• 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.

2900xt 1024mb vs 2900pro 1024 ??

Soldato
Joined
4 Aug 2005
Posts
2,676
just seen the 2900pro 1024mb card on overclockers apart from the slightly slower clock speed is there anything else i'm missing about these cards? as from where i'm stood they look pretty impressive and at a touch over £200 you seem to be getting a hell of a lot of card for your money

DISCUSS :D
 
yeah similar principle i guess, sorry didn't see that thread (it's early :p) but the 1024mb pro puts it on competition terms with the 8800 640mb gts now which would be the better option do you think?
 
The 1gb version is pretty much useless from benchmarks I've seen (same speed as the 512mb version but dearer). I doubt if it will ever shine tbh.

When I say useless I mean it's no greater than the 512mb version and not useless all together ;).
 
it would help with games with larger textures and areas, should help with crysis as 512 wont be enough to run that max
 
it would help with games with larger textures and areas, should help with crysis as 512 wont be enough to run that max

Regardless of whether that is true or not a 2900pro isn't gonna be maxing out crysis anyways or get anywhere near looking at current performance.

sid
 
Memory doesn't really contribute towards performance. Only if it starts to run out does it degrade performance. I could see the extra memory help to keep things consistant at high resolutions, otherwise 1GB is just a useless feature for the time being.
 
ok let me put this scenario to you experts :D,

i have a vx922 monitor the max i'l be gaming at is 1280x1024 end of the month i'm going for a gfx, and cpu (quad G0) ugprade and probably a cooling solution which i shall decide later! on the gfx front what would be my best option to run fear,bioshock,crysis etc etc as close to max as possible?
 
ok let me put this scenario to you experts :D,

i have a vx922 monitor the max i'l be gaming at is 1280x1024 end of the month i'm going for a gfx, and cpu (quad G0) ugprade and probably a cooling solution which i shall decide later! on the gfx front what would be my best option to run fear,bioshock,crysis etc etc as close to max as possible?

Well the 2900 pro will be one to conside. If not a 8800 GTS 320Mb will do at your res but Crysis may need the extra memory of the 640Mb card but nobody knows yet.

To be safe and for a long time to come, get the 8800 GTX. You may at some point upgrade your monitor, you never know, and then you will regret just getting a card to handle 1280 x 1024.

But if the 2900 pro cards turn out as expected then bang for bucks you won't go wrong with them.
 
Harris1986 said:
ok let me put this scenario to you experts ,

i have a vx922 monitor the max i'l be gaming at is 1280x1024 end of the month i'm going for a gfx, and cpu (quad G0) ugprade and probably a cooling solution which i shall decide later! on the gfx front what would be my best option to run fear,bioshock,crysis etc etc as close to max as possible?

For graphics cards right now its always going to be 8800Ultra>8800GTX>2900XT>8800GTS640>8800GTS320.

The 2900Pro isnt in that list, as despite it just being meant to be a lower clocked XT, it's an unknown right now. My personal guess is it'll perform 640GTS>2900Pro>GTS320, but until it's release, we won't know. It may even turn out to be a good match for the 640, considering the slightly higher clocked XT is a fair bit faster than the 640GTS in some games, and just beaten in others. I think more people are watching the Pro for the price: perf value though, which I can certainly understand, as well as possible overclocking potential.

Although you're at a lower resolution, with Nvidia's new cards looking like they're not going to arrive til next year, you're probably be better off going for the best you can afford, so it lasts longer, or the 2900Pro/320GTS and then upgrading again when the new options appear. Until its actual availability or some reviews show up though, the 2900Pro may either be excellent, or may not run as well as hoped, only time can tell.
 
Last edited:
it would help with games with larger textures and areas, should help with crysis as 512 wont be enough to run that max

I can't see it myself. If you are getting into a situation where 512meg VRAM isn't enough, then a 2900pro is gonna be running slowly in any event, even if it had 4gig RAM.
 
Harris1986 said:
thanks for that, it is very much a toss up between the 2900pro or the 640gts for me at the min, aiming to keep costs under £250 all in all!

Well, as the 2900pro is looking to be a nice slice cheaper than the GTS, I'd keep an eye out when it's released shortly to see how they perform :)
If its not that great, you've got the choice of the 640GTS (or a 2900xt, unless you've got other things to spend on), and if it performs as it seems it might (being just a slightly lower clocked xt)...well enough said.

Ps. Im assuming you have a fairly decent PSU, as most people around here seem to nowadays.
 
Well, as the 2900pro is looking to be a nice slice cheaper than the GTS, I'd keep an eye out when it's released shortly to see how they perform :)
If its not that great, you've got the choice of the 640GTS (or a 2900xt, unless you've got other things to spend on), and if it performs as it seems it might (being just a slightly lower clocked xt)...well enough said.

Ps. Im assuming you have a fairly decent PSU, as most people around here seem to nowadays.

I haven't but my 4 year old Tagan 430W is still going strong even with 3 hard drives, watercooling, 8800 GTS, dvd writer etc ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom