Gameguru Mania Updated:01:26 AM CET Feb,14
66 lottery login

91 club

okwin

bdg game

55 club

Playbonus.ca
CONTACT
Please e-mail us if you have news.

(c) 1998-2026 Gameguru Mania
Privacy Policy statement
SEARCH:
 Gameguru Mania News - Dec,01 2005 -  
7800GTX 512MB vs. X1800XT 512MB - tech
(hx) 09:15 PM CET - Dec,01 2005 - Post a comment / read (4)
GamePC compares the two fastest graphics cards on the market for a holiday GPU showdown:
nVidia's GeForce 7800 GTX 512 MB card is simply a better performer in very gaming benchmark we threw at it. nVidia's combination of a highly-clocked 24-pipeline GPU and half a gig of 1.7 GHz GDDR-3 memory is unbeatable at this time. With these raw specifications, the ability to best the Radeon X1800 XT was simply a matter of looking at the numbers. While the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 MB card is extremely impressive on the performance front, but the ability to push out these kinds of performance numbers while running dead silent is a far bigger accomplishment in our book.

ATI's Radeon X1800 XT 512 MB product is, unfortunately, a victim of nVidia's excellent timing. If the GeForce 7800 GTX 512 MB card wasn't announced at the same time, many would be crowning the X1800 XT the performance king. The card is still exceedingly fast in the majority of games, and overall does best the GeForce 7800 GTX 256 MB card, which is a solid feat in itself. ATI's product lineup is now up to date with Shader Model 3.0 and HDR support, and even has some advantages over nVidia like dual-link DVI outputs and H.264 decoding abilities. The card is also pretty quiet considering the fiery R520 core which lies under the cooling system, although under heavy loads, it's certainly louder compared to the 7800 GTX 512 MB.

It appears that ATI was a bit too conservative with their clock speeds. Their Radeon X1800 XT cards are clocked high-enough to best the 7800 GTX 256 MB, but it's unlikely they foresaw (frankly, no one did) what nVidia had up their sleeves. However, seeing as how the R520 architecture can overclock quite well out of the box, ATI has another chance to get it right and compete with the 7800 GTX 512 MB. Get that GPU clock up in the 750-800 MHz range and boost GDDR3 memory clocks over 1.7 GHz, and the R520 architecture should be able to compete quite well. Now that they've worked out most of the kinks in their 90 nm technology, it's simply a matter of time and cranking out higher-grade chips and ramping up yields. ATI also has their R580 architecture on the horizon, too, which is a big question mark at this time.
last 10 comments:
Anonymous(01:21 AM CET - Dec,02 2005 )
DELETED

No.21(03:30 AM CET - Dec,02 2005 )
Huh? What is so pro-ATI in this comparison? Its more of opposite. Check the Nvidia drivers and what CPU they use and review this so called comparison before you post crap like what you have done now.

quote:
ROFL... I nearly cried laughing at the bit about ATI now having more features like Shaders 3.0 and HDR ..... when only months ago they were bashing the 6800 saying these features weren't so important and that "raw performance" was what REALLY counted!!!

Oh r'lly? Where? More of that they "probably" tried to make the point that few uses SM 3.0 in games right now(at that time) only Far Cry is the game that i know of right now that uses it.

quote:
As my company, MS should have stayed in nVidia's bed where it was nice and warm .. and the performance was better.

You forgot "f-u-n-c-t-i-o-n/-s". Repeat six times in your head for best possible effect! as recommended by the proud people in Ministry of Health. Peace and out.

A question: Are you an Nvidia fan boy?

xxxx(05:12 AM CET - Dec,02 2005 )
9fps, who gives a shit. It comes down to cost and common sense. Let's see, you have to buy 2 7800 GTX cards running in SLI for 8 fps. I think you would have to be an addict or a retard who doesn't truly know the value of money to spend the kind of doh to get a measily 8-9fps. That's over a $1000 US for 9fps! Duh. Considering 30FPS is all anyone needs, 37fps good smooth play if the game code is decent at all. Then lets not forget power usage to go SLI requiring a new power supply fans and likely another case. Totally even more retarded. So how anyone can put nvidia anywhere on top is beyond me. Even push Nvidia. I admit, they got a nice card but it's at a huge cost for LITTLE gain.

Looking at this page
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati_radeon_x1800_xt_xl/page5.asp

Shows the ATI cards have room to get faster. I don't know what I would go with if I was a retard with that kind of money, shit I'd rather fix my house or spend it on my family instead. I don't see any wrong decision going with ATI or nVidia. Just depends on whats more important to you. Your money or your ego.

devilhood(09:51 AM CET - Dec,02 2005 )
SLI will never truely attain it's full potential because no one really cares enough to design an engine that will take full advantage of what nVidia is offering.
Perhaps future driver updates will increase it's overall utilization of power.
I personally believe that it's essentially a novelty feature that will die out in about a years time, well I pray that it does anyways.
The prices for these setups and cards ARE crazy, people have gotta be blind to not notice that the value for money is rock bottom.

All comments
 Add your comment (free registration required)


Related news:
Geforce 7800GTX 512 MB to cost $649 - tech (Nov 08 2005)

related cheats/trainer:

no results found


 Links
Search results for -7800GTX- :

no records found

 External links