2900XT to 8800GT

[willhub]

WILL!!!!! Stick with your new card and stop slating the 2900's man lol. The 8800GT is the better card, no one said it wasn't so pop your head back into your straight lined games. You should buy a bigger screen for crying out loud Mr high IQ . Get a 21-22" CRT, my CRT is capable of 2048x1536 @ 79Hrtz.

How do you think my 2900Pro would handle Crysis with 6xAA at this resolution?. <--- A joke and not needing an answer as I can see elderly and a walking stick answers or the equivalent too. Uphill too with the wind blowing against them .

2048x1536 with no AA looks and plays pretty well btw and the performance isn't touched. I will apply AA if I can, as long as it doesn't make the game I'm playing choppy. Also if your standing still in a game then it's not the kinda game for me. I like action and fast FPS. Also jaggies aren't as bad at higher resolutions if AA is bad on a certain title.

ATI have sorted out the AA to GTS level in a lot of the titles it was getting beaten in before. Maybe it's not to the level we wanted/expected but in all fairness the R600 is a new design that was too early and truthfully IMO ATI have done well since the release of this flawed card. They've learned a lot about the new architecture and whilst it may damage ATI/AMD this round it may just pay later on in the game.

I'm saying what I think, but I know for a fact they havent sorted out AA to GTS level as the 2900 just cant do it, 16xCSAA in CSS provides you with extreamly low fps compared to that of GTS/GT/GTX. It's a crap card with AA, end of, thats the story.

There design wont pay later on in the game because NV will be releasing something even better so its just getting them behind, I'm only saying what I think now of the 2900, I'm not complaining since I dont have one. It is'nt fair If I am not allowed to say anything about the 2900 now, no point getting mad over it I'm not doing anything wrong.

 

[J.D]

I'm saying what I think, but I know for a fact they havent sorted out AA to GTS level as the 2900 just cant do it, 16xCSAA in CSS provides you with extreamly low fps compared to that of GTS/GT/GTX. It's a crap card with AA, end of, thats the story.

There design wont pay later on in the game because NV will be releasing something even better so its just getting them behind, I'm only saying what I think now of the 2900, I'm not complaining since I dont have one. It is'nt fair If I am not allowed to say anything about the 2900 now, no point getting mad over it I'm not doing anything wrong.

Read my post over and over until you realise that I'm not mad in the slightest (might take you a while if you couldn't pick that up from my last post? ). I'm just having a laugh for christs sake . Will sometimes..........

16xCSAA and that isn't needed really unless your running at 1280x1024 which you are not (except Crysis maybe). Buy a decent screen and try some high resolution gaming if you love high IQ so much. If I wanted AA as much as you then I'd want a bigger resolution to do just that.

There design wont pay later on in the game because NV will be releasing something even better so its just getting them behind,

I'm sure I've read that the way that anti aliasing will be used in the future will then favour the current 2900 range over current Nvidia cards as Nvidia still do it old skool and that's why the GTX destroys the 2900 series. Also I said "They've learned a lot about the new architecture and whilst it may damage ATI/AMD this round it may just pay later on in the game.". I'm not stating that it will go this way, just that it might. You need to start reading posts before you answer them man.

Oh and the 2900 IS at GTS level when it comes to AA. Yes the 2900 still takes the greater hit but without it the 2900 is a fair bit ahead of the GTS at times and when AA is applied it's 50/50 and that's dependant on the title.

 

[Rackerz]

It is dependant on the game how the AA works between the GTS and 2900. To be honest the AA problem was never that bad, owning a 2900XT myself I know that it got destroyed with AA in some games whereas others it was fine. HLEP2 for example, my 2900XT ate that game for breakfast and didn't break a sweat.

 

[psychas]

would it not be better to wait till 9800gtx/gts or r700 ? then changing graphic cards like socks

 

[J.D]

would it not be better to wait till 9800gts or r700 ? then changing graphic cards like socks

Where's the fun in that?. I just can't wait until after the year. A CR/YZ/KX 250 motocross and a new system is going to be on the cards . Also I want to get in on this phase benchmarking and then I will be testing a lot of cards out. Changing them like socks lol .

 

[TheRealDeal]

My brother bought a cr 250 last year was brand new i think what a beast. I had a few shots to fast for me as i had not been on a bike for 10 years was not exactly the best bike for me to jump straight on.

 

[willhub]

Read my post over and over until you realise that I'm not mad in the slightest (might take you a while if you couldn't pick that up from my last post? ). I'm just having a laugh for christs sake . Will sometimes..........

