• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

HD 2900XT vs 8800GTS

NeptuneUK

NeptuneUK

NeptuneUK

Associate
Joined
20 Aug 2005
Posts
458
Location
Yorkshire
I have done a lot of searching but I really can't find any proper comparisons of each card... I'm really stuck between choosing either the 2900XT and the 8800GTS.

I only game at 1280x1024 resolution, and I wish to play DX10 games next year.... what would be the wisest purchase??

Out of the 2900XT 512mb, 8800GTS 320mb or 8800GTS 640mb??

Arrghhh.
 
2900XT

And it's not just because I own one :P It's proven to be a better performer than both in most cases, although 8800 GTS 640MB owners may disagree (the difference isn't loads). I'd still pick a 2900XT if I had the choice again, but if you prefer Nvidia go for the 640MB GTS, otherwise 2900XT... you'll be very happy with either :)
 
Id have said the 2900 XT also, but seen as you want to play Dx10 games, it has to be the GTS 640mb, as the 2900's Dx10 drivers need a lot of work, so to sum up, for Dx9 the 2900 XT, for Dx10, the 640mb GTS.:)
 
lol ok then, Ive seen loads of DX9 benchmarks of the cards, and the results seem to be very erratic, some games run faster on the 2900XT but others on the 8800GTS... the differences seem to be rather minor anyway but I dont know how they would perform against each other in a DX10 environment. I have just previously assumed that the 2900XT would like DX10 better.

I am upgrading now and will have to live with the card for the next several years before id be able to afford another upgrade... maybe the DX10 drivers will be better in a few months time (when they will be more important?)
 
Yeah the 2900 is fine in Dx9, its the faster card, hammering the GTS by up and over 20+ frames in some, but in Dx10 its a different story, even the 320mb GTS hands it its ass in Bioshock. ATi's Dx10 drivers are terrible at the mo. :)
 
What a conundrum. ¬_¬


edit:

bshock2560.gif


That graph is confusing... which is DX9 and 10?!!? D:


My old GPU was the x1950pro... the 2900 runs like twice as fast.... in DX10!!!


Either way... if im going to be gaming at 1280x1024.... if I went with the 2900... id be getting insanely high FPS regardless lol :)
 
Last edited:
The ones that say Dx10 are Dx10, ones that dont are Dx9. :p

If you only interested in Dx9 then get the 2900, but if you want Dx10 as well, then id get the GTS 640mb, unless you get the 2900 and wait till ATi sort their Dx10 drivers, as they are poor at the moment, Bisohock is 20% slower than the 320mb GTS in Dx10 at 16x12 and less reso's
 
Last edited:
Check out the boost in Dx10 here that the 163.44 drivers give :- http://www.legitreviews.com/article/558/2/ Nvidia are far and away the leaders in Dx10 at the moment.

In Dx9 the 2900 is faster than the Ultra in Bioshock, but when Dx10 is added the performance cripples, thats a huge, huge drop in performance that, can't even beat the 320mb GTS.
 
Last edited:
Sorry for going abit off topic.

But how's you guys with 2900XT's finding 1680x1050 res, I'm buying a new monitor hopefully tomorrow, 22" :D, and I wondered what its like :D.
 
I'd say get an 8800GTS if you care about DirectX 10 (blegh) and/or antialiasing in games since it seems to be optimised better for both of those. Then again, developers are getting lazy and not even implimenting AA in games anymore so flip a coin.
 
I'd get the 2900XT. ATi are sure to be concentrating fully on the DX10 side of things at the moment and if their DX9 driver boosts are anything to go by then we're hopefully looking at a 50% increase in DX10 in some cases.

If you can wait I'd give them until the end of the month and see what they come out with. I'm pretty confident that the 2900XT can perform a lot better in DX10 then it is at the moment.

I'm happy out though as I'm still on XP and my 2900XT is on par with the 8800GTX in Bioshock ;)
 
Yep, I'm happy with my 2900XT compared with even a GTX. Some games run better, others not. As far as it goes for DX10 I think ATI will put their fingers out as DX10 becomes a bit more mainstream gaming wise. It's ATI's most powerful card right now, which is why I take it over a GTS. I've also heard theres a lot more to come out of the 2900s.
 
I am seriously considering the BFG 8800GTS OC2 640mb right now. it costs a lot less and is like in between the normal GTS and the GTX.... which is awesome.
 
Ignore my advice then :P. Only joking, honestly either of the GTS 640/2900XT will do you well, there isn't much between them.
 
Rackerz said:
Yep, I'm happy with my 2900XT compared with even a GTX. Some games run better, others not. As far as it goes for DX10 I think ATI will put their fingers out as DX10 becomes a bit more mainstream gaming wise. It's ATI's most powerful card right now, which is why I take it over a GTS. I've also heard theres a lot more to come out of the 2900s.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I think it's a testiment to ATi's driver team that they managed to turn what was a poor card at launch, into something that beats the 8800GTS.

Sure, Dx10 is a bit slower, but i'm sure that will improve. :)
 
Indeed. DX10 isn't my thing, the only thing I can say I'm disappointed with when it comes to ATI is the AA capability. It's there but hinders performance a lot, the Quake Wars demo at 2x AA High settings dipping into 20s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom