Im upgrading my system atm I got: 1 gig of ram, 3.2ghz prescott, 6600gt

i want to upgrade my 6600gt to one of these cards but I'm not sure which one to go with, from benchmarks it looks like the x1800xt is about on par with the 7800 gtx, and I like the sound of the avivo features, but I havn't found any benchmarks of the 512mb 7800 gt so I can't really tell which would be the better card.

I'm of the opinion that the Dual 7800GT is more of a gimmick. Go with the X1800XT.

Don`t Listen To Them :!:
Go See "VGA Charts VIII - PCI Express - Winter 2005"
As You Will See The 7800GTX 256Mb is The Fastest of The 3 Cards , By The Way Even a 7800GT Is Faster than a X1800XT , Go See It Your Self , In FEAR You Can See That 7800GTX and 7800GT Is 20% Faster Than X1800XT :!:
If You Want To Play Games WELL , ALWAYS Go For nVIDIA :!:
ATI SUCKS :!:

you speak like you never owned an Ati card

in this case i would advise him to go with a 7800GT 512mb from gainward

Thats the card I was looking at mopeygoth, jus wasn't sure how it compared to the x1800xt, and wasn't sure whether it was worth getting a gtx with only 256MB of DDR. Price wise the Gainward 512 7800 GT and the Club 3de x1800xt are the same price, but a 7800gtx is an extra £50.

^^ dont worry im harldy going ot listen to someone with the name PX7800GT but is the x1800xt better than the 7800gt with 512mb of ram?

which one will be as good as if not better the x1800xt or the 7800 gt?

Link to the 7800 GT:
http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/pro [...] uid=105498

Personally, I'm curious as to how the 256MB vs 512MB thing can be factored into the general "best card for the money" shortlist.

Specifically, at the exact same price, am I better going for a (Powercolour) X1800XT 512MB, or (OcUK) 7800GTX (Extreme) 256MB? Note that AVIVO is irrelevant to my considerations.

(edit: also curious about where the linked 7800GT 512MB weighs in, it's the same price as the aforementioned models)

The X1800XT is not only very fast, but it also displays better quality images that the 7800.
Not to mention hardware encoding of videos.
I have one and I can get 4,935 3DMarks06 and 9,881 marks in 3DMark05 with a single card.

Jeez, talk about posessed... You can see that he really is half way between heaven and hell.

Looking at kinetix2005's specs, I'd think that getting such a high end gcard with a 3.2 prescott would be a waste - I can speak for myself as I have 640 P4 - and I know that it's keeping my xtx from really doing what it's supposed to do.

I'd recommend a bigger cpu and a card like the 7800GT/1800XL or maybe a X1900 256mb (if they ever come out). The jump from 6600gt to any of the above will be a good jump. I'm also assuming that a bigger CPU will be at a reasonable price and that you have some sort of budget. Otherwise, pick up the best and get a cpu later

You're an idiot; The X1800XT will beat the 7800GTX 256MB and the 7800GT. The 7800GTX512 is faster than the X1800XT, but for the 750$ price tag the difference is so small you'd be an "nVidiot" to buy the GTX512.

512mb on high end cards will only make a difference at high resolutions, or when a game uses normal maps with little to none compression (where the effects aren't really so spectacular). So it depends on what you going to do with the card.

Everyone thought that the 7800gtx 512 was faster because of the memory, but the memory was just clocked higher than the 7800gtx 256.

But in the same breath, with new games constantly pushing the envelope of graphics quality, 512mb might come in handy future wise, especially the 1900 series with 48pixel processors.

Yeah looking at it the core clock speed of the x1800xt is 625mhz with mem speed @ 1500mhz while the 7800gt has a core clock speed of 450mhz and mem @ 1300mhz

But that doesn't make a difference either. A 7800GTX at 625MHz would beat an X1800XT at 625MHz. You really need to stop using intel's marketing logic.

lol ok so generally speaking

gtx 512 >> x1800xt >> gtx 256

but where does the gt 512 place?

1900xtx = 1900xt >> gtx 512 >> x1800xt >> gtx 256 >> gt512 <> XL

Ill probably end up with the x1800xt anyway lol. U think my CPU will bottleneck then? If I'd bought it a couple of months later I probably would have gone AMD :?

Well, I'm looking to play new release games at as max settings as possible, while running at 1600x1200 res (native for my 20" LCD).

I'm looking to get as much graphics card as possible in the region E300-400.

Regardless of individual model, I'm probably looking for a 512MB card so as a "must have" with my res requirement?

The X1900 XT is your card.

Oh well, I guess your stuck with 1600x1200, so get a 512mb card (helps with high res and future proof). Just keep in mind the whole cpu thing. At 1600x1200 a 1900/7800 won't save you because of the cpu bottleneck. At that res you are pulling alot of resources, and even though it's playable, cache'ing will cause pausing and stalls cos the gcard has to wait for the CPU to feed it data... I have alot of problems with FEAR at 1600x1200 with aa and af and culling (i think it describes when you walk round a corner and a new room/environment needs to be rendered)...

But make sure you wait till the end of this week coming, as Nvidia will be releasing the 7900 and two things will happen. A price war will commence and maybe the 7900 will be faster than the 1900....

I think that's why I haven't gone the LCD/TFT route yet, the whole Native Res thingy...

Yeah, I've suspected there may not be too much point in my getting anything other than the X1900XT at the moment. I guess I'll have to wait till the price comes down. At the moment I can't find it on UK/Ireland sites for anything less than a bit over 500 euro.

I could buy from the US (prices here in .ie/uk are higher), but with shipping costs, possible custom duties (pretty horrific rates, I won't have paid tax as far as the officials are concerned, and it's 21% here), many retailers not shipping outside US - it would be horrible to try and organise and weigh up price benefits.

The native res thing isn't much of a pain for older games that don't do 1600x1200, as rather than rely on the poor monitor resampling, I get the graphics card to do it in hardware and actually it looks quite reasonable even displaying 1024x768 on the LCD. But for new games, the strain of having the card do the resampling mightn't make this such a great option (I may try it if stuck though).