which GFX card for under £150

Locky · 24 Sep 2006 at 12:10

been away from the gfx sene for a while

and looking to upgrade

so which card is best £150?

benjo · 24 Sep 2006 at 12:14

if PCI-e then X1800XT 256

Locky · 24 Sep 2006 at 12:17

yeah ive just been looking at that

any of the nv cards any good?

ACESHIGH · 24 Sep 2006 at 12:21

The Nv cards that offer performance close to the X1800XT cost more & have been prone to an excessive failure rate.

Thats the best card you can get close to that price, unless you get the X1900XT 256MB.

t31os · 24 Sep 2006 at 12:26

Personally preferring my 7900gs over my x1800xt, not as faster, but far quieter and the nvidia drivers are not a royal pain in the butt like ATI's/Omega's.

I prefer Ati generally, but at this time i'm more impressed with the 7900gs.

Its the ocuk 7900 gs, there's a few threads discussing this card, have a look.

Naffa · 24 Sep 2006 at 12:47

I'd be inclined to recommend the 7900GS as well. If t31os has had the 7900 and the X1800 and he prefers the 7900 then that must say something?

The X1800XT will perform better at stock but these 7900s have been clocking like no'ones business. I'd go for one of them if it were me.

Hamoodii · 24 Sep 2006 at 13:12

Get the X1800XT for sure

A the X1800XT can do HDR+AA at the same time, while the 7900 lack that ability.

Get the X1800XT you wont be dissapointed

Cyber-Mav · 24 Sep 2006 at 13:21

i got a hold of a 9800pro recently to see what its like compared to the 6200 its replaced. the drivers are just crappy and let down the hardware badly. will stick to nvidia cards until ati can sort its act out. the catalyst control center is just a load of bloat ware with no option to go back to the classic control panel like nvidia offers.

fish99 · 24 Sep 2006 at 14:09

X1800 XT outperforms 7950 GT, let alone 7900 GT, let alone 7900 GS. X1900 XT is so close to £150 that I'd seriously consider that too.

There's no denying the high power consumption figures of both those ATI cards though.

Current ATI drivers are fine.

Martnewy · 24 Sep 2006 at 14:19

Will the 1800XT work well with the Viewsonic VX2235wm??

Darkwave · 24 Sep 2006 at 14:21

Cyber-Mav said:
i got a hold of a 9800pro recently to see what its like compared to the 6200 its replaced. the drivers are just crappy and let down the hardware badly. will stick to nvidia cards until ati can sort its act out. the catalyst control center is just a load of bloat ware with no option to go back to the classic control panel like nvidia offers.

ATI Tray Tools is your friend, and the friend of millions of ATI users.

Cyber-Mav · 24 Sep 2006 at 14:24

fish99 said:
X1800 XT outperforms 7950 GT, let alone 7900 GT, let alone 7900 GS. X1900 XT is so close to £150 that I'd seriously consider that too.

*cut out the personal attacks -J*

UKTopGun · 24 Sep 2006 at 15:25

Cyber-Mav said:
snip

I can't see those results being fair/correct.

For one in games such as Lock on, Pacific fighters, Serious sam there is less than 5fps difference between the X1800XT and X1900XTX.

For another the X1800XT acctually gets a higher FPS than the X1900XT in Serious Sam 2.

For a third, nearly all reviews compare the X1800XT vs 7900GT (just google) and nearly all forum boards say near equal performance yet by those benchmarks it seems we should be comparing X1900XT vs 7900GT (X1900XTX in two of those games).

man_from_uncle · 24 Sep 2006 at 15:51

The more I look at benchmarks the more i realise that there are a lot of ways to, not so much rig, but create compelling results depending on what hardware you want to promote. Often though it's just luck of the draw; the resolution, specific eye candy options, timing related to driver release, game and patch release details. All in all it's hard to get really objective results.

I'd have thought that the general consensus was that at stock the X1800XT was slightly faster than the 7900gt and slightly slower than the 7950gt and all of them are slightly faster than the X1900gt and slightly slower than the X1900XT.

