Curse

stickyballs · Mar 17, 2006, 04:04 AM // 04:04

All a matter of preference. I use NVidia 6800 GT and it works *slightly* better than my X800. Doesn't really make a different IMHO.

Res Surection · Mar 17, 2006, 10:12 AM // 10:12

isnt the core clock and memory speed lower?

j0j081 · Mar 17, 2006, 11:09 AM // 11:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Res Surection

isnt the core clock and memory speed lower?

you can't go by those alone. there are a lot more things to factor in.

Anyway here is a brief summary of the last few years for those of you interested. the whole Nvidia 5XXX line sucked. DirectX 9 performance was horrible in comparison to ATIs 9XXX line more specifically the 96/97/9800s. These are still some of the most widely used cards today. Nvidia however turned things around drastically with the 6XXX line, the 6800 has been out for a long time now and it still considered by some to be the best bang for the buck. All of the 6 line outperformed anything ATI could offer at the time in their various market segments. Then to top it off the 78 line was released pushing back ATI even more. Although ATI did bring forth a card to match it (x1800 line) this wasn't until months after the initial Nvidia release when for all intents and purposes the competition was over, not to mention ATI couldn't meet demand and basically had a paper launch. Finally, ATI made up a lot of ground by refreshing the x1800 line into the x1900 line. This beat out Nvidia's top 7800 cards but just a couple weeks ago Nvidia launched the 79 line which now holds the peformance crown but only if you have $500-600 to spend on the GTX model. Nvnews a site I visit frequently has quite a few members purchasing card like that in SLI so I guess there is a market for it. As far as SLI and Crossfire goes, so far SLI has been the far better option but like someone said ATI is still trying to improve their two card version.

OneArmedScissor · Mar 17, 2006, 03:32 PM // 15:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by twangansta

I haven't been keeping up to date on prices and the performance of various computer hardware, and I'm only more informed on Nvidia cards.

I would say the 6800 GS is a great buy, I've seen as low las 149.99 on Newegg (maybe lower). For something a bit more, the 7600 GT seems right around $200, but I haven't read enough reviews on it to get a full knowledge of its performance.

Agreed. The 6800GS is the best bang for the buck card right now. Easily overclocked, etc. The 7600 is a great card, but I would still go with the 6800GS because there isn't much difference between the two to justify a $50-$75 extra spending.

You guys are comparing AGP X1600s with PCI-E 6800GSs?!?

OneArmedScissor · Mar 17, 2006, 03:33 PM // 15:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by fragyou

you can't go by those alone. there are a lot more things to factor in.

Anyway here is a brief summary of the last few years for those of you interested. the whole Nvidia 5XXX line sucked. DirectX 9 performance was horrible in comparison to ATIs 9XXX line more specifically the 96/97/9800s. These are still some of the most widely used cards today. Nvidia however turned things around drastically with the 6XXX line, the 6800 has been out for a long time now and it still considered by some to be the best bang for the buck. All of the 6 line outperformed anything ATI could offer at the time in their various market segments. Then to top it off the 78 line was released pushing back ATI even more. Although ATI did bring forth a card to match it (x1800 line) this wasn't until months after the initial Nvidia release when for all intents and purposes the competition was over, not to mention ATI couldn't meet demand and basically had a paper launch. Finally, ATI made up a lot of ground by refreshing the x1800 line into the x1900 line. This beat out Nvidia's top 7800 cards but just a couple weeks ago Nvidia launched the 79 line which now holds the peformance crown but only if you have $500-600 to spend on the GTX model. Nvnews a site I visit frequently has quite a few members purchasing card like that in SLI so I guess there is a market for it. As far as SLI and Crossfire goes, so far SLI has been the far better option but like someone said ATI is still trying to improve their two card version.

The 1900s beat the 7900s dude.
Hell... the X1800XT beats out the 7900GTX in COD2 and the 7900GT in FEAR and BF2.

glockjs · Mar 17, 2006, 04:00 PM // 16:00

people turn into fanboys

the market is back and forth. i'll go with whatever gives me the best bang for the buck so to speak. right now ati is on top of the high end. and crossfire>sli(by a mile)...but tomorrow that could change :/

TB_ · Mar 17, 2006, 04:06 PM // 16:06

All Im gunna say is look at the bottom of the gw website.

Ghozer · Mar 17, 2006, 04:45 PM // 16:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by TB_

All Im gunna say is look at the bottom of the gw website.

Agreed, GW was Designed using ATI, and runs 'best' on ATI as a result

Teklord · Mar 17, 2006, 05:19 PM // 17:19

Last I heard there was no clear cut winner in the Ultra High end Video card market. The X1900XTX will beat out the 7900GTX in some games and benchmarks, and the opposite is also true. Pretty much its a neck and neck race. As for SLI and Crossfire, well SLI is older so it wouldn't surprise me to hear that it is more stable. However there are two features with Crossfire that I absolutlely adore: You don't need identical model cards to run it, and you don't need 'profiles' to enable it in games, Crossfire works on any application right out of the box. As such, I'm currently running an X1800XL which when I purchased it was around $450.00 CAN, and that's about as much as I'll spend on one component at any one point in time. I'm set up using an Asus A8R MVP so that in the future all I need to do is purcahse the Crossfire X1800 Edition and I'm set. That'll be an easy upgrade.

PieXags · Mar 17, 2006, 05:29 PM // 17:29

...touchy question to ask. Don't bother asking something like this on the Internet as it's usually just preference you'll hear. You can get a fine card from nVidia or ATI, both have cards that can be found at suitable prices to fit your needs I'm sure. A short while back I bought ATI's x850xt pe at $350 and it runs anything I can buy as of right now as high as I'd want it. ...by all means my PSU should probably have exploded right now (being that it's a 250W) but everything's been just fine with the card.

So long as stuff looks nice and pretty 'eh?

OneArmedScissor · Mar 17, 2006, 05:33 PM // 17:33

for overclockability... get a 7900
For leaving it at stock settings... get a 1900

Teklord · Mar 17, 2006, 05:37 PM // 17:37

And why would anyone Overclock a top of the line Ultra High End I can run anything at the Highest Graphics possilbe graphics card?

I really don't understand what it is with people and overclocking these days! I mean fine, if your running some middle to lower end hardware, and you know what you are doing, overclock it so it can still play todays games that would make sense. But to overclock a 7900 or an 1900, I mean for those that know Spaceballs well ".. whats with you man, come on!" -Dark Helmet

Josh · Mar 17, 2006, 05:43 PM // 17:43

^ Yeah, me too, I understand overclocking a lower and middle-range cards, but the top range of the cards, to me it's:

- Don't fix what isn't broken.

sigried · Mar 17, 2006, 05:54 PM // 17:54

well i have a Nvidia an im having this stuped bug all the time im gettin i piss of witht the Nvidea car i think im goin to get a ATi, you see the Guildwars is specially desing to work with ATI less glithc

Peewee · Mar 17, 2006, 06:16 PM // 18:16

Personally i have nothing but bad experience with this current NVidea 4000 MX card. Not only does the card suck, but customer support, and their seeming lethargy in fixing problems (that have more to with wasted power and conflicts than lack of card power) makes me more inclined to forget about them on my next card, whatever it may be.

As people have said, take an ATI for GW, as my card, and others NVidea cards, have major issues with GW as far as texturing goes, and other more recent games simplwont work. (i recently found that Battle For Middle Earth 2 will run on a GeForce 3 series, but not on a 4000 MX *sigh*)

Serafita Kayin · Mar 17, 2006, 06:22 PM // 18:22

don't be pissed about an mx4000.

That architecture is 5 generations or so old.

GF2-GF3Ti-GF4Ti-GF5-GF6-GF7. Six generations. It's built on the Geforce 2 MX architecture, and was a crappy card back in the day. It's only purpose in life is cheap upgrades from onboard video and businesses.

If they wouldn't support a 5, 6, or 7 series. I'd cry. The MX 4000 is an embarrasment to them, and that's a quote.

Cottage Pie · Mar 17, 2006, 07:07 PM // 19:07

I use a Nvidea GeFroce FX5900...it does the job at an average of 50FPS with all settings on max. Nothing to moan about for £40

4runner · Mar 17, 2006, 07:21 PM // 19:21

Just upgraded to 7900gtx 256ddr2 x16 pipe X2, what a difference!!!

core clock ___450mhz
memory clock____1400mhz

on an amd fx60 asus an8 sli, dam scored 33,256 on 3dmark2005
old score was 29,178 on a p4 3.6g ee asus main board with 7800gts oh what a difference

7800gt's
core clk_________400
memory clock____1000

Nvidia FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Str0b0 · Mar 17, 2006, 07:22 PM // 19:22

One word for why ATi is better. Crossfire. Enough said. NVidia has yet to come up with as good a dual card set up as the ATi Crossfire. Also, though this difference has become less distinct over the years. NVidia is designed to work best with Pentium chips. ATi is designed to work best with AMD chips. This isn't as noticeable now as it was a few years back but it does still make a difference.

Serafita Kayin · Mar 17, 2006, 08:07 PM // 20:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Str0b0

One word for why ATi is better. Crossfire. Enough said. NVidia has yet to come up with as good a dual card set up as the ATi Crossfire. Also, though this difference has become less distinct over the years. NVidia is designed to work best with Pentium chips. ATi is designed to work best with AMD chips. This isn't as noticeable now as it was a few years back but it does still make a difference.

Where in the blue holy hell did ya get this?

Did you know that ATi MAKES Intel's chipsets now? That nVidia IGNORED the P4 for years and only released AMD boards?

Crossfire, though intelligent, is not as developed as SLi and in fact, I know people, myself included, who are experimenting with Crossfire cause nobody knows all the answers about it yet INCLUDING ATi.

It comes down to this. If you like it, use it. If you had a bad experience, evaluate it in an objective manner and ask yourself does it really seem indicative of the rest of the cards in a series. If yes, feel free to not buy them. If no, quit your bitching. I mean it. You may have a legitimate gripe about a SINGLE CARD but if you aren't able to test a few of them how do you know they're all crap? I CAN and DO test multiple cards, of the same types and different types, and I can tell you that each card can be night and day.

Who's better? Who cares! Get what you can afford and what makes you happy, cause if you wanna brag about e-penis (which is what this boils down to) I can shame you all. I'm industry. I knew what was in 7800 before it was more than a gamer's wet dream. I helped lay out the power circuitry on my own board. That board made it into production and has been setting records ever since.

If you wanna argue knowledge, I'll wipe the floor with most people before i roll out of bed, but I'm not here to beat people with my knowledge. I'll tell you the most important thing I ever learned.

Give it three months, and it'll all be different.

There is no better, only different. If you don't believe me, experiment.

/flamebait+angry mod (given extenuating circumstances of certain valid comments, mod is not deleting) * number of useless posts/number of decent posts=closed. Go play outside.