X800 pro at 8XAA and 16XAF is faster than a G800 GT right ?

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
?>

Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.

So any comments.

Thanks.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:0r2nl01dmoeukilcj2it93buovphaqens6@4ax.com...
>
>
> ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
> ?>
>
> Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
> high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.
>
> So any comments.
>
> Thanks.

It all depends on which games you are playing. Both are pretty fast cards,
some people like Radeon X800 cards better, some 6800 cards. Google for some
reviews with benchmarks to see how each card runs the games intend to play.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

I have googled and i have read, just confuses me more :(

I would like a fast card thats quiet and uses not alot of power :),
X800 would fit that bill when i put a Zalman heatsink on it.

Oh well ill ask in a few more groups.

Thanks.


On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 05:56:47 GMT, "Glzmo" <glzmo@NOyahooSPAM.com>
wrote:

>"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>news:0r2nl01dmoeukilcj2it93buovphaqens6@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>> ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
>> ?>
>>
>> Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
>> high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.
>>
>> So any comments.
>>
>> Thanks.
>
>It all depends on which games you are playing. Both are pretty fast cards,
>some people like Radeon X800 cards better, some 6800 cards. Google for some
>reviews with benchmarks to see how each card runs the games intend to play.
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Then you have answer your own question as X800 card from ATi is better fit.

CapFusion,..


"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:r24ol0lj5fri8p30fvtqh2v6i3k6k4eecd@4ax.com...
>
>
> I have googled and i have read, just confuses me more :(
>
> I would like a fast card thats quiet and uses not alot of power :),
> X800 would fit that bill when i put a Zalman heatsink on it.
>
> Oh well ill ask in a few more groups.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 05:56:47 GMT, "Glzmo" <glzmo@NOyahooSPAM.com>
> wrote:
>
>>"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>>news:0r2nl01dmoeukilcj2it93buovphaqens6@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>> ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
>>> ?>
>>>
>>> Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
>>> high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.
>>>
>>> So any comments.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>
>>It all depends on which games you are playing. Both are pretty fast cards,
>>some people like Radeon X800 cards better, some 6800 cards. Google for
>>some
>>reviews with benchmarks to see how each card runs the games intend to
>>play.
>>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

So the X800 aint that slower either than a GT ?


On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:26:21 -0700, "CapFusion"
<CapFusion.Yo.@hotmail.Hehe.Com> wrote:

>Then you have answer your own question as X800 card from ATi is better fit.
>
>CapFusion,..
>
>
>"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>news:r24ol0lj5fri8p30fvtqh2v6i3k6k4eecd@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>> I have googled and i have read, just confuses me more :(
>>
>> I would like a fast card thats quiet and uses not alot of power :),
>> X800 would fit that bill when i put a Zalman heatsink on it.
>>
>> Oh well ill ask in a few more groups.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 05:56:47 GMT, "Glzmo" <glzmo@NOyahooSPAM.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>>>news:0r2nl01dmoeukilcj2it93buovphaqens6@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
>>>> ?>
>>>>
>>>> Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
>>>> high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.
>>>>
>>>> So any comments.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>It all depends on which games you are playing. Both are pretty fast cards,
>>>some people like Radeon X800 cards better, some 6800 cards. Google for
>>>some
>>>reviews with benchmarks to see how each card runs the games intend to
>>>play.
>>>
>>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Maybe you should look at this link. It may give you some general idea -
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040809/index.html
I thought you were going to ATi due to quieter cooling solution? So, 6800GT
is faster or slower then X800 should not matter, either way.

CapFusion,...


"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:uksol0tlgssnr7vusg0nhhvberd9rkjn0p@4ax.com...
>
>
> So the X800 aint that slower either than a GT ?
>
>
> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:26:21 -0700, "CapFusion"
> <CapFusion.Yo.@hotmail.Hehe.Com> wrote:
>
>>Then you have answer your own question as X800 card from ATi is better
>>fit.
>>
>>CapFusion,..
>>
>>
>>"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>>news:r24ol0lj5fri8p30fvtqh2v6i3k6k4eecd@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>> I have googled and i have read, just confuses me more :(
>>>
>>> I would like a fast card thats quiet and uses not alot of power :),
>>> X800 would fit that bill when i put a Zalman heatsink on it.
>>>
>>> Oh well ill ask in a few more groups.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 05:56:47 GMT, "Glzmo" <glzmo@NOyahooSPAM.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>news:0r2nl01dmoeukilcj2it93buovphaqens6@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
>>>>> ?>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
>>>>> high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.
>>>>>
>>>>> So any comments.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>>It all depends on which games you are playing. Both are pretty fast
>>>>cards,
>>>>some people like Radeon X800 cards better, some 6800 cards. Google for
>>>>some
>>>>reviews with benchmarks to see how each card runs the games intend to
>>>>play.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

