• 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.

X1900 Thread - no nonsense

x1800 XT is £281, x1900 XT is gona be what, about £400 when the VATs added, and this is the difference between them.

x19.JPG


That looks like an absolute rip off. :eek:

Wonder how many extra the XTX can add to that, an extra couple of frames anyone ?

Sorry to say but that looks bad, still its only 1x review, lets see what tomorrow brings, hope its better than that though, has to be especially for the price.
 
Last edited:
LoadsaMoney said:
I don't blame yer, i didn't expect it to be that bad. :(
Click to expand...

There are games the X1900 excels at, but as I said all along the 7800 GTX 512MB will hold its own. :)
But now ATI have really brought the fight to NVIDIA with an equal product to theirs and better in many games, plus it cost less, has AVIVO and superior visuals so the battle is on. :D
 
Yup i certainly can't see them bringing it out sooner if thats the competition. :(

Yeah its going to excell at the shader intensive games, which is how many, and where are they.

Lets see what more reviews bring tomorrow.

Hey Gibbo your up late. :D
 
Last edited:
The benchies might change a bit once the cards are tested with more up to date drivers. I'll be keeping my eyes peeled tomorrow to see if Anand or HardOCP give up some reviews, i'd guess they're likely to have been supplied with more recent (even if they are beta) drivers.
 
dis said:
The benchies might change a bit once the cards are tested with more up to date drivers. I'll be keeping my eyes peeled tomorrow to see if Anand or HardOCP give up some reviews, i'd guess they're likely to have been supplied with more recent (even if they are beta) drivers.
Click to expand...

ATI have been releasing drivers more or less on a daily basis for these cards and their own in hourse engineers, so its clear to see driver revisions will improve performance further and ATI are working on dual core optimisations for their X1K series graphics cards. :)
 
Results – Quake 4 (DirectX 9 Benchmark)

Quake 4 is a surprise win for the Radeon X1900 XT and even the Radeon X1800 XT ever since the Catalyst 5.11 drivers debuted which bolstered ATI's OpenGL performance significantly, but curiously its effects are not obvious at all in Chronicles of Riddick and Doom 3. Quake 4, which is based on the modified Doom 3 engine, is thankfully seeing healthy improvements to the extent that it overtakes NVIDIA's best at high resolutions. So one has to ask why such poor performance in Chronicles of Riddick?
Click to expand...
Isnt Quake4 OpenGL?

Also @LoadsMoney -> Pick a game which is Shader heavy.... everyone knows that the X1800 and the X1900 are VERY similar with the exception of minor tweaks (bringing the voltage down) and THREE times the shaders, so it will be of no surprise to anyone that the different in a randomly picked situation is very small.
Bring on the shader heavy games and i dont doubt a huge gap will become clear.
 
Goksly said:
Isnt Quake4 OpenGL?

Also @LoadsMoney -> Pick a game which is Shader heavy.... everyone knows that the X1800 and the X1900 are VERY similar with the exception of minor tweaks (bringing the voltage down) and THREE times the shaders, so it will be of no surprise to anyone that the different in a randomly picked situation is very small.
Bring on the shader heavy games and i dont doubt a huge gap will become clear.
Click to expand...

Yes i agree bring them on, afterall that is the x1900's strong point, but as ive said before they aint gona appear overnight, and the next gen DX10 cards are at the door already.

Look how long SM3.0 has been about, those games are not exactly flooding out are they, its gona take time, but its time that they aint got as cards get released much quicker than games.
 
Last edited:
Thing that disappointed me the most (if the review is accurate) is the temps. Looks like a X1800XL is on the cards for me - good money saving / temps probably the same as the X1900 lot and my TFT wont go over 1280.
Watch me buy it and then Valve patch CS: Source to shade everything. basts :P
 
Well by the looks of it, if the x1900 is at best a couple of frames quicker, then you must be insane to spend £400 on it when the x1800 is only £281, but as i said thats only 1x review, lets wait and see what tomorrow brings with reviews from the likes of Anandtech etc... :)
 
LoadsaMoney said:
then you must be insane to spend £400 on it when the x1800 is only £281
Click to expand...

I'm insane :-)

We'll see what tomorrow brings i guess, but i need a new gfx card so i'll be waiting for 2pm to roll by (spent the last 2 weeks runing a backup rig with a 9200SE in it, painfull). Besides, that review used 5.13 cats and they're over a month old, if the updates to the drivers are arriving that thick and fast then hopefully we'll all see some nice results when the big reviews arrive.
 
X1900 XT is 17% faster than X1800 XT at the highest resolution with IQ on, X1900 XTX over 46% faster than GTX 512. Yay for lots of ALUs! - Fear

X1900 XT and XTX have incremental performance gains over X1800 XT in Far Cry at all resolutions, with all the ATI boards making GTX 512 look rather daft in Crytek's FPS title. The ATI products are faster as a group with AA and AF applied, than the GTX 512 without, in our benchmark (a section of Pier). - Beats the GTX 512mb by 100% in the given example of FarCry!

If your choice is between the boards on test, and you love Quake 4 and you're looking forward to Quake Wars so much you drool in pints, NVIDIA's GTX 512 is the hardware for you. - GTX still takes it by prolly ~15% at low res and more like 5% at higher res.

GeForce 7800 GTX 512 is generally bested in all modern games, and Radeon X1000-series products have enough significant image quality advantages to give X1900 XT the nod even if the performance difference was slight in either direction, comparatively speaking. We're seeing all the early XT boards come with the 1.1ns BJ11 DRAMs of the XTX, making the XTX a choice only for those with carefree finances.
Click to expand...
It may not reflect the "average" performance gain, but goes to show that when ATI said that it would outperform the GTX 512mb by up to 100% they were not lying ;)

Still annoyed at them for not using a quieter cooling solution :(
Seems that, for the time being at least, ATI do have the performance crown in most games and defo have the IQ lead. Not really a sensible by for the X1800 owners, but for anyone looking to upgrade its a win win situation - grab yaself a X1800 bargin, or treat yaself to the new king ;)
 
dis said:
I'm insane :-)

We'll see what tomorrow brings i guess, but i need a new gfx card so i'll be waiting for 2pm to roll by (spent the last 2 weeks runing a backup rig with a 9200SE in it, painfull). Besides, that review used 5.13 cats and they're over a month old, if the updates to the drivers are arriving that thick and fast then hopefully we'll all see some nice results when the big reviews arrive.
Click to expand...

Im insane as ill be buying a x1900xtx today, and knowing that ill be playing it on my native re of 800x600 :eek:

:p Only kidding ill be playing at 1280x1024 but still that is low for the x1900xtx, well at least it will last a long time. Is there any point in overclocking an already overclocked grpahics card, i expect there aint much left in it.
 
Theres an error in the hex review under FEAR, the text totally doesn't add up with the graph- they must have there numbers the wrong way round.

The text syas this:
X1900 XT is 17% faster than X1800 XT at the highest resolution with IQ on, X1900 XTX over 46% faster than GTX 512. Yay for lots of ALUs!
Click to expand...
But the graph clearly shows that the X1800 is 46% slower than the GTX512, with the GTX512 at the most 17% slower than the X1900XT.

So in the most shader intensive game in existence, the X1900XTX, the highest clocked version is 17% faster than the GTX512. Not what I would call impressive. Anyway, time to read on.

EDIT: All the graphs just look plain wrong and don't add up.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom