Budget: <£200

zo1d · 13 Oct 2006 at 19:55

I'm in exactly the same boat here as well...

The main and only real plus point for me is that the 7900GTO uses less power, although both have very similar power consumption during 2D operation.
The 512MB of ram is desirable, although only really needed above 1280x1024, and arguable by the time 256mb cards can't cut it, the 512mb versions won't be far behind.

However from the reviews I've read it seems that ATI wins hands down on image quality, is anyone able to tell me just how noticeable this is in real life?

Personally I think I’ll go for HIS ICE3 X1900XT, just as silent as a 7900GTO, as fast, if not faster, and has better image quality, which just pushes the ATI ahead of the Nvidia.

megatron · 13 Oct 2006 at 21:41

ademcg said:
The X1900 series coolers are known to be **** and noisy as hell,

If that were true, at least for stock speeds, I would have put my waterblock on my x1900xt. I have all the bits, but just not bothered to touch it as its working fine and I dont feel like messing about atm.

The only time its noisy is for 3 sec when u push the power button. If it was this loud 100% of the time or only in 3d I wouldnt put up with it, but inside the rest of my system based on a quiet p180 it does not stand out.

Maybe if u want to overclock it would be a problem, but then overclocking usually starts with a cooler upgrade anyhow.

UKTopGun · 13 Oct 2006 at 21:44

Surely the 7900GTO isnt faster than the X1900XT if both are overclocked? 7900GTO can be overclocked to GTX speeds and the X1900 to XTX speeds?

Which both are near equal performance.

Edit -> Personally I'd go for the X1900XT for the image quality and HDR+AA benefits (assuming your going to overclock it).

megatron · 13 Oct 2006 at 21:57

Doesnt the x1900gt have full pipelines with 256Mb ram and 7900 gto have less pipelines on the gpu? Could be wrong, I not up to date with the latest cards cause Im happy with my x1900xt.

easyrider · 13 Oct 2006 at 22:16

megatron said:
Doesnt the x1900gt have full pipelines with 256Mb ram and 7900 gto have less pipelines on the gpu? Could be wrong, I not up to date with the latest cards cause Im happy with my x1900xt.

You are wrong

Cyber-Mav · 13 Oct 2006 at 22:32

7900gto has 24 pipes running at 650mhz, x1900xt has 16 pipes running at 625mhz. 7900gto has a considerable fill rate advantage over the x1900xt hence why the 7900gto is faster.

ACESHIGH · 14 Oct 2006 at 01:30

Cyber-Mav said:
7900gto has 24 pipes running at 650mhz, x1900xt has 16 pipes running at 625mhz. 7900gto has a considerable fill rate advantage over the x1900xt hence why the 7900gto is faster.

You keep saying the GTO is faster but, it is infact slower than the X1900XT 256MB, if both are at stock. When talking overclocking, you really should mention both can be overclocked, and again its likely the X1900XT will still be faster in the majority of games.

but then overclocking is never a sure thing.

Cyber-Mav · 14 Oct 2006 at 02:09

ACESHIGH said:
You keep saying the GTO is faster but, it is infact slower than the X1900XT 256MB, if both are at stock. When talking overclocking, you really should mention both can be overclocked, and again its likely the X1900XT will still be faster in the majority of games.

but then overclocking is never a sure thing.

i had a 7900gs 256mb and i clocked that to 650 on the core and 725 on the ram and the card almost got 9200 3dmarks on 05. and the 7900gs is only 20 pipe.
my x1900xt gets 10992 at 625 core and 825ram. so i rekon a 7900gto with the full 24 pipes and 512mb memory should beat the x1900xt easily. i mean 4 more pipes is gonna give the 7900gto a big boost over the 7900gs i assume :confused:

cyclops12 · 14 Oct 2006 at 07:23

and your x1900xt has only 16 pipes
and lets not forget what happend when you clocked the gs that high it broke didnt it
both the xt and the gto are good cards you wont be dissapointed with either
1 will be a small bit faster in some games and the other in other games
just like it has allways been

megatron · 14 Oct 2006 at 13:11

I may have been mistaken about the pipeline numbers, but Ive heard that a large percentage of factory overclocked 7900 series break rather quickly.

I bought an x800gt after reading that the nvidia was slightly faster overall, so I guess Im an ATI fanboy.

However Ive hear more than a few times that the IQ, image quality, looks better on an ATI. Also nvidia cant do HDR + AA at the same time.

Currently on the orb, 3 of the top 5 on 3dmark 06 are running ATI crossfire.

easyrider · 14 Oct 2006 at 13:17

megatron said:
I may have been mistaken about the pipeline numbers, but Ive heard that a large percentage of factory overclocked 7900 series break rather quickly.

Not one report on here about the GTO's failing.
Nothing but scaremongering to try and get a point across.

I bought an x800gt after reading that the nvidia was slightly faster overall, so I guess Im an ATI fanboy.

You said it

However Ive hear more than a few times that the IQ, image quality, looks better on an ATI. Also nvidia cant do HDR + AA at the same time.

Again a lame boring example that is the only reason that ATI fans give to the cards.

Currently on the orb, 3 of the top 5 on 3dmark 06 are running ATI crossfire.

Point being?

This thread is not about Xfire at all :rolleyes:

Cyber-Mav · 14 Oct 2006 at 14:33

image quality is the same with both nvidia and ati. its all depending on how you set it up in the drivers.

as for aa+hdr, yes the ati card can do it but people make it sound like it can be done for free, because it can't there is a performance penalty involved.

zo1d · 14 Oct 2006 at 15:01

Cyber-Mav said:
image quality is the same with both nvidia and ati. its all depending on how you set it up in the drivers.

as for aa+hdr, yes the ati card can do it but people make it sound like it can be done for free, because it can't there is a performance penalty involved.

This is a quote from a review by X-bit labs (click here) on the X1950, quote...

"We also want to single out the fact that having the same or higher performance than the GeForce 7900 GTX, the Radeon X1950 XTX provides a much higher quality of anisotropic filtering. This is not too conspicuous in the heat of a battle, but the difference is striking in some cases."

I am very tempted by the 7900GTO due to the lower power consumption, as I like to run a very quiet rig, however, not at the expense of image quality. Is anyone able to comment from real world experience, on just how noticeable the image quality is between the 7900 and X1900?

Gibbo · 14 Oct 2006 at 15:07

Hi there

Right fanboys aside, some facts!

X1900 XT is the faster gamers card, even the 256MB version. These are £144.99 +VAT from OcuK.

The 7900 GTO is the faster card for those who just want to run benchmarks, even at stock it will get better 3D Mark results. In games however its marginally slower in 90% of games. These for the moment are only £134.99 +VAT from OcUK, bargain!

For those who are willing to overclock, BIOS flash etc. etc. then the 7900 GTO is the quickest card. However remember flashing the BIOS invalidates warranty so if something fails in 6 months time your screwed as an RMA won't be given.

Two great cards and the decision should be made on what games you want to play. As if your playing Oblivion then ATI is the obvious choice if you get my drift.

easyrider · 14 Oct 2006 at 15:11

Gibbo said:
Hi there

Right fanboys aside, some facts!

X1900 XT is the faster gamers card, even the 256MB version. These are £144.99 +VAT from OcuK.

The 7900 GTO is the faster card for those who just want to run benchmarks, even at stock it will get better 3D Mark results. In games however its marginally slower in 90% of games. These for the moment are only £134.99 +VAT from OcUK, bargain!

For those who are willing to overclock, BIOS flash etc. etc. then the 7900 GTO is the quickest card. However remember flashing the BIOS invalidates warranty so if something fails in 6 months time your screwed as an RMA won't be given.

Two great cards and the decision should be made on what games you want to play. As if your playing Oblivion then ATI is the obvious choice if you get my drift.

For £158 having 7900 GTX is a no brainer!

No need to flash the bios overclocking any card invalidates warranty.

And when the GTO is clocked to GTX speeds this is the card to get.

If all "proper" GTX's were this price we wouldn't be having this discussion you would be sold out!

OH and people with resolutions above 12x10 then the GTO is more of a reason to buy one!

ACESHIGH · 15 Oct 2006 at 01:21

easyrider said:
And when the GTO is clocked to GTX speeds

it dies.

megatron · 15 Oct 2006 at 08:46

easyrider said:
Not one report on here about the GTO's failing.
Nothing but scaremongering to try and get a point across.

You said it

Again a lame boring example that is the only reason that ATI fans give to the cards.

Point being?

This thread is not about Xfire at all

I said it, but do u realise that u are an nvidiot to the extreme? U seemed to (or every thread I read in graphics section), there is some nvidiot trying to make sure that any undecided buyers steer well clear of ATI. Why? Ive been using ATI since radion 8500, but Im not obsessed with ATI, I have an Nvidia motherboard.

I dont understand why the whole ATI/nvidia decision cant be seen with a calm rational thought process, by some people.

I mention crossfire since u make it sound like nvidia blows away anything ATI has to offer in performance stakes; its simply not true.

Also in 3dmark05 the top score is once again crossfire.

I dont mean for someone to base a £180 purchase decision on this fact, Im just trying to paint an unbiased picture.

As for heat consumption, noise; I find that if u are noise conscious u must pay attention to the case as a whole and not just one component. If the case is cool, the grx card is cooler and not likely to ramp up the RPM. Mine never has.

Talking about efficiency, power consumption maybe better in nvidia (Ill take ** word for it, to me its a non-issue); but you will have to agree that architechturally speaking ATI is more efficient. ATI competes with 16 pipes vs 24.

easyrider · 15 Oct 2006 at 10:40

megatron said:
I said it, but do u realise that u are an nvidiot to the extreme? U seemed to (or every thread I read in graphics section), there is some nvidiot trying to make sure that any undecided buyers steer well clear of ATI. Why? Ive been using ATI since radion 8500, but Im not obsessed with ATI, I have an Nvidia motherboard.

I dont understand why the whole ATI/nvidia decision cant be seen with a calm rational thought process, by some people.

I mention crossfire since u make it sound like nvidia blows away anything ATI has to offer in performance stakes; its simply not true.

Also in 3dmark05 the top score is once again crossfire.

I dont mean for someone to base a £180 purchase decision on this fact, Im just trying to paint an unbiased picture.

As for heat consumption, noise; I find that if u are noise conscious u must pay attention to the case as a whole and not just one component. If the case is cool, the grx card is cooler and not likely to ramp up the RPM. Mine never has.

Talking about efficiency, power consumption maybe better in nvidia (Ill take ** word for it, to me its a non-issue); but you will have to agree that architechturally speaking ATI is more efficient. ATI competes with 16 pipes vs 24.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7978974&postcount=4

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7951880&postcount=25

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7926425&postcount=6 ]

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=7858427&postcount=24

All these post of mine suggest ATI so you are taklking carp.

Donb't label me with a fanboy badge like yourself.I dont care who make sthe cards its speed and value that counts.

I suggest you read more posts before making sweeping statements.

I make calm rational thoughts about GFX cards based on the individual cards merits.

TomL · 16 Oct 2006 at 09:39

I appreciate all the feedback, in all likelihood I'll choose the ATi card as I'm an inexperienced overclocker and the idea of modifying the factory settings of the card to make it better than the other doesn't appeal to me.