it came out, shattering all previous performance records by a huge margin. Even today repeatedly people and reviewers say they are surprised how it still provides reasonable performance in all new games (at medium settings). The 6600GT is probably about 25-50% faster I would guess.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

I can't believe he's getting this advice. He's going to be limited at 1280x1024. At that resolution with no AA or AF, the difference is 5-25% in most newer games.

 

[Creig]

The 6600GT doesn't even completely blow away a 2 year old ATI 9800 Pro. Anandtech review I think you'll want the extra performance of an X800XL if you plan to use the card for the next 2+ years.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
I can't believe he's getting this advice. He's going to be limited at 1280x1024. At that resolution with no AA or AF, the difference is 5-25% in most newer games.

Yeah but why wouldnt he turn on AA/AF at 1280x1024?

 

[Megatomic]

I run 1280x1024 with 4xAA/8xAF. This is a very playable setting for an X800XL.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: Creig
The 6600GT doesn't even completely blow away a 2 year old ATI 9800 Pro. Anandtech review I think you'll want the extra performance of an X800XL if you plan to use the card for the next 2+ years.

About that review: is it with or without AA/AF. I find it really hard to believe that a 128-bit 6600gt beats a 256-bit 9800pro at 1600*1200 resolution, even more so with AA.

Anyway, back to the topic, it depends how much money you're willing to spend. The 6600gt is a midrange card, while the x800xl is a high end card. You could either get a midrange card upgrade every year, or get a previous-gen high end card every year, depends on how you upgrade. Of course if you're willing to cough up the dough, you'd get a new high end card every year. It depends on what your priorities are, but I say if you can afford a x800xl, then go for it, it's a good card for the money.

 

[Matthias99]

Originally posted by: munky

Originally posted by: Creig
The 6600GT doesn't even completely blow away a 2 year old ATI 9800 Pro. Anandtech review I think you'll want the extra performance of an X800XL if you plan to use the card for the next 2+ years.

About that review: is it with or without AA/AF. I find it really hard to believe that a 128-bit 6600gt beats a 256-bit 9800pro at 1600*1200 resolution, even more so with AA.

Those numbers are without AA/AF, and so are a best-case scenario for the 6600GT. The 6600GT has a lot more fillrate (500*8 versus 380 * 8 -- about 33% more fillrate) and not much less bandwidth than the 9800Pro (it's 128-bit, but the RAM is at 500Mhz, whereas the 9800Pro is at 340Mhz -- it's only about a 25% difference). At 1600x1200 with AA/AF, the 6600GT gets hamstrung by its memory, but below that (or without AA/AF), it's usually a good bit faster than a 9800Pro.

You can see in some of the other tests in that article that the 6600GT drops to near (or below) 9800Pro performance with AA enabled. Enabling AF as well would hurt it even more.

I have to say this is not a *huge* detriment to the 6600GT, since neither card is going to perform terribly well at 1600x1200 with AA/AF on newer games.

 

[slash196]

Without looking at price, XL hands down.

 

[Zebo]

6600GT is a horrendous value compared to XL which is more than twice as fast for only 50% more money. When you're chopping along with the 6600GT, you'll definity be feeling buyers remorse for that XL.

 

[Lemodular]

Originally posted by: Zebo
6600GT is a horrendous value compared to XL which is more than twice as fast for only 50% more money. When you're chopping along with the 6600GT, you'll definity be feeling buyers remorse for that XL.

Horrendous value? Read this. The x800xt/tl is clearly better card but it's the next card class up from the 6600GT. Why is everyone trying to compare a 6600GT with the larger spec'd X800? The comprable card to the 6600 line is the 9800 or the x700, since they are similar in price. If one can afford it, go for the X800XL, if not the next best thing would be the 6600GT.

 

[ironique]

Of the three cards, X800XL, definately.

 

[Tweakin]

Having just moved from a 9600xt to a x800xl for the sole purpose of 12x10 with filtering, I also went through the same process. I even purchased a 6600gt for my other system to see how it was...sent it back in a week as I was already pushing it at 10x7 with filtering enabled.

I figured the extra $100 was worth the x800xl as this is the first video upgrade I have done in a long time. I think this card will keep you happy into the next generation of games. The x800xl has a better return from your investment.

 

[LukeMan]

If your looking to be a money pincher but want performance, then check ebay for an x800 Pro OEM card. I bought an x800 Pro pcie card that was pulled from a Dell computer. Since it was from a Dell system it had a big black heatsink, not the normal heatsink/fan on most x800 cards. Since it had the heatsink rather than the ATI heatsink/fan I got it for a cheap $180. I then bought an Arctic-Cooling vga cooler for $30. Grant it, its not able to run at all 16 pipes, but its easily overclockable, and can nearly keep up with the 6800 ultra. Bottom line is, just keep your eye on ebay and you can end up with a fast overclockable card for $210 give or take.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: LukeMan
If your looking to be a money pincher but want performance, then check ebay for an x800 Pro OEM card. I bought an x800 Pro pcie card that was pulled from a Dell computer. Since it was from a Dell system it had a big black heatsink, not the normal heatsink/fan on most x800 cards. Since it had the heatsink rather than the ATI heatsink/fan I got it for a cheap $180. I then bought an Arctic-Cooling vga cooler for $30. Grant it, its not able to run at all 16 pipes, but its easily overclockable, and can nearly keep up with the 6800 ultra. Bottom line is, just keep your eye on ebay and you can end up with a fast overclockable card for $210 give or take.

Yeah, Dell pulls can be good deals...including the 6800GTO.

 

[LukeMan]

the 6800 GTO can be got pretty cheap, but it is an underclocked GT. The Dell pulled x800 Pro though is the same core and memory speeds as a normal x800Pro, just without the fancy looking heatsink/fan. Since the GTO is underclocked it will be a tad slower than the x800 Pro, since the Pro is very comparative to the normal GT.

Only problem with the dell x800 Pro though, is that its non vivo, so I guess trying to go 16 pipes is outta the question.

 

[KoolDrew]

6600gt is a great budget card. If you decide to get a better card, the X800XL is an excellent choice.

 

[fstime]

Originally posted by: hans030390
that i am! I will fully accept all major hate flame/making fun of me IF sm3.0 doesnt turn out to be great or if the 6600gt sucks at all future games on lowest settings.

BUT, don't bring in the 5xxx series into this...that is TOTALLY different.

If SM3.0 ends up being great with the 6xxx cards, i'll be happy for being the only broken record here!

I'll take a FX5200 over a TI4600 because its DX9.

:disgust:

 

[whoster69]

I've been trying to make up my mind between the 6800GT and the X800XL and I've just about decided on the 6800GT.

After studying numerous scores and reading lots of comparisons of these two cards, most of the time, the 6800GT scores slightly higher. It does cost more (about $60 more from the prices I've found, but for that $60 I get a SM 3.0 compatible card and slightly better performance overall). To me that's worth the extra 60 bucks on a $300 investment. I play a lot of Battlefield 1942 and like the way it looks better on the nVidia cards.

I currently own an ATI 9700 Pro and think it's a great card. I've also got a GeForce 2 GTS Pro and love it.

 

[fstime]

Originally posted by: whoster69
I've been trying to make up my mind between the 6800GT and the X800XL and I've just about decided on the 6800GT.

After studying numerous scores and reading lots of comparisons of these two cards, most of the time, the 6800GT scores slightly higher. It does cost more (about $60 more from the prices I've found, but for that $60 I get a SM 3.0 compatible card and slightly better performance overall). To me that's worth the extra 60 bucks on a $300 investment. I play a lot of Battlefield 1942 and like the way it looks better on the nVidia cards.

I currently own an ATI 9700 Pro and think it's a great card. I've also got a GeForce 2 GTS Pro and love it.

Its more than $60.

I believe the cheapest XL is around 280 and the cheapest GT is $380.

$100 may be a lot more to someone else then it is to you. You still get a great card.

If I were you, I would just wait until the next generation cards come out.

They should ALL have Sm3 support.

No point in buying video cards this late.

 

[LukeMan]

Originally posted by: whoster69
I've been trying to make up my mind between the 6800GT and the X800XL and I've just about decided on the 6800GT.

After studying numerous scores and reading lots of comparisons of these two cards, most of the time, the 6800GT scores slightly higher. It does cost more (about $60 more from the prices I've found, but for that $60 I get a SM 3.0 compatible card and slightly better performance overall). To me that's worth the extra 60 bucks on a $300 investment. I play a lot of Battlefield 1942 and like the way it looks better on the nVidia cards.

I currently own an ATI 9700 Pro and think it's a great card. I've also got a GeForce 2 GTS Pro and love it.

http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041222/vga_charts-08.html

according to those tests, the x800xl scored higher fps than the 6800gt in 2 of the 3 tests. If $60 or whatever is worth sm3.0 than go waste your money. Also a big benefit of the ATI cards is that they create less heat than the NVidia cards, and can usually be overclocked more. Correct me if I'm wrong but the x800xl doesn't even require an extra power source?

 

[whoster69]

I almost didn't post because I knew someone would start quoting specific tests. (I wasn't sure if it would be the ATI fans or the nVidia fans.) Yes you can find tests that the X800XL is faster in. You can find tests that the nVida is faster in. That's the problem with cards that have results that are so close. As I said before, slightly better overall after reading numerous scores/comparisons. I'll also add that these were just the 20 or so tests that I read. Someone else might have read a different set of tests and come to a different conclusion that would be just as relevant. That's why I stated it as slightly higher.

As to the $60 difference that was off the top of my head. It's fluctuated back and forth, getting closer as of late (probably due to the G70 coming out soon). I wouldn't be surprised if it the X800XL got cheaper after ATI releases their next part, so it could go back the other way then.

In looking up the latest prices, here's what I found, but take note that this is by no means an exhaustive study. I just looked at a few prices on a few sites.

X800XL PCIe 256MB Retail: Rosewill $285 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814164041

nVidia 6800GT PCIe 256MB: XFX $350 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814150091 (A few weeks back they had a 6800GT for $330)

There. That's $65 bucks. Closer to my prediction than I would have thought LOL!

Again, like I said before with SM 3.0 support, SLI, and in my judgement, slighly better performance overall, I thought it was worth the next money. Others could certainly come to the reverse conclusion.

 

[imported_rod]

The general consensus seems to be that the 6800GT>X800XL, but it is more expensive, so it's to be expected. Also, the X800XL>6600GT, but agin, it's more expensive.

If you can justify paying for a X800XL rather than a 6600gt then get the X800XL. When i was buying my PC the difference was over $100 so i opted for a 6600GT, but if i were buying a new computer today, i would probably opt for the X800XL.

RoD

 

[Powermoloch]

The thread exist :Q !

 

[Munky]

I just read my own post from 4 months ago and I think we should have an official rule against resurecting a dead thread.