16xCSAA and that isn't needed really unless your running at 1280x1024 which you are not (except Crysis maybe). Buy a decent screen and try some high resolution gaming if you love high IQ so much. If I wanted AA as much as you then I'd want a bigger resolution to do just that.



I'm sure I've read that the way that anti aliasing will be used in the future will then favour the current 2900 range over current Nvidia cards as Nvidia still do it old skool and that's why the GTX destroys the 2900 series. Also I said "They've learned a lot about the new architecture and whilst it may damage ATI/AMD this round it may just pay later on in the game.". I'm not stating that it will go this way, just that it might. You need to start reading posts before you answer them man.

Oh and the 2900 IS at GTS level when it comes to AA. Yes the 2900 still takes the greater hit but without it the 2900 is a fair bit ahead of the GTS at times and when AA is applied it's 50/50 and that's dependant on the title.

The 2900 is NOT at GTS level when it comes to AA, you cant be playing 16xAA in half the games you could with a GTS, its a fact the 8800 handles AA better dont even start arguing about that because its a fact.

Also I'm on a 22" monitor, nothing wrong with it, I use 16xAA because I can, I expect to use at least 8xAA which in a lot of games was not possible with the 2900 compared to my GT.

Honestly another argument its never going to end you know.

 

[Clairvoyant]

Why do these threads alway turn in to arguments.

If you like your 2900 then you like it, if you dont liek the 2900s fine.

These comments about AA and the 2900 and the GTX and the GTS have been said time and time again, since the release of the 2900 XT.

Let justnot keep going over the same old crap.

Thank you

 

[willhub]

Why do these threads alway turn in to arguments.

If you like your 2900 then you like it, if you dont liek the 2900s fine.

These comments about AA and the 2900 and the GTX and the GTS have been said time and time again, since the release of the 2900 XT.

Let justnot keep going over the same old crap.

Thank you

Well we have to have something to argue about...

It is dependant on the game how the AA works between the GTS and 2900. To be honest the AA problem was never that bad, owning a 2900XT myself I know that it got destroyed with AA in some games whereas others it was fine. HLEP2 for example, my 2900XT ate that game for breakfast and didn't break a sweat.

How much AA did you apply in HL2:EP2 and at what res?

 

[Emlyn_Dewar]

As if it matters... It's HL2, hardly unbelievable.
To the OP, just sell your 2900 and go buy a PCI-e 6200 with Turbocache It'll stop you going wrong in the head & frothing at the mouth if someone dares mentions AA and 2900 in the same sentence...

 

[Richdog]

Well we have to have something to argue about...

How much AA did you apply in HL2:EP2 and at what res?

willhub I think you're in danger of getting incredibly repetitive with all this constant 2900 bashing... just let it lie as it's starting to ruin any thread with the word "2900" mentioned in it.

 

[psychas]

he rages to much lol so.

would it not be better to wait till 9800gtx/gts or r700 ? then changing graphic cards like socks

 

[Darkwave]

he rages to much lol so.

would it not be better to wait till 9800gtx/gts or r700 ? then changing graphic cards like socks

If you can still afford socks you're not upgrading enough!!

 

[The Asgard]

Never run 16XAA, cant tell the difference between 16X and 8X anyway! Overkill and marketing gimmick IMHO.

4XAA is enough for most people. How often do you sit looking at jaggies while your playing the game? All just blends in for me

I would love to play with a 2900 series card!

 

[Darkwave]

Never run 16XAA, cant tell the difference between 16X and 8X anyway! Overkill and marketing gimmick IMHO.

4XAA is enough for most people. How often do you sit looking at jaggies while your playing the game? All just blends in for me

I would love to play with a 2900 series card!

TBH I can tell the difference between 8x and 16x, but only if I look for it.

I usually run 8xCSAA purely for the performance though.

 

[Rackerz]

Let's not start bashing Will people, the 2900 is a shambles when compared with the 8800 series. On it's own it runs nice and sweet, I had a 2900 and it's no longer with me because I require playing with at least 2xAA because my monitor is right infront of my face.

 

[J.D]

The 2900 is NOT at GTS level when it comes to AA, you cant be playing 16xAA in half the games you could with a GTS, its a fact the 8800 handles AA better dont even start arguing about that because its a fact.

Also I'm on a 22" monitor, nothing wrong with it, I use 16xAA because I can, I expect to use at least 8xAA which in a lot of games was not possible with the 2900 compared to my GT.

Honestly another argument its never going to end you know.

Will, I've said I was having a laugh and was not arguing and you've been all serious about it? . Take a chill pill .

I know the AA hit on the 2900 is much worse than any 8800 card. I did say however that without AA the 2900 is the faster card (I think from what I've seen in benchmarks), and that's why it's 50/50 with 4xAA applied, which most people will use. I run at high resolutions and you don't need AA as much and can still have an amazing looking game with good FPS. If your having fun and enjoy a game then AA isn't anything to worry about but @ 4xAA I think the GTS and 2900 are really neck and neck over the titles and that's my opinion from the hundreds of benchmarks I've seen.

Read my post over and over until you realise that I'm not mad in the slightest (might take you a while if you couldn't pick that up from my last post? ). I'm just having a laugh for christs sake . Will sometimes..........

16xCSAA and that isn't needed really unless your running at 1280x1024 which you are not (except Crysis maybe).

Oh and the 2900 IS at GTS level when it comes to AA. Yes the 2900 still takes the greater hit but without it the 2900 is a fair bit ahead of the GTS at times and when AA is applied it's 50/50 and that's dependant on the title.

I should have said with about 4xAA is applied as I agree that the more the AA then the more the hit the ATI card would take so that would mean a slower FPS meaning the GTS would be the faster card. I think that most people will use 4xAA if any but that's just a guess on my part.

Will I hope you know that I think the 2900 range is just as good as the 8800GTS (old version) and not better than. I just don't agree that it's as bad as you moan about constantly and non stop all the time.

Never run 16XAA, cant tell the difference between 16X and 8X anyway! Overkill and marketing gimmick IMHO.

4XAA is enough for most people. How often do you sit looking at jaggies while your playing the game? All just blends in for me

I would love to play with a 2900 series card!

Exactly my point. If your enjoying a game then the jaggies aren't really noticed much. If you play at high resolution then the smaller amount of AA is needed which then won't effect me at all.

Stop looking at railings and the edge of building roofs Will and play the damn game .

 

[willhub]

Will, I've said I was having a laugh and was not arguing and you've been all serious about it? . Take a chill pill .

I know the AA hit on the 2900 is much worse than any 8800 card. I did say however that without AA the 2900 is the faster card (I think from what I've seen in benchmarks), and that's why it's 50/50 with 4xAA applied, which most people will use. I run at high resolutions and you don't need AA as much and can still have an amazing looking game with good FPS. If your having fun and enjoy a game then AA isn't anything to worry about but @ 4xAA I think the GTS and 2900 are really neck and neck over the titles and that's my opinion from the hundreds of benchmarks I've seen.

I've had 2 8800GTS's, 2900XT and now a 8800GT and I can honestly say in no game is the 2900 neck with the 8800, for example Dirt, 8800 take it by a long way.

Will I hope you know that I think the 2900 range is just as good as the 8800GTS (old version) and not better than. I just don't agree that it's as bad as you moan about constantly and non stop all the time.

I dont get it, the 2900 series cant be as good as the old 8800's, I mean the 8800's can have more AA, they are quieter too, the only games the 2900XT kicks the 8800's ass at that I own is TDU which at 1680x1050 the frame rates even with 4xAA on me 8800GT are still unplayable which with my 2900 were fine.

Hell even with no AA the GT's still in front of the 2900.

Stop looking at railings and the edge of building roofs Will and play the damn game .

I'm sure there was a game screenie once I seen, it was took at 1900x1600 or w/e that high res is and there was still some jaggys, I dont like seeing any jaggys at all really, its just not natural lol

Anyway please lets not go about it anymore today.

 

[J.D]

LMAO how can you give me all that as a reply and then say lets just leave it . Funny guy .

You have a faster CPU and RAM than me so I can't compare with my own system fairly but from all the benchmark sites I've see it's about 50/50 over a good range of titles.

Are you going to honestly say to me that all the reviews and benchmarks I've seen and read, are just talking nonsense and I should listen to you and your experiences?.

The GT, GTX and Ultra beat the 2900 no problem but in my opinion from reading a lot about them and going through reviews that they are 50/50 (old GTS and 2900's).

 

[willhub]

LMAO how can you give me all that as a reply and then say lets just leave it . Funny guy .

You have a faster CPU and RAM than me so I can't compare with my own system fairly but from all the benchmark sites I've see it's about 50/50 over a good range of titles.

Are you going to honestly say to me that all the reviews and benchmarks I've seen and read, are just talking nonsense and I should listen to you and your experiences?.

The GT, GTX and Ultra beat the 2900 no problem but in my opinion from reading a lot about them and going through reviews that they are 50/50 (old GTS and 2900's).

I dont trust any reviews hardly.