I don't think you will be able to tell a difference between these two cards
at 1024x768.
And if you have a slow CPU then the CPU will be the limiting factor.
And if they perform pretty much the same then yeah it is time to look at
things like:
(a) which is more quiet? (dunno)
(b) which consumes more power? (nVidia)
(c) which creates more heat? (?)
(d) price (neck & neck?)
and the most important to me...
(e) which has the newer technology that will last longer into the future
with the next generation of games starting to come out now? (nVidia)


"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:uksol0tlgssnr7vusg0nhhvberd9rkjn0p@4ax.com...
>
>
> So the X800 aint that slower either than a GT ?
>
>
> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:26:21 -0700, "CapFusion"
> <CapFusion.Yo.@hotmail.Hehe.Com> wrote:
>
>>Then you have answer your own question as X800 card from ATi is better
>>fit.
>>
>>CapFusion,..
>>
>>
>>"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>>news:r24ol0lj5fri8p30fvtqh2v6i3k6k4eecd@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>> I have googled and i have read, just confuses me more :(
>>>
>>> I would like a fast card thats quiet and uses not alot of power :),
>>> X800 would fit that bill when i put a Zalman heatsink on it.
>>>
>>> Oh well ill ask in a few more groups.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 05:56:47 GMT, "Glzmo" <glzmo@NOyahooSPAM.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>news:0r2nl01dmoeukilcj2it93buovphaqens6@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
>>>>> ?>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
>>>>> high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.
>>>>>
>>>>> So any comments.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>>It all depends on which games you are playing. Both are pretty fast
>>>>cards,
>>>>some people like Radeon X800 cards better, some 6800 cards. Google for
>>>>some
>>>>reviews with benchmarks to see how each card runs the games intend to
>>>>play.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Avid Gamer wrote:

>
>
> So the X800 aint that slower either than a GT ?
>


As Cap has said depends on the game ... if you play Q3 then the 6800 Gt
or Ultra are for you .. if you play Far Cry then the X800 may nudge it
out.

If you want a card which can be used with Pixel Shader 3.0 when it is
implemented then go with the Nvidia cards.

I have both .. actually prefer the graphics on the Nvidia card a bit
more.

regards

@ndrew
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:30:13 +1000, Avid Gamer <Scully@yahoo.com.au>
wrote:

>
>
>ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
>?>
>

NO. Not for the comparison that you cite. The 6800GT is a full
16-pipe implementation vs Ati's 12-pipe. Plus the future benefits of
more extensive DX9.0c compliance. Plus the neat video processor for
those of us interested in high-end/HDTV desktop video applications.

John Lewis


>Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
>high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.
>
>So any comments.
>
>Thanks.
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Well the x800 pro is 100 bucks cheaper in my country, and the reviews
say even if it has 4 pipes less than a 6800 GT the X800 is still
better value.

And the GT aint that much faster realy and Pixel shader 3 ? how many
games are using 2.0 now not many, so buying the game for 3.0 is
stupid, as by the time any one programs for 3.0 it will be upto 4.0 :)

Oh well x800 here i come.


On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 08:54:26 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
wrote:

>On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:30:13 +1000, Avid Gamer <Scully@yahoo.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
>>?>
>>
>
>NO. Not for the comparison that you cite. The 6800GT is a full
>16-pipe implementation vs Ati's 12-pipe. Plus the future benefits of
>more extensive DX9.0c compliance. Plus the neat video processor for
>those of us interested in high-end/HDTV desktop video applications.
>
>John Lewis
>
>
>>Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
>>high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.
>>
>>So any comments.
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

X800 should be fine for any current game and the next coming along. You main
concern is not the score but the smooth and enjoyable play result.

CapFusion,....


"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:rqgrl0pna42amitib57mg65cr7pc0fe9jk@4ax.com...
>
>
> Well the x800 pro is 100 bucks cheaper in my country, and the reviews
> say even if it has 4 pipes less than a 6800 GT the X800 is still
> better value.
>
> And the GT aint that much faster realy and Pixel shader 3 ? how many
> games are using 2.0 now not many, so buying the game for 3.0 is
> stupid, as by the time any one programs for 3.0 it will be upto 4.0 :)
>
> Oh well x800 here i come.
>
>
> On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 08:54:26 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:30:13 +1000, Avid Gamer <Scully@yahoo.com.au>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
>>>?>
>>>
>>
>>NO. Not for the comparison that you cite. The 6800GT is a full
>>16-pipe implementation vs Ati's 12-pipe. Plus the future benefits of
>>more extensive DX9.0c compliance. Plus the neat video processor for
>>those of us interested in high-end/HDTV desktop video applications.
>>
>>John Lewis
>>
>>
>>>Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
>>>high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.
>>>
>>>So any comments.
>>>
>>>Thanks.
>>>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 06:53:56 +1000, Avid Gamer <Scully@yahoo.com.au>
wrote:

>
>
>Well the x800 pro is 100 bucks cheaper in my country, and the reviews
>say even if it has 4 pipes less than a 6800 GT the X800 is still
>better value.
>
>And the GT aint that much faster realy and Pixel shader 3 ? how many
>games are using 2.0 now not many, so buying the game for 3.0 is
>stupid, as by the time any one programs for 3.0 it will be upto 4.0 :)
>
>Oh well x800 here i come.
>

Why bother posting if you had already made up your mind ? Which is
pretty obvious from your comments in this thread. I notice that you
only posted to the nVidia news-group. You don't currently have
an Ati card, by any chance ?

