x1950 review

sablabra · 13 Aug 2006 at 01:32

LoadsaMoney said:
Anyone whos upgrading from a low end card will get one, an x1950 will run the same DX9 stuff perfectly fine as G80/R600, the only advantage they have is DX10 which is not going to be used for donkeys yet, so if you have an x1800/x1900/x1950 you can miss G80/R600 out and just get a DX10 card when DX10 is used more, and worth having, by which time the G80/R600 will be well old hat as new cards will be out.

so we have Crysis and now your saying Eve online that wil have DX10 features, so everyone should rush out for the R600/G80 just because they can run 2 games with DX10 features, still not worth it, just run them in DX9.

The only ppl who will benefit from getting an R600/G80 are those with low end cards, and the willy wavers who can lob them out as they have DX10, anyone with the x1800/x1900/x1950/7900 GTX etc... can miss them out and just get a one when DX10 is used more and worth having, which will be past R600/G80.

But G80 will still be the fastest card for dx9 games

. G80 is to be lauched septemper/october, heard it from a nvidia beta tester, but don't take my word for it.

And the greatest game for me with dx10 will be Flight sim X

Darkwave · 13 Aug 2006 at 01:40

ATI says the R600 will be the fastest DirectX 9 card ever made, Nvidia says the G80 will be the fastest DirectX 9 card ever made... I say that they are both bloody liars until one of them gives me a free sample.

Or at least until reviews are out.

sablabra · 13 Aug 2006 at 01:46

Úlfhednar said:
ATI says the R600 will be the fastest DirectX 9 card ever made, Nvidia says the G80 will be the fastest DirectX 9 card ever made... I say that they are both bloody liars until one of them gives me a free sample. Or at least until reviews are out.

But G80 will be released way before R600. So when G80 is released I'm not doubting it will be the fastest dx9 card. Of course, G80 won't be the fastest card forever!

Darkwave · 13 Aug 2006 at 01:46

sablabra said:
But G80 will be released way before R600. So when G80 is released I'm not doubting it will be the fastest dx9 card. Of course, G80 won't be the fastest card forever!

LOL, I completely forgot about that. Aye the G80 will be the fastest DirectX 9 card, maybe for a few months, maybe for a year. Who knows? ATI and Nvidia don't, that's for sure.

sunlitsix · 13 Aug 2006 at 01:55

it will turn out the same as all the other series of cards (im guessing the names here)

nvidia release the 8800GTX - fastest card around
ati release the X2800XTX - the new fastest
nvidia has a revised chip ready the 8850GTX - takes crown again

etc etc

Darkwave · 13 Aug 2006 at 01:59

Aye, I think your crystal ball is correct. It's an endless cycle.

You missed some bits though... "The 2800XT-X will have better image quality and Nvidia will charge more."

Nah in all honestly I'm hoping it goes the opposite way to that, I like to switch brands because it gets boring sticking to one card. Recently I have had two Nvidia then two ATI (which might be three soon) so it's time for a switch if Nvidia will let me this time.

easyrider · 13 Aug 2006 at 02:01

Úlfhednar said:
Aye, I think your crystal ball is correct. It's an endless cycle.

You missed some bits though... "The 2800XT-X will have better image quality and Nvidia will charge more."

You offer so much advice....and yet your rig does not support it? :confused:

Darkwave · 13 Aug 2006 at 02:15

easyrider said:
You offer so much advice....and yet your rig does not support it?

My rig has a PCI-E slot, why would it not support it? :confused:

Never mind the fact I am going AM2 or Conroe if I get an X1950, even my current socket 754 board will support it. :confused:

easyrider · 13 Aug 2006 at 02:20

Úlfhednar said:
My rig has a PCI-E slot, why would it not support it?

lol

I meant you offer top hardware advice...

but do not use it....

You base your arguement on conjecture.Reviews etc...

I use the stuff on a day to day basis.

I discarded my X1900 xtx cause it was no faster in games than my GTX.
It did all the things i wanted to avoid as an overclocker.

heat
power
noise.

your basis of arguement is not based on anything but reeading reviews

I base my arguement on using the hardware

Darkwave · 13 Aug 2006 at 02:27

easyrider said:
lol

I meant you offer top hardware advice...

but do not use it....