I also think that there is wide agreement that the ATI cards are at an advantage because of their HDR and AA feature, but the nvidia cards have been overclocking quite considerably, and for a lot of people that justifies the price.

Having said that the X1800XT with 256mb is at a great price point and the only nvidia card i'd look at over it in that general price bracket would be the 7900gs, because it's just cheaper, overclocks well and runs cool with less power draw.

t31os · 24 Sep 2006 at 16:47

Ati tray tools, omegas, ccc, i'd still rather use the nvidia drivers, they work, are easy to use.

My x1800xt has used various drivers, about 15 different versions, and i always found it a chore to get it working just right. Don't get me wrong, its a blistering card, and its definately better then the GS, but its also more cost.

Considering its cheaper price (elsewhere its still same price as the special last week) i think i'd rather settle for the 7900GS just because its easier to use, quieter, and runs cooler...... AND if you want overclocks fairly good to.....

If you want the best performace, then yeah grab the x1800xt, if you want something a bit more 'all round' then the 7900gs does the job well enough for me, and perhaps for you to. Depends how you put your priorities...

fish99 · 24 Sep 2006 at 17:28

Cyber-Mav said:
(selection of Firing Squad benchmarks)

That's some rather selective linking. In the same article I see the X1800 XT beating 7590 GT in the Oblivion foliage test, beating the 7950 GT in HL2:Lost Coast, beating 7950 GT in Fear. I mean sure the 7950 GT wins in other stuff, like Far Cry and Oblivion mountain test (lock on modern air combat and pacific fighters are hardly important numbers) and most OpenGL games, but lets consider all the benchmarks here, not just the ones that support your case. Then consider the price difference and the fact that only one of them is under £150 as the OP asked for.

Neo4 · 24 Sep 2006 at 17:38

Another vote for 7900GS.Love it so far.BF2 looks great.CSS runs nice and smooth and its not as whiney as my x1900xt equipped PC.

Darkwave · 24 Sep 2006 at 17:48

fish99 said:
Lets consider all the benchmarks here, not just the ones that support your case.

Bingo! Cyber-Mav was recently caught trying to pass off October 2005 benchmarks as the norm, again specifically flight sims and OpenGL. Taking into account that October 2005 = Catalyst 5.10 (or earlier), when ATI drivers were really pathetically optimised for OpenGL, I doubt this was an accident.

My advice would be to ignore any benchmarks Cyber-Mav posts, and go looking at recent benchmarks yourselves if you want an unbiased review. Even older cards like the 7900GT and X1800XT get thrown-in with cutting edge a lot of the time for comparison these days, so you can be assured they're using up to date drivers and games.

Naffa · 24 Sep 2006 at 17:48

fish99 said:
That's some rather selective linking. In the same article I see the X1800 XT beating 7590 GT in the Oblivion foliage test, beating the 7950 GT in HL2:Lost Coast, beating 7950 GT in Fear. I mean sure the 7950 GT wins in other stuff, like Far Cry and Oblivion mountain test (lock on modern air combat and pacific fighters are hardly important numbers) and most OpenGL games, but lets consider all the benchmarks here, not just the ones that support your case. Then consider the price difference and the fact that only one of them is under £150 as the OP asked for.

All he was showing was that the X1800XT doesn't outperform in every game... I think it's accepted that the X1800XT is faster overall, but not in every case. You're post was soley showing your annoyance at a set of benchmarks that showed an Nvidia card to be top. :eek:

Ulfhedjinn said:
My advice would be to ignore any benchmarks Cyber-Mav posts,

Usually I'd say that about anything he posts.

I was just backing him up.

Darkwave · 24 Sep 2006 at 18:01

naffa said:
Usually I'd say that about anything he posts.

I was just backing him up.

I wouldn't have even mentioned it had he not done it before TBH.

A line has to be drawn somewhere with misinformation.