Jump to content

Welcome to Geeks to Go - Register now for FREE

Geeks To Go is a helpful hub, where thousands of volunteer geeks quickly serve friendly answers and support. Check out the forums and get free advice from the experts. Register now to gain access to all of our features, it's FREE and only takes one minute. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more.

Create Account How it Works
Photo

7900GTX vs X1900XTX


  • Please log in to reply

#1
anoobrew

anoobrew

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts
The x1900 is supposed to be better ......but if i liquid cool a 7900gtx will it beat out a x1900?

And wats the max u can OC these cards.......on air and on liquid.
  • 0

Advertisements


#2
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
An x1900 has a fair advantage other the 7900 and its not just in clock speeds as a whole the r5xx cores are better than the G70 core due to its more advanced technology there are some slight advantages in all areas over the 7900 and it has the advantage of not only higher but more stable FPS which is more important, it has some features that were used as a test bed for the new unified architecture cards of DX10, and they overclock well for what it is, however 7900 and 1900s arent the best overclockers as they are allready running at very high clock speeds. It is also a bad time to purchase gfx cards so soon to the summer release time with the new dx10 cards coming out hopefully.

OCing ability is largely dependant on the card itself as i said but one card differs from another its impossible to accuratley predict. Air and water is also hard to predict it depends hwo good your air cooling is, and water usually isnt actually better than air for most kits unless you get the very expensive ones with multi fan radiators they are generally as good as the air just a little quieter on the normal kits anyway as the affordable ones arent targetted to overclock but to be near silent solutions you have to fork out big bucks for the really good kits.

Edited by warriorscot, 03 May 2006 - 12:50 PM.

  • 0

#3
The Colonel

The Colonel

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 232 posts
The thing I dislike about ATi is they are more expensive than nVIDIA in the US and they don't FULLY support SM3.0
  • 0

#4
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
Ive read almost every tech document and review kicking about on those cards and none of them make any mention of SM3 problems, and not supporting it fully. Also Nvidia havnet got proper SM3 support either especially when you look at the HDR abilities of the cards, if ATIs SM3 isnt fully supported ild hate to see what you class Nvidias support like.

Also SM3 isnt a big deal, the only difference between 3 & 2 is in efficiency in some areas, 2 is actually superior to 3 in some sutuations. In terms of what SM3 can do there is nothing it can do that you cant do witha SM2 card.

But i dont know where you are getting the SM3 thing ive not heard a word about it, and considering the number of reviews and tech docs ive read thats pretty amazing.
  • 0

#5
chopyaedoff

chopyaedoff

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 148 posts
The ATi is the only card that can render Farcry with HDR and AA (I think).
  • 0

#6
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
Nvidia cards cant do AA and HDR in any game not just far cry, its one of the gremlins nvidia couldnt get rid of from the 6 series, the 7 series is basically just a very highly tweaked and upgraded version of 6 series cores which is why they have a couple of glitches that werent a big deal on the 6 series but are a bit more annoying when you are wanting the best.
  • 0

#7
rumble291

rumble291

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 430 posts
The ATI cards are better the X1900XT proformace much better like warriorscot said I would get the X1900XT. Is it me or have nvidia rushed to get the new cards out and by doing that increased ustability?
  • 0

#8
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
With the original 7 series cores they had the same issues ATI has with the r5xx cores with manufacturing and some pretty bad technology and engineering barriers so they decided to scrap it and go with the side project which was the rediesign and upgrade of the 6 series cores originally supposed to be a basis of budget cards became there main card line and carried over the weaknesses of the 6 series and they were operating at the maximum potential they could get out of them. In contrast ATI stayed the path and went with there new core which was also acting as a test bed for some of the technilogies earmarked for dx10 cards(the "ultra threading" ability was a step towards pipeline unification and it has the ddr4 interface ability) they put so much money into it that the card that used it most(x1900) was actually ready well before the x1800 and it was also easy to produce and had the usually rare luck of having a first card run that produced economically viable cards first go.

I still wouldnt get a new card right now though, i would save up because the dx10 upgrade will also need an os upgrade to get the dx10 features.
  • 0

#9
anoobrew

anoobrew

    Member

  • Topic Starter
  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts
I think im gonna convert to ATi, despite the anti-american canadians hikin our prices a x1900 costs less than the 7900 gtx and looks better in games. It may eat up tons of power ....but so does the inefficient and useless Sli ( unless ur rich and have a 30 in moniter).
  • 0

#10
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
Lol, ill buy ATI until they suck, then ill switch and buy whoever else is about until they suck and so on and so forth, ATI i generally prefer these days because technology wise they have been leading the way with the gfx hardware. And ill probably buy Nvidia motherboards until they start to suck.
  • 0

#11
Anton1382

Anton1382

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 134 posts
I have a Nvidia 7900GTX (2GB graphics memory with 4 graphics cards) and it works perfectly. Nvidia, I think, is the best graphics card maker and has a solid lead over ATI especially since the new 7 series comes standard with a power saving feature not only in the laptops but desktops too. It also comes with Nvidia's famous nView which is a great feature. I do think the nVidia GeForce 7900GTX (or at least my limited version) outperforms any ATI graphics card. :whistling:
  • 0

#12
warriorscot

warriorscot

    Member 5k

  • Retired Staff
  • 8,889 posts
Actually gloabaly ATI has a better rep and market share they have a firm grasp of European and asian markets its noly in the US where they are heavily out sold by nvidia, power saving doesnt matter in desktops but in laptops ATI have a better low power range they dont have alot of high end cards so Nvidia and ATI dont compete in those markets alot. Nview is pretty poor, well you actually have 4 gfx cards, there isnt a comparable ATI system(as no one needs 4, hardly anyone needs two) head to head x1900XT beats 7900GTX on pretty much every front they are also more technologically advanced.

Also people that buy dell dont get to brag.

Edited by warriorscot, 10 May 2006 - 05:14 PM.

  • 0






Similar Topics

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

As Featured On:

Microsoft Yahoo BBC MSN PC Magazine Washington Post HP