X1900 Noise, Conclusion

The Asgard · 31 Jan 2006 at 22:51

Hi,
After my last post and not having anything definitive I decided to buy one and see/listen for myself. Bought a Sapphire X1900XT.

Currently Reserator Cooled and Running a GTX 512 with the heatsink.

Like a few people have stated startup speed is very noisy and although its loud its not a shreaking loud. This quickly slows down to a quietish hum. Louder than the GTX 512 but not buy much. Next thing to do was run 3D Mark 2006. Test run at default XT speeds. Running the test increased fan noise but the noise wasn't too bad and at XT speeds never seem to get much above stage 2 of the fan. Unlike the GTX 512 where there seems to be a totally varible fan the X1900 seems to jack the fan speed up in stages. Cranked the Card to XTX speeds and the noise increased to the 3rd level of the fan which was some what louder while running the tests and produced temps between 87-90'c via the overdrive panel. Not sure if this is a tad high ?
The 3rd level noise was quiet high certainly higher than a GTX 256 but the noise was not harsh.

Anyway I'm pleasently suprised by the noise and although louder than the GTX 512 it isn't a Dust Buster by any means although the potential is there if the thing got to hot, probably put it back to XT speeds for the noise aspect.

Performance wise in 3d Mark 2006 My GTX 512 is faster scoring nearly 5800 against the XTX score of 5481. Off to play a few games.

X2 4400 @ 2.64
2 Gig of Ram
XTX Speeds

3d Mark Score 5521
SM 2.0 Score 2193
HDR/SM3 2372
CPU 1865

LoadsaMoney · 31 Jan 2006 at 23:04

Yeah they are not loud at all, got the same on my Sapphire x1800 XT, all i can hear is a faint hum while heavy gaming, i was very suprised as well, as when i first saw it, and heard it on startup, i thought it was gona be an ear bleeder, but no way is it, it goes nowhere near that loud, my x800 XT PE was louder.

Id say 90 is a tad high, but its around that sort of temp where the fan would really pick up.

The Asgard · 31 Jan 2006 at 23:08

Yes 90 does seem high I'm just wondering if the heatsink been mounted correctly with the right amount of goop. Going to have a check now.

HighlandeR · 31 Jan 2006 at 23:27

My GTX-512meg is a keeper for sure, the fan doesnt even rev up after a few hours gaming.... but thats only cos I got 1 15db 120mm fan pointed towards it

I never dreamed of such silence PC gaming, only thing I need to work on now is bigger hdd and silent keyboard

The Asgard · 31 Jan 2006 at 23:44

Reapplied the heatsink compound using AS5 and the max temps only dropped a couple of degree's, Max 88. I must say it's scarey how much waste heat is produced where talking nearly hairdryer type heat especially with the last scene of 3D Mark 6 the fan really ramps up for that. So much for global warming.

In Wow the fan noise only hits the 2nd stage and is pretty quiet. Fan noise really does vary with the amount of work the GPU is doing which is what you would expect. On a side note the lapping on the heatsink was virtually mirror.

This XT came with BJ11 memory chips which I believe is 1.1 strange why they are so under clocked.

speeduk · 31 Jan 2006 at 23:55

Think im gonna stick a cpu heatsink on my XT soon. Hehehe.

The Asgard · 1 Feb 2006 at 00:02

Right a bit more playing. Very disappointed with Doom 3 at 1920x1200 I only got 60FPS using the timedemo demo1. With the GTX512 managed over 100 FPS. Fan noise while running the test only ever hit Stage 2.

Tried Fear running at 1920x1200 completely different story Min 39 Average 62 with a max 134 but on the down side the fan switched to stage 3 which is quite loud. Amazing performance though.

lego · 1 Feb 2006 at 00:50

Dont foget drivers for this card are still in their infancy, give it a few days for the 6.2's and try again

VirusViper · 1 Feb 2006 at 01:37

Wow i keep seeing people saying 90c and mines goes 65c which i was worried so im glad mines low altho mind u my case temp is only 20c so...

VirusViper · 1 Feb 2006 at 01:42

The Asgard said:
Right a bit more playing. Very disappointed with Doom 3 at 1920x1200 I only got 60FPS using the timedemo demo1. With the GTX512 managed over 100 FPS. Fan noise while running the test only ever hit Stage 2.

Tried Fear running at 1920x1200 completely different story Min 39 Average 62 with a max 134 but on the down side the fan switched to stage 3 which is quite loud. Amazing performance though.

Sorry for second post but a quick note about Doom3 and same goes for Quake 4 both games will see higher FPS in nVidia cards as apose to ATi because both those games seem to be nVidia designed like Half-Life 2 is for ATi.
Example being i can top over 200fps in games like Counter-Strike: Source where as my brothers nVidia and reviews are only boasting 140fps max on cards like the 7800 GTX 512MB.

