|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Connect3D & Sapphire Radeon X1900GT
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
yip yip yip yip
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lake District, UK
Posts: 2,922
![]() ![]() |
Well, that's screwed up my decision on what to buy. I thought the competitor to the 7900gt was the x1900xt?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
X1900XT is ~£310, whereas 7900 GT is £260 at most if you shop around.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
What's a Dremel?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 11
![]() |
If there's a way to unlock the extra pipelines then I might just get this card along with a Conroe in the summer
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Tyrannosaurus Alan !
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Uk, Essex
Posts: 2,367
![]() |
Quote:
.Great Review Guys, -Fr4nk
__________________
{Macbook Pro + Dell 2407 WFP - Canon 3000V + Canon 350D + BG-E3 + Sigma 10-20mm + 50mm f1.8 + kit 28-90mm EF - Rolleiflex 2.8 TLR}
*Flickr ~Flickriver ^ My Behance Art Folio |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Minimodder
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 40
![]() |
I'd imagine that the extra pipes are laser cut?
|
|
|
|
| ContingenctPlan |
| View Public Profile |
| Find More Posts by ContingenctPlan |
|
|
#7 | |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Hypermodder
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: sadffffff
Posts: 676
![]() |
why would a crt gamer use 1280x1024? it would be squished
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Its a resolution that caters for both CRT and LCD gamers - I know that it is squished, but then many people I know used to run 1280x1024 on their Windows desktop, despite my attempts to tell them that it was not the correct ratio for their screen. Anyway, I guess that with the increased number of 1280x1024 panels, it makes sense to cater for more people with the one stone.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Why not? I own a domain to match.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: An hour north of Boston
Posts: 12,576
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Not to mention that if the card can handle 1280x1024, it can definitely handle the 4:3 1280x960.
__________________
hire me @ eric-stern.com - web developer and php ninja
pics @ my smugmug :: Twitter @firehed :: blog @ firehed.net 40D|580EXII|285HV|AB800|70-200f/4LIS|17-50f/2.8|150f/2.8Macro|50f/1.8 MacPro @ 8x2.8GHz, 10GB FBDDR2, 3TB HD :: MBP @ 2x2.2GHz, 4GB DDR2, 320GB HD |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
We've just added a slight addendum to page 1.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Hypermodder
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: sadffffff
Posts: 676
![]() |
bigz, firehed, it was more of a nitpick than anything. just like, why specifically say CRT and 1280x1024, when a crt user shouldnt use 1280x1024 at all? just seems it would only serve to confuse less knowledgeable crt users into using an incorrect res.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Geoff Richards
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 2,089
![]() |
The trouble is that if you use 1280x960 then you alienate the growing masses of people gaming on 19" LCD monitors at 1280x1024, so at least the latter covers both better than the former.
And if we didn't mention CRTs at all we would cop flack for appearing to only test on LCD monitors. I agree we could present it more clearly but we're in a bit of a lose-lose situation without having to add 400 words of Disclaimer |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
What's a Dremel?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 2
![]() |
My only complaint with this review is the X1800XT itself was not even tested yet is referred to in the conclusion
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
The last time we had an X1800XT was back in November, so we're limited by what we can say. I would certainly have loved to have an X1800XT included in the comparison because the £170 asking price is a killer. However, the driver performance certainly hasn't gone backwards, and we feel that the Radeon X1800XT is faster in texture heavy or fillrate limited games. In games that make extensive use of shaders (like F.E.A.R., Oblivion, Call Of Duty 2), I feel that the X1800XT is a slower card. Looking forwards, the X1900GT would be a better purchase, but older games will run slower on it, IMO.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 | |
|
What's a Dremel?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 2
![]() |
I've been scouring every forum and review site for a couple weeks and this seems to be the number #1 question on the minds of those upgrading "X1800XT or 7900GT". Now that the X1900GT is out this makes it even more difficult and the results in this review don't really seem to paint ATI's GT as a winner.
Quote:
If its that slow in CoD2 then I wonder how it could possibly beat the X1800XT in the rest of the benchmarks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
The XFX 7900 GT XXX is a higher clocked GeForce 7900 GT - BFG Tech's 7900 GT OC is closer to the default 7900 GT clock speeds. Hence why I said that the 7900 GT is slower in Call of Duty 2.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Multimodder
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 110
![]() |
ATI should've kept their X1800 XT and just fixed the fan speeds for it.
Now they try and replace it with the X1900 GT which should at least have a consistent advantasge over the card its replacing, instead the X1800 XT is cheaper, faster in most situations, has a cooler that shoots the hot air out of the case, and comes in 256 or 512mb versions. If they had kept up production, prices would continue to drop (currently under $280 and $320 for the 2 versions) and they'd continue to be better value then the 7900 GT. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Multimodder
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 178
![]() |
Ugh, this ones messed me up. Not sure if I should go for a 7900GT, x1800XT or the new X1900GT.
I was just about to make my decision aswell but now ive seen that the x1900gt will be hitting eBuyer next week.What would you guys recommend?
__________________
¦¦ AMD 64 3500+ Venice @ 2.5Ghz ¦¦ X1900XTX @ 690/1600 (Yes I know its totally bottlenecked by this system) ¦¦ Asus A8R-MVP ¦¦ LG GSA-H10ABAL 16x ¦¦ Crucial 1GB DDR PC3200 ¦¦ Seagate Barracuda 7200.7 ¦¦ Hiper 580w Type R Modular PSU |
|
|
|
| ToiletGamer |
| View Public Profile |
| Find More Posts by ToiletGamer |
|
|
#20 |
|
Pewlius Caesar
bit-tech Staff
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ascot, Berks
Posts: 18,021
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
X1800XT is a card that I don't think you can go wrong with now if you don't mind having a dual-slot cooler. That's simply because of its price.
GeForce 7900 GT is a more consistent performer than Radeon X1900GT across the board and it's very overclockable. On the other hand, the Radeon X1900GT is likely to fare better in newer games that are coming out, because shaders are getting more and more complex in new games. Shader instruction processing is where Radeon X1900GT does really well.
__________________
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|