Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

x1900xt or 7950GT KO

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 11, 2006 8:57:35 AM

In all of the Tomshardware most recent VGA Charts, the X1900xt beats the crap out of the 1950GT. ATI's card has better FPS on the highest settings according to these results. I was also thinking about an 7950GT but now i'm not so sure. You might get better results from the 7950GT KO since its factory overclocked but still.... do you want an overclocked chip out of the box or one thats better right at stock speeds and then overclock it yourself?

you do the math
November 11, 2006 10:36:57 AM

X1900XT wins all benchmarks on the VGA charts.

Go for the X1900XT.
Related resources
November 11, 2006 2:30:37 PM

you mean the x1950xt... yea x1950xt for the win.
November 11, 2006 7:06:16 PM

X1900 or the X1950 over any 7950GT.

Both cards from Saphire are currently going for $200 on newegg.
a b U Graphics card
November 11, 2006 8:33:34 PM

You typed X1900XT but you linked to a X1950XT. The 1950 has 1.8GHz memory and the 1900 has 1450MHz memory. The X1950XT 256MB in your link is a best buy for the money.
November 12, 2006 2:07:52 PM

1. Dont get the 7950 GT. The 7900 GTO is much better and for 50$ less.
http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=445&card2...

2. Get the X1900XT 512MB for 300$ or the 7900 GTO 512MB for 250$. Their performance is the same, but the X1900XT has better features, and i will buy the X1900XT.
http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=377&card2...

3. The X1950XT has only 256MB of RAM wich means it's performance is actually lower in most games, even at lower resolution and it's extra memory bandwidth dosent do much good. X1900XT is better.
http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=377&card2...
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2006 7:25:26 PM

Quote:
3. The X1950XT has only 256MB of RAM wich means it's performance is actually lower in most games, even at lower resolution and it's extra memory bandwidth dosent do much good. X1900XT is better.

Track, can you show one link where a 625/1800 clocked 256MB X19xx loses to a 625/1450 clocked 512MB X19xx?
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2006 7:27:04 PM

The X1950XT will easily beat the 7900GTO in most games. Matter I fact I expect it to match a 7900GTX once reviews come out.

Check this review and you will see the slower clocked X1900XT 256MB > 7900GTO in most of the games they tested.
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/evga_e-geforce_7900...

Also note in that review that the 512MB X1900XT only beats the 256MB X1900XT by up to 4 fps. And, that advantage shrinks (fps wise) when you raise the resolution. Look over the 19x12 benchmarks it's usuall 3fps or less in each game. The fact that the 512MB version has a consistent lead and one that does not vary by resolution leads sites like Anandtech to comment that they believe it is from memory timings and not the amount of memory. ANyway, I can't see spending a little more for a slower 7900GTO or alot more just for a slower clocked 512MB X1900XT. I still say the 256MB X1950XT for $260's is the way to go.
November 12, 2006 7:37:07 PM

Quote:
The X1950XT will easily beat the 7900GTO in most games. Matter I fact I expect it to match a 7900GTX once reviews come out.

Check this review and you will see the slower clocked X1900XT 256MB > 7900GTO in most of the games they tested.
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/evga_e-geforce_7900...


Youve been wrong a lot today.. :cry: 

The X1950XT will NOT beat the 7900 GTO "easily". It is somewhat better in most games, but not by all that much.
November 12, 2006 7:39:16 PM

Quote:
3. The X1950XT has only 256MB of RAM wich means it's performance is actually lower in most games, even at lower resolution and it's extra memory bandwidth dosent do much good. X1900XT is better.

Track, can you show one link where a 625/1800 clocked 256MB X19xx loses to a 625/1450 clocked 512MB X19xx?

You know there arent any X1950XT reviews..

All i know is that having 256MB in today's games gives u less performance. Not to mention that GDDR4 memory at 1800Mhz with only 256MB is pretty stupid. I mean there is too much bandwidth and not enough RAM.

http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=33&page=4
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2006 7:40:38 PM

Quote:
The X1950XT will easily beat the 7900GTO in most games. Matter I fact I expect it to match a 7900GTX once reviews come out.

Check this review and you will see the slower clocked X1900XT 256MB > 7900GTO in most of the games they tested.
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/evga_e-geforce_7900...


Youve been wrong a lot today.. :cry: 

The X1950XT will NOT beat the 7900 GTO "easily". It is somewhat better in most games, but not by all that much.
Track, I just posted the proof that the 256MB X1900XT will beat the GTO more often than not. And also disproved your theory that the amount of ram will effect high resolution gaming in a big way. Look over the link I gave above to FS review and you'll see you are wrong on both accounts.
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2006 7:43:58 PM

Quote:
All i know is that having 256MB in today's games gives u less performance. Not to mention that GDDR4 memory at 1800Mhz with only 256MB is pretty stupid.

It's GDDR3 not GDDR4 in the X1950XT.