I was going for a 7800 GTX 512MB as my mobo is SLi but the X1900 series gave better fps in a larger variety of games i play where as i dont really play Doom3 and Quake4.

BigDom · 1 Feb 2006 at 02:19

VirusViper said:
Sorry for second post but a quick note about Doom3 and same goes for Quake 4 both games will see higher FPS in nVidia cards as apose to ATi because both those games seem to be nVidia designed like Half-Life 2 is for ATi.
Example being i can top over 200fps in games like Counter-Strike: Source where as my brothers nVidia and reviews are only boasting 140fps max on cards like the 7800 GTX 512MB.

I was going for a 7800 GTX 512MB as my mobo is SLi but the X1900 series gave better fps in a larger variety of games i play where as i dont really play Doom3 and Quake4.

Exactly and 3dMark 2006 is also known to be Nvidia Biased. I believe ( unless the patch has come out ) B&W 2 shows better FPS on the 7800GTX BUT in that case there is an acknowledged bug which causes the problem and a patch from makers of B&W 2 will restore the problem.

Basically there will allways be games which bias slightly towards one particular card but at the end of the day for the vast majority of games one card will show out on top... currently it's undesputidly the 1900.

The Asgard · 1 Feb 2006 at 04:29

VirusViper said:
Wow i keep seeing people saying 90c and mines goes 65c which i was worried so im glad mines low altho mind u my case temp is only 20c so...

Could be your 1900 is not running at full speed. Try doing the test in my other post about temps? Or it could be my 1900 is running way too hot. either way it would be good to know.

Dutch Guy · 1 Feb 2006 at 09:28

So the card makes more noise, runs hotter and is slower and you are pleasantly surprised :confused:

The Asgard · 1 Feb 2006 at 10:04

Dutch Guy said:
So the card makes more noise, runs hotter and is slower and you are pleasantly surprised

A bit of a simplification :rolleyes:

The X1900 does run some games slower but also run some games a lot faster. The card is a a lot more future proof than a GTX512 but the big thing is its like £200 cheaper for similiar performance and better IQ. Bit of a no brainer really and yes I am pleasently suprised. Why are you confused?

Dutch Guy · 1 Feb 2006 at 10:14

The Asgard said:
A bit of a simplification

The X1900 does run some games slower but also run some games a lot faster. The card is a a lot more future proof than a GTX512 but the big thing is its like £200 cheaper for similiar performance and better IQ. Bit of a no brainer really and yes I am pleasently suprised. Why are you confused?

I'm surprised because everything you say is a disadvantage of the card, you did not say it was a lot faster in games and has better IQ (but I should have looked better as I just saw you posted before playing games)

The Asgard · 1 Feb 2006 at 10:19

I think the reviews of the XT1900 say it all really. Its a forward thinking card with good performance with current games. My only real concern is the 90'c Load temps which is a bit of a concern with a regard to reliability that and burning the house down while left unattended.

Dutch Guy · 1 Feb 2006 at 10:40

The Asgard said:
I think the reviews of the XT1900 say it all really. Its a forward thinking card with good performance with current games. My only real concern is the 90'c Load temps which is a bit of a concern with a regard to reliability that and burning the house down while left unattended.

90C is a bit high but I ran my 6800NU at >100C under load for a long while without issue (dust in the heatsink that wasn't visible when it was in the case

)

The ATI card has a temperature controlled fan so I guess if 90C was too high the fan would increase speed even further?

The Asgard · 1 Feb 2006 at 10:44

Dutch Guy said:
The ATI card has a temperature controlled fan so I guess if 90C was too high the fan would increase speed even further?

Yes you would have thought but that would make the card noise wise totally unacceptable.

Dutch Guy · 1 Feb 2006 at 10:49

The Asgard said:
Yes you would have thought but that would make the card noise wise totally unacceptable.

I have always thought that GPU's can take heat a lot better than CPU's, I think the throttle temperature of my 6800NU is 125C and as I said the card was still stable at 100C while my A64 CPU begins to lose stability at >55C

The Asgard · 1 Feb 2006 at 10:59

Dutch Guy said:
I have always thought that GPU's can take heat a lot better than CPU's, I think the throttle temperature of my 6800NU is 125C and as I said the card was still stable at 100C while my A64 CPU begins to lose stability at >55C

I think your right. Always remember looking at the throttle temps for my nvidia cards and thinking, thats high but never seeing more than about 70'c in actual use. I suppose the X1900 is just in a different league with regard to temps and just something that I personally not use to seeing. Would be nice to know that 88-90 'C underload is the norm for a well ventilated case though.