John Lewis



John Lewis
>
>On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 08:54:26 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:30:13 +1000, Avid Gamer <Scully@yahoo.com.au>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
>>>?>
>>>
>>
>>NO. Not for the comparison that you cite. The 6800GT is a full
>>16-pipe implementation vs Ati's 12-pipe. Plus the future benefits of
>>more extensive DX9.0c compliance. Plus the neat video processor for
>>those of us interested in high-end/HDTV desktop video applications.
>>
>>John Lewis
>>
>>
>>>Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
>>>high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.
>>>
>>>So any comments.
>>>
>>>Thanks.
>>>
>
 

chip

Distinguished
Nov 16, 2001
513
0
18,980
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

"Scotter" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:8P57d.11576$N.5240@fe1.texas.rr.com...
> I don't think you will be able to tell a difference between these two
cards
> at 1024x768.
> And if you have a slow CPU then the CPU will be the limiting factor.
> And if they perform pretty much the same then yeah it is time to look at
> things like:
> (a) which is more quiet? (dunno)
> (b) which consumes more power? (nVidia)
> (c) which creates more heat? (?)

Actually, (b) and (c) are the same question. Effectively all Power input =
Heat. The only power that doesn't end up as heat is the tiny fraction that
escapes out of the case as sound. Sound *inside* the case is converted to
heat anyway. And - incidentally - even the sound escaping the case still
ends up as heat: it warms your room a tiny tiny tiny bit.

Chip.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

Yeah, if i can get a smooth constant FPS of just below 90 FPS in games
with high AA and AF iam happy,

Just becuase the GT is the fastest does not mean its the best, though
if i can get a GT for the same or less than a x800 pro i will go the
GT :)

Bye.



On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 15:19:24 -0700, "CapFusion"
<CapFusion.Yo.@hotmail.Hehe.Com> wrote:

>X800 should be fine for any current game and the next coming along. You main
>concern is not the score but the smooth and enjoyable play result.
>
>CapFusion,....
>
>
>"Avid Gamer" <Scully@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>news:rqgrl0pna42amitib57mg65cr7pc0fe9jk@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>> Well the x800 pro is 100 bucks cheaper in my country, and the reviews
>> say even if it has 4 pipes less than a 6800 GT the X800 is still
>> better value.
>>
>> And the GT aint that much faster realy and Pixel shader 3 ? how many
>> games are using 2.0 now not many, so buying the game for 3.0 is
>> stupid, as by the time any one programs for 3.0 it will be upto 4.0 :)
>>
>> Oh well x800 here i come.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 08:54:26 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:30:13 +1000, Avid Gamer <Scully@yahoo.com.au>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
>>>>?>
>>>>
>>>
>>>NO. Not for the comparison that you cite. The 6800GT is a full
>>>16-pipe implementation vs Ati's 12-pipe. Plus the future benefits of
>>>more extensive DX9.0c compliance. Plus the neat video processor for
>>>those of us interested in high-end/HDTV desktop video applications.
>>>
>>>John Lewis
>>>
>>>
>>>>Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
>>>>high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.
>>>>
>>>>So any comments.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks.
>>>>
>>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.videocards.nvidia (More info?)

9600 PRO I HAVE AND BEFORE THAT A GEFORCE 3 TI 200 :)

On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 07:18:54 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
wrote:

>On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 06:53:56 +1000, Avid Gamer <Scully@yahoo.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Well the x800 pro is 100 bucks cheaper in my country, and the reviews
>>say even if it has 4 pipes less than a 6800 GT the X800 is still
>>better value.
>>
>>And the GT aint that much faster realy and Pixel shader 3 ? how many
>>games are using 2.0 now not many, so buying the game for 3.0 is
>>stupid, as by the time any one programs for 3.0 it will be upto 4.0 :)
>>
>>Oh well x800 here i come.
>>
>
>Why bother posting if you had already made up your mind ? Which is
>pretty obvious from your comments in this thread. I notice that you
>only posted to the nVidia news-group. You don't currently have
>an Ati card, by any chance ?
>
>John Lewis
>
>
>
>John Lewis
>>
>>On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 08:54:26 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:30:13 +1000, Avid Gamer <Scully@yahoo.com.au>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>ATI cards have had that advantage for a while have they still got it
>>>>?>
>>>>
>>>
>>>NO. Not for the comparison that you cite. The 6800GT is a full
>>>16-pipe implementation vs Ati's 12-pipe. Plus the future benefits of
>>>more extensive DX9.0c compliance. Plus the neat video processor for
>>>those of us interested in high-end/HDTV desktop video applications.
>>>
>>>John Lewis
>>>
>>>
>>>>Just thinking of getting a new card, and i want to play my games at
>>>>high res avive 1024by768 with high AA and AF.
>>>>
>>>>So any comments.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks.
>>>>
>>