Quote:
You know there arent any X1950XT reviews

Yes I do, and that's why I say "i expect" and "IMO" as we are both speculating at this point.
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2006 7:45:40 PM

Don't get me wrong, if priced the same I would have no issues with recommending either the X1950XT 256MB or the X1900XT 512MB. But they are not priced the same. If you find the 512MB X1900XT for $260, sure...go for it.
November 12, 2006 7:59:52 PM

Ok, i dont want this getting out of hand.

Your a nice person, u dont flame and i thank you for helping me on my thread, but u are just wrong!

The X1950XT has GDDR3 memory?? Are u crazy? The whole point of the X1950XTX, the R580+ is that it has GDDR4 memory.
http://www.gpureview.com/Radeon-X1950-XT-card-467.html


You said that the X1950XT will beat the 7900 GTO by A LOT. It wont, only by somewhat.
My knowledge of a RAM bottleneck is from here - http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=33&page=4
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2006 8:08:31 PM

Quote:
Ok, i dont want this getting out of hand.

Your a nice person, u dont flame and i thank you for helping me on my thread, but u are just wrong!

The X1950XT has GDDR3 memory?? Are u crazy? The whole point of the X1950XTX, the R580+ is that it has GDDR4 memory.


LOL, alright we disagree and don't have a concrete review to back either of us fully up. Hopefully soon we shall know for sure. So maybe we should just admit neither is clearly going to win from what we know and both cards are good options if you find a good price. Does that work for now? :D 

Anyway, while the X1950XTX is GDDR4, the X1950XT's are GDDR3. Look at Sapphire's Specs:
http://www.sapphiretech.com/us/products/products_overvi...
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2006 8:13:30 PM

Quote:
You said that the X1950XT will beat the 7900 GTO by A LOT. It wont, only by somewhat.
I did not say "by alot". I said "easily beat"...as in clearly ahead. That's not the same thing. And my reason for stating that are that 1) the slower clocked X1900XT 256MB beats the 7900GTO more often than not and 2) we have discussed this and most people here admit that overall X1900XT 256MB > 7900GTO. It only makes sense that the added 350MHz effect mem speeds will increase that lead.
November 12, 2006 8:14:30 PM

Why dont u look at my links?
I can prove that cards are bottlencecked by 256MB.

There is no way they got to 900Mhz and up with GDDR3, and if they did there is even less reason to buy the X1950XT because the X1900XT would be able to overclock to the same clock speed, having GDDR3 aswell.
November 12, 2006 8:33:21 PM

Why not check the links to the X1950XT's in question? They all have GDDR3 RAM. Plain and simple. :wink:
a b U Graphics card
November 12, 2006 8:40:29 PM

Quote:
Why dont u look at my links?
I can prove that cards are bottlencecked by 256MB.

I did look those links over. How is 7800GT's in Quake 4 proof? Resolution had no effect whatsoever. Notice fear showed no difference in gaming performance and Halflife2 LC little to no difference. I'm not seeing the high resolution being effected like you have said. http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=33&page=5

Quote:
There is no way they got to 900Mhz and up with GDDR3, and if they did there is even less reason to buy the X1950XT because the X1900XT would be able to overclock to the same clock speed, having GDDR3 aswell.

The GDDR4 mentioned in your other link is a mistake for the XT as the XT does not share that with the XTX.

I showed you Sapphire says it's GDDR3.
His also says it's GDDR3: http://www.hisdigital.com/html/product_sp.php?id=267

Powercolors states GDDR3 also.
http://www.powercolor.com/main_product_detail.asp?id=13...

As far as GDDR3 vs. GDDR4, I don't see that as a negative (apart from potential to hit higher clocks if the GDDR4 is rated for it). It could use a bit more power with GDDR3, not an issue for this power hungry card. If the GDDR4 is rated at 1.8Ghz and not higher, then it wouldn't hit the higher clock speeds anyway. And GDDR3 is actually a tad bit quicker than GDDR4 at the same speed do to latency.
http://www.behardware.com/art/imprimer/637/
Of course if it had 256MB of the XTX's memory then hitting 2.0GHz or beyond would be a benefit to GDDR4 (I take it this is your thinking/point).
November 12, 2006 8:55:44 PM

Yes, thats good.

But didnt u see how much RAM is needed? Over 500MB!
If the card cant find enough in the VRAM, is uses the normal RAM, wich is slower.
In that review they had high speed RAM, so think how much of a performance hit a normal person would get with only 256MB?
November 13, 2006 12:55:15 PM

Quote:

3. The X1950XT has only 256MB of RAM wich means it's performance is actually lower in most games, even at lower resolution and it's extra memory bandwidth dosent do much good. X1900XT is better.


THIS IS NOT CORRECT.

The X1950 XT is essentially the same card with a huge memory speed increase. The memory speed will affect performance more consistantly than a 256mb deficit ever will, in 90% of the titles out there...

...if you're talking ***SPECIFICALLY*** about overclocking a 512mb X1900 XT vs a 256mb X1950 XT, then you should specify that.
And even then, it's not a given as the X1950 XT memory will be overclockable as well.

I