GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB or Sapphire ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT

[ins0mn1ac]

T.

Quick qustion, the Corsair 520 should be fine with the HD2900XT right? Rest of hes rig is, 2GB of Memory, One Hard Drive, couple of fans, not much at all.

One last thing, will the Corsair come with all the right adaptors and everythig to run the HD2900XT card?

Yes, and Yes.. afaik.

The 8800GTS 640 is proberbly faster in over 50% of games, I dont trust any of those reviews, they all seem to get it wrong.

lol

 

[Darkwave]

From what I've seen in more recent reviews it's about 50/50 between them but the GTS 640MB seems to win when using (normal/multisampled) antialiasing and when playing DirectX 10 supported titles.

Since developers seem to be getting pathetic lately and not even supporting antialiasing in their games (a lá Stalker and Bioshock, and possibly Crysis) then I would get an 2900XT 512MB if the price was right. Not to mention that DirectX 10 is a waste of space so far.

Edit: I'm personally waiting until November to see, officially, what all this G92 malarky is about. I was going to upgrade my GTS 640MB to a GTX 768MB but if G92 does turn out to be high-end, which is up in the air right now, there'd be no point in upgrading yet. Not to mention that the 8800s and 2900s will drop in price around that time, especially if G92 is a high-end part.

 

[willhub]

Yes, and Yes.. afaik.




lol

I've had 2 8800GTS 640mb and 1 HD2900XT, and I know which one was the fastest in my rig...



Dont you just hate rolleyes?

 

[helmutcheese]

Why not just buy the worlds fastest GPU and enjoy the Crysis demo (25th Sep ?)

 

[willhub]

Why not just buy the worlds fastest GPU and enjoy the Crysis demo (25th Sep ?)

Damn time really does fly

If I wanted I could flog my 2900 now and go and buy an 8800Ultra, but do you really think that actually would be worth it?, if I managed my money better and bought one 8800GTS, then sold that, by now I could have had 2 8800GTX's .

 

[helmutcheese]

Read what I put in other thread.

Its looking more and more like the 8800Ultra is still going to be the Big Daddy (stole this name from other thread lol) till 2008, the card in Nov are again claiming to be non high end and possibly still 384bit.

I did read Nvidia will hold of a 9800Ultra after releasing a 9800GTX, and then release it after ATI launch (FEB 2008 ?)

There is at least 2 peeps who know their stuff in this forum who both are getting 8800Ultras next week or so, they would not if they thought a high end card was due in 8weeks.

 

[Shocky-FM]

The raw spec's of the ATI should mean faster performance in future games that use shader based AA.Games that use mulisampling AA seem to mask the performance of the 2900xt IMO, but on the flip side the 8800 gts has more memory,much faster stream processors and a big head start with drivers.

If i had to pick id go with ATI.... then moan that it's to load and power hungry

Not the case with COJ, 8800GTS still faster with shader based AA.

 

[jigger]

Not the case with COJ, 8800GTS still faster with shader based AA.

I think that's more to do with driver support than hardware.

 

[Shocky-FM]

I think that's more to do with driver support than hardware.

Well I lack a crystal ball so I tend to judge them on the performance they provide now and not what they might provide in the future.

 

[willhub]

Well I lack a crystal ball so I tend to judge them on the performance they provide now and not what they might provide in the future.

I bought a 2900 based on the future performance, unfortunatly it is not increasing as fast as people would like to make out it is.

 

[jigger]

Well I lack a crystal ball so I tend to judge them on the performance they provide now and not what they might provide in the future.

Ok... i didnt mean to upset you, im just saying the 2900 is better suited to shader based AA games and could pull away from the 8800gts with more support, when that support will show this is a differant matter, but AMD/ATI are making head way with games develorpers and the 2900 has started to improved for it.

 

[supra21]

I bought a 2900 based on the future performance, unfortunatly it is not increasing as fast as people would like to make out it is.

what about this:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/06/amd-announces-plans-to-open-up-ati-graphics-drivers/

 

[jrodga2k5]

what about this:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/06/amd-announces-plans-to-open-up-ati-graphics-drivers/

If that information is accurate then I may just have to get an hd2900xt I doubt 90% faster in Quake 4 though

 

[Darkwave]

If that information is accurate then I may just have to get an hd2900xt I doubt 90% faster in Quake 4 though

They're Linux drivers.

 

[Talrinys]

I'd get the nvidia card if you're used to nvidia, as i am(not that it made a difference when i bought it, the 2900 wasn't out), and the ATI if you're used to that.
Besides, i believe, and i don't really care about this stuff so don't quote me on it, that the 2900XT makes more noise and uses more power than the 8800GTS. I do however believe that the 2900XT is a very nice card, and should really rock the 8800GTS when overclocked, thanks to the much wider bus.

 

[willhub]

what about this:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/09/06/amd-announces-plans-to-open-up-ati-graphics-drivers/

What about what? Thats nothing to show performance.

I'd get the nvidia card if you're used to nvidia, as i am(not that it made a difference when i bought it, the 2900 wasn't out), and the ATI if you're used to that.
Besides, i believe, and i don't really care about this stuff so don't quote me on it, that the 2900XT makes more noise and uses more power than the 8800GTS. I do however believe that the 2900XT is a very nice card, and should really rock the 8800GTS when overclocked, thanks to the much wider bus.

When overclocked, the 2900 does gain extra fps, but not as much as the 8800GTS does.