You base your arguement on conjecture.Reviews etc...

I use the stuff on a day to day basis.

Because my GTO² was fine until I wanted to play Oblivion in higher detail, and then because I broke my X1800XT I am thinking of upgrading to an X1950XT/XT-X when they are out.

I upgrade out of necessity, not out of "fancying better tech," I wouldn't even if I could afford to. But I am hardly saying anything different to most people on this foru

easyrider said:
I discarded my X1900 xtx cause it was no faster in games than mt GTX.
It did all the things i wanted to avoid as an overclocker.

heat
power
noise.

your basis of arguement is not based on anything but reeading reviews

I base my arguement on using the hardware

Firstly; Not everyone wants a card for the same reasons you do. A lot of people who come to these boards just want the best bang for their buck, many even say so quite clearly.

If people want less heat, power, and noise then by all means I will suggest going for Nvidia, but as most people seem to just want more pixel-pushing power for less cost I tend to suggest ATI as they also have the bonus of better image quality.

As for what my argument is based on; I don't own all the hardware I talk about, but I have used most of it at some point or another due to having computer geeks for friends. Getting information from reviews is hardly a bad idea either if you look out for the ones that don't correspond with the rest, otherwise there would not be sites like Anandtech, FiringSquad, or Tom's in the first place.

Those sites are there because lots of people read them and use them to decide what hardware to buy, saying you're not allowed to make an informed decision without using and testing it is quite frankly utterly absurd.

Darkwave · 13 Aug 2006 at 02:29

Also, I would like to take the opportunity to point out that over the last few days you have been suggesting the 7950GX2 to people non-stop. Last I checked, that wasn't in your signature.

If you've "used" one and not "owned" one then I guess your opinions are just as uninformed as mine.

easyrider · 13 Aug 2006 at 02:45

Úlfhednar said:
Also, I would like to take the opportunity to point out that over the last few days you have been suggesting the 7950GX2 to people non-stop. Last I checked, that wasn't in your signature.

If you've "used" one and not "owned" one then I guess your opinions are just as uninformed as mine.

lmao

I have hardware coming out of my ears!

lol

But granted...I have never tried a GX2 in my conroe rig.
But you inform me that if I get 18,500 points with it in 05 and a x1950 xt that gets 13000

the x1950 is faster...

Thanks for the heads up

Darkwave · 13 Aug 2006 at 02:49

3D Mark isn't the end-all and be-all to everyone, easy. A card that sucks in 3D Mark can many-a-time haul arse in games. My X1800XT sucked in 3D Mark but it did loved HDR+AA in 1600x1200.

I wouldn't know what 3D Marks they get but Gibbo has so far said the X1950 is close to or beyond 7950GX2 performance, and as the X1950XT is confirmed to be £230 from here, and the X1950XT-X to be £290, it will be a better buy than a £375 GX2 either way.

easyrider · 13 Aug 2006 at 02:55

Úlfhednar said:
3D Mark isn't the end-all and be-all to everyone, easy. A card that sucks in 3D Mark can many-a-time haul arse in games. My X1800XT sucked in 3D Mark but it did loved HDR+AA in 1600x1200.

I wouldn't know what 3D Marks they get but Gibbo has so far said the X1950 is close to or beyond 7950GX2 performance, and as the X1950XT is confirmed to be £230 from here, and the X1950XT-X to be £290, it will be a better buy than a £375 GX2 either way.

of course

a couple of thousand here and there can be forgiven.

not 5000 lmao.

I want ATI to give me 18,500 in 3D 05 for its x1950

as I know that 225mhz on the ram from a x1900xtx is not gonna even be close.

I will be the first to admit it if I'm wrong BTW.You can quote me on that.

And in any games.It will be not that much of an increase over x1900.

Darkwave · 13 Aug 2006 at 02:56

An SLi card with 1GB RAM is obviously going to be better in 3D Mark though, it's hardly anything like real-world performance. :confused:

easyrider · 13 Aug 2006 at 03:04

Úlfhednar said:
An SLi card with 1GB RAM is obviously going to be better in 3D Mark though, it's hardly anything like real-world performance.

of course.

But at high res it is.

I had a 7900GT driving my viewsonic 20" widescreen.I had it a week.I got a 7900 GTX ,games were smoother.

I then installed a x1900 xtx.

It made my psu fan run faster(noise) heat etc.. and the age old( image quality arguement was finally put to rest)

I went back to my GTX.In fact overclocking My GTX was easier 700/1900 was a breeze.

I got more out of it than the x1900xtx.And this is based on experience.

Really I dont care about ATI an NV.I warrant the best design..

HDR and AA are not enough for me
And all I see is post about how a card can do this and this card cannot.

If the x1950 is faster...I'm gonna get one.But Iknow that its nothing more than a small boost.Nothing to get excitied about IMO.

Darkwave · 13 Aug 2006 at 03:14

easyrider said:
of course.

But at high res it is.

Up to 2048x1536, even with 4x AA, 512MB makes no difference so why would 1024MB? :confused:

easyrider said:
I had a 7900GT driving my viewsonic 20" widescreen.I had it a week.I got a 7900 GTX ,games were smoother.

Of course it would make it run smoother, a 7900GTX is a whole other ball-game compared to a 7900GT.

easyrider said:
I then installed a x1900 xtx.

It made my psu fan run faster(noise) heat etc..

I never denied that the X1900 series runs hotter than the 7900 series, but I do think the price difference is worth it. You may disagree, but many people want bang-for-buck.

easyrider said:
and the age old( image quality arguement was finally put to rest)

I'm glad you came to realise that ATI image quality is generally better.

easyrider said:
I went back to my GTX.In fact overclocking My GTX was easier 700/1900 was a breeze.

I got more out of it than the x1900xtx.And this is based on experience.

Really I dont care about ATI an NV.I warrant the best design..

Aye, and that's an extremely valid reason and I would suggest current Geforce graphics cards to anyone who made it clear they want quiet and cool operation.

easyrider said:
HDR and AA are not enough for me
And all I see is post about how a card can do this and this card cannot.

If the x1950 is faster...I'm gonna get one.But Iknow that its nothing more than a small boost.Nothing to get excitied about IMO.

HDR+AA are not all the X1800/X1900 series bring to the table though. They bring performance equal (better in some situations, worse in others, c'est la vise) to their Nvidia counterparts, but they do it for far less cost and with better IQ in general aside from HQAF and HDR+AA. This is why people on this forum are all about ATI lately.

When G80 is released, everyone will be going crazy for it until R600 is released, and if it's better than R600 then everyone will be going crazy for it for a long time after too. For now though, ATI is bang-for-buck king, and that's what most people want.

easyrider · 13 Aug 2006 at 03:36

Úlfhednar said:
Of course it would make it run smoother, a 7900GTX is a whole other ball-game compared to a 7900GT.

Is it?

Whats different?

1.1nm ram? core speed?

Loads of 7900 GT's clock to GTX speeds and the only thing that is different is the ammount of ram.

256 against 512mb something that you state means nothing in todays games.

Darkwave · 13 Aug 2006 at 03:46

You mean that 7900GTs go to 7900GTX speeds with a pencil mod.

I have never seen benchmarks showing a 7900GT outperforming an 7900GTX in 3D Mark or in games, maybe they could with a volt-mod but I have not seen it. But through pure overclocking is a no-go either way.

Also, 1 in 20 7900GTs is a dud. 5% RMA figure courtesy of XFX and eVGA.

easyrider · 13 Aug 2006 at 03:48

Úlfhednar said:
You mean that 7900GTs go to 7900GTX speeds with a pencil mod.

I have never seen benchmarks showing a 7900GT outperforming an 7900GTX in 3D Mark or in games, maybe they could with a volt-mod but I have not seen it. But through pure overclocking is a no-go either way.

Also, 1 in 20 7900GTs is a dud. 5% RMA figure courtesy of XFX and eVGA.

Do a search for Easyriders offical 7900 overclocking thread