For chist´s sake I hate this!

drunkenmaster · 15 May 2007 at 16:00

Yarkanat said:
Yeah, I think one thing what surprises me is it seems like ATi is knowingly committing a suicide, I mean high temps and power consumption, worse IQ, bigger size, low AA efficiency, and a higher price doesnt make sense But I am SO waiting for my new samsung 226BW

the only problem with that statement is, my temps aren't any higher than with my 8800gtx, its not noisey, most reviews put it at 20W or so higher power consumption when comparing full systems usage, higher power consumption doesn't actually mean anything. its smaller than a gtx, marginally larger than a gts(but easier to fit in, the gts/x have the pci-e connector facing front of case, which does mean it adds another bit to length as the cable can't just turn instantly, the cable, getting it there and inbetween drives in many cases is a pain).

aa efficiency, so far its looking more like aa is defaulting to higher levels of aa, so infact it might well be that most reviews are comparing 4xaa on nvidia to 8xaa on the 2900xt. it doesn't have worse IQ either, the AF is so close to identical in almost every single situation. the aa, only the wide tent is really creating a blur, they are also getting a new mode soon that does edge only and should completely fix the blur. box mode, so standard 2/4/8xaa modes are very good if not better than nvidia's. personally i think AF makes a huge difference as do 4xaa, going hugely high on AA doesn't have massive effects(not as massive as 4xaa does). most websites are saying apart from the blurryness the IQ is very very close, remember all the pictures that compare IQ are like 1 inch sections of big screens MASSIVELY magnified, even then there are tiny differences, these are very rarely things you can see in game. the only thing is prices, they should be £250, and any higher is down to people getting it out first wanting to get more for them. at £250 they are very good value.

Darkwave · 15 May 2007 at 16:03

drunkenmaster said:
the only problem with that statement is, my temps aren't any higher than with my 8800gtx, its not noisey, most reviews put it at 20W or so higher power consumption when comparing full systems usage, higher power consumption doesn't actually mean anything. its smaller than a gtx.

The 2900XT is the direct competitor to the 8800GTS though, not the 8800GTX, so that comparison is moot really and as a competitor to the 8800GTS, it doesn't really cut it.

Yarkanat · 15 May 2007 at 16:08

drunkenmaster said:
the only problem with that statement is, my temps aren't any higher than with my 8800gtx, its not noisey, most reviews put it at 20W or so higher power consumption when comparing full systems usage, higher power consumption doesn't actually mean anything. its smaller than a gtx, marginally larger than a gts(but easier to fit in, the gts/x have the pci-e connector facing front of case, which does mean it adds another bit to length as the cable can't just turn instantly, the cable, getting it there and inbetween drives in many cases is a pain).

aa efficiency, so far its looking more like aa is defaulting to higher levels of aa, so infact it might well be that most reviews are comparing 4xaa on nvidia to 8xaa on the 2900xt. it doesn't have worse IQ either, the AF is so close to identical in almost every single situation. the aa, only the wide tent is really creating a blur, they are also getting a new mode soon that does edge only and should completely fix the blur. box mode, so standard 2/4/8xaa modes are very good if not better than nvidia's. personally i think AF makes a huge difference as do 4xaa, going hugely high on AA doesn't have massive effects(not as massive as 4xaa does). most websites are saying apart from the blurryness the IQ is very very close, remember all the pictures that compare IQ are like 1 inch sections of big screens MASSIVELY magnified, even then there are tiny differences, these are very rarely things you can see in game. the only thing is prices, they should be £250, and any higher is down to people getting it out first wanting to get more for them. at £250 they are very good value.

Yeah, I think they are pretty much on the same par with each other, the GTS and XT. But why did ATi break the tradition of sending in the XTX first?
Since AMD bought ATi, there have been nothing but troubles.. ATi/AMD has nothing to counter Conroe and new Dual &Quad cores, or the G80 GTX. I doubt that the R600 XTX will never come out. But I hope ATi plans for something truly great. Which arrives as scheduled lol

bfar · 15 May 2007 at 16:10

Yarkanat said:
Yeah, thanks dudes, I think I will be sticking to the GTS now, It´s a shame lol, Because a while ago my rig was:

X1950pro
athlon3200+

Now its all Intel and NVidia

Honestly, why do you care? In five years time it will be Intel or powerVR or some other evil corporation producing the best hardware. The brand means nothing. Its all about each individual modal, and no matter what anyone says, the 8800 GTS is a sheer beauty, and you will love it.

ATI will not be clawing this back with a driver update. Thats wishful thinking.

Yarkanat · 15 May 2007 at 16:16

Yeah I know, I know brand means nothing, It just seems I have a bond with ATi hardware, never used Nvidia before except in the good ole 90s lol

Gosh the GTS is silent! My buddy has one, and it doesnt make a noise, even under load! Its as if its under water :confused:

Giftmacher · 15 May 2007 at 16:37

drunkenmaster said:
aa efficiency, so far its looking more like aa is defaulting to higher levels of aa, so infact it might well be that most reviews are comparing 4xaa on nvidia to 8xaa on the 2900xt.

If that turns out to be the case ATi really should kick themselves for releasing drivers in that state. :rolleyes:

It'd be a hell of a thing to do when a GPU is already going to get a frosty reception for being so late.

Gift.

Duff-Man · 15 May 2007 at 16:43

Personally, I would stick with the GTS, assuming you bought the 640mb version.

You would do well with either, but for my money the GTS just comes out on top in terms of price : performance. It also has the added advantage of being quieter.

Ronaldo · 15 May 2007 at 16:46

is the GTS is 640Mb then get it great card and clocks well

drunkenmaster · 15 May 2007 at 16:47

Giftmacher said:
If that turns out to be the case ATi really should kick themselves for releasing drivers in that state. It'd be a hell of a thing to do when a GPU is already going to get a frosty reception for being so late.

Gift.

nvidia had exactly the same issue, and it seems to be mainly down to well, games are made and they really only know and support/recognise 2/4/8xaa. source no vista was one of the games nvidia specifically fixed, the game was running like a good 20-30% slower because the 4xaa mode ingame was setting in reality a higher setting. i didn't get slow down as i was using 8 xaa i think, other people and loads of threads of people with stupidly slow CS:S on vista and nvidia worked it out, that was months after release. sometimes there are issues, but if it turns out to be true, and all the reviews point out possible bugs, then completely ignore them or get to the bottom of them is pretty lame. i mean if, guru3d in particular, find out in their 2nd benchmark, that theres a AA glitch that is causing lower performance, couldn't they just benchmark at a different setting. but many sites stuck with 4xAA/16xAF throughout all their benchmarks, with a bunch of games looking shockingly bad.

to be honest theres no real reason to go with either card, they are both good, really good, fast, only thing i'd definately recommend is don't go out and buy a £370 brand new GTX, buying mine 2nd hand for cheaper is fine though

and if you're thinking about getting a 8800ultra, ati or nvidia gts or 2900 can both be crossfired for less than the cost of a 8800ultra. tis probably the most worthless card ever made.

Cyber-Mav · 15 May 2007 at 17:14

jamie2497 said:
Seems to me as if the X2900XT is giving random performances throughout games, sometimes even dropping below the X1950XTX. The GTS shows quite a consistant performance through all games and a lot of the time beats the 2900, plus its cheaper

I myself changed my mind from an X2900XT to a 8800GTS 640mb

reason is that like the x1950xtx the shader count on the ati cards is not actually true, on the x2900xt there are actually 64 streme processors which have 5 streme processor units attached to each one making a total of 320.

now its a bit like the x1900xt cards that have 48 shaders but actually 16pipes with 3 shaders per pipe. thats why at worst the x2900xt will perform like a 64 streme processor card and at best it may do up to 320 streme processors worth of work but only under certain controlled situations.

either way you look at it the ati implementation is a cheapo method and they should have just ripped nvidias design and peade proper streme processors that do the job properly.

the 8800gtx will do 128 shaders worth of work in all situations resulting in more consistant performance in any game.

bit gutted about this. but it explains the x2900xt's abysmal performance from 320 streme processors, just like ati did with the x1900xt range with 48 shaders being needed to rival nvidia gtx cards with 24 proper pipes.

Cyber-Mav · 15 May 2007 at 17:14

Ronaldo said:
is the GTS is 640Mb then get it great card and clocks well

most of all it responds well to clock speed increases.

Yarkanat · 15 May 2007 at 17:24

Yeah I ordered the 640 MB version. I think I´ll love it

I come from x1950pro agp

Cyber-Mav · 15 May 2007 at 17:27

Yarkanat said:
Yeah I ordered the 640 MB version. I think I´ll love it I come from x1950pro agp

huh? the 8800gts is not agp? how come you ordered that?

Yarkanat · 15 May 2007 at 17:27

I also ordered DS3 and E4300

Also some gskill pc6400

Nelly · 15 May 2007 at 17:30

Yarkanat said:
I also ordered DS3 and E4300 Also some gskill pc6400

Just think though, we have saved a least £150 to the cheapest 8800GTX sure it may have less stream processors 96 v 128 but we can still overclock the 8800GTS to GTX speeds!!

I'm all excited I cant wait I dunno about you? lol

Sir Random · 15 May 2007 at 17:31

Yarkanat said:
Yeah I ordered the 640 MB version. I think I´ll love it I come from x1950pro agp

With the E4300 and DDR2, you'll be blown away by the difference

.

Nelly · 15 May 2007 at 17:32

Sir Random said:
You'll be blown away by the difference .

Same here, I havent even rigged up my Conroe system yet, I'm running on an FX-53, X1900XTX etc etc etc!

Will be built by friday!!!!

Darkwave · 15 May 2007 at 17:32

Sir Random said:
With the E4300 and DDR2, you'll be blown away by the difference .

Yup, that's a quality upgrade. :eek:

queamin · 15 May 2007 at 18:06

Don't forget nvidia shaders are running about twice as fast as ati's

Yarkanat · 15 May 2007 at 18:13

I am SO waiting for this upgrade! My whole new system is:

DS3
E4300
GF8800GTS
2 GB GSKILL PC6400 (Capable of 980mhz 4-4-4-12)
Samsung 26BW 22" widescreen :eek:

Yeah man! Im waiting to see how that beast overclocks! And look at this:

http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=8800&page=7

Not worth 150 £ really for few fiddly FPS, huh? And even if the difference was 30 fps e.g 150 and 120, i really couldnt see the difference. GPU and screen arrives tomorrow! And other parts in 2 weeks.

Nelly btw, can I add you in msn?