• 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 vs 8800GTX Image comparison.

Page 16 vr-zone review

To be crazier, I put the 2 "horsies side by side". Remember, this is a banner hanging on the wall like 20 in-game meters away from me and 3 stories high up. To be zooming in like this is kind of ridiculous, but what the heck!



No clear conclusion, but if you look more towards the left of the horse, you may find that the lines on the head, mouth leg, seem to be a little sharper on the NVIDIA.

Do you like vegetation? Oh, I love vegetation! 3D rendered ones especially!


Vegetation seems to be a fair bit more different. Here, you can acutely see that the 8800GTS renders the closer bunch of leaves sharper, yet rougher. There's a clearer distinction in colors of bunches of leaves on the GTS. This may also mean slightly more aliasing with the resultant effect being some "texture swimming" during movements of your character or as the wind blows.

How about in another more popular game, such as Battlefield 2142? Also ran at 1600 x 1200, 16x AF, Best Anti-Aliasing Settings - Wide Tent 16x Sampling on ATi X2900XT and 16x Quality on NVIDIA.



At normal view screen size you can already tell the difference. Look at the gun, that's closest to your character, you can see it starkly sharper on the 8800 compared to the 2900. Notice especially the words and buttons on the gun. Words are sharper and so are the finer details on the buttons on the card below. Even the dirt track further away from the character looks sharper rendered on the 8800.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
HighlandeR said:
Oh boy only till tommorow ;)

Will be interesting to see if ATI doesnt get much performance loss with AF/AA modes enabeled, you never know may still outperform an GTX yet.
Click to expand...

Thats just it ... the XT actually goes downhill with hi res and AA /AF, completley the opposite of what you would expect from a card with the largest memory bandwith available :(
The XT overall comes nowere near the GTX, nvidia has the speed crown without a doubt, pity I so wanted ATi to at least be in the ball park of the GTX.

But I could see the pattern forming by Thursday, so I got my GTX ordered and have been a lot more impressed with drivers than I was first time round, at least ATi kicked nvidia into getting some good drivers out :)
IMO the 8800 series IQ is equal to ATi (and has been since release), personal preference is actually better than the X19 series.
The XT will improve with drivers I have no doubt, but I can't see any major performance increases, not enough to get near a GTX in 1920x1200 4 or 8 AA + AF.

If you run 1280x1024, or were looking at a 640mb GTS, then personally the XT would be my choice, but hi-res and quality settings are dissapointing TBH, thats coming from someone who would prefer an ATi card.
Bottom line for me is if you have a budget of ~£260 and play in 1280x1024 max the XT would be my reccomendation.
If you want hi-res/quality with performance, you gotta pay nvidia's top dollar pricing. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
jaykay said:
The xt has better aa and the corrigated iron i think is a bit better on the ati card but thats me.
Click to expand...

Its The AA is with out doubt better on the ATI & corrugated iron is better than before.
 
Marc Fraser said:
Only difference I can see in the second shot are at the front of the airship. There is a bit more detail in the XT shot, the pole at the front is more visible.
Click to expand...
noticed that.
 
I had my face pressed against my monitor and honestly I can't see a difference.

Except that 2142 one, the 8800 is incredibly better.

For the money, I don't see why people would chose a 2900 over the 8800, unless your fanboys. :p
 
Have to say my comment earlier, that out of a GTS and a 2900 has been re-thought due to the pricing and official reviews, 640 GTS would be the winner IMO as that can be had for £40 less and runs cooler and quieter.
IQ is six of one, half a dozen of the other IMO.
 
Vogon said:
Have to say my comment earlier, that out of a GTS and a 2900 has been re-thought due to the pricing and official reviews, 640 GTS would be the winner IMO as that can be had for £40 less and runs cooler and quieter.
IQ is six of one, half a dozen of the other IMO.
Click to expand...


you forgot to add that it consumes less power too.
 
Well, from a personal perspective, power consumption is irrelelavant, performance, noise and heat are the key points for me.
The latter 2 can be user rectified, the first needs some work from ATi ;)
They might yet do it, I hope they will, but I wouldn't bank on it personally.
 
nicksource said:
I had my face pressed against my monitor and honestly I can't see a difference.

Except that 2142 one, the 8800 is incredibly better.

For the money, I don't see why people would chose a 2900 over the 8800, unless your fanboys. :p
Click to expand...
Well you could not see a reason because you just don't have the mental capacity.
 
Nvidia looks sharper, but i wouldnt say better.
On oblivion it looks more real on the ATI but battlefield 2 is crappy on the ATI :S
Different ways of rendering the AA perhaps playing a part here?
 
Ulfhedjinn said:
It looks to me like the GTX screenshot has way more artifacts from the JPEG compression, which is a bit odd considering they're showing the exact same thing. Is anyone else spotting this?

Note: Before some fanboy takes this as making excuses for the GTX, I should let everyone know that personally I think that the new ATI antialiasing modes look superior to what we currently have on the Geforce 8 series from what we've seen so far.
Click to expand...
i would personaaly say that the first ati shot had more compression look around the mast in the centre of the screen (the thin one.)
 
I dno if its just me but the 8800GTX jpegs seem a bit softer, with the radeons a bit sharper. Most likely the drivers / jpeg compression.
 
Oblivion screenshots, reproduced with thanks from IceShock's post here.

GTX left vs 2900XT right. All in game settings maximum. 1680x1050 PNG format.

Maximum G80 16SSAA vs R600 16x Box AA



Maximum G80 16SSAA vs R600 24x Wide Tent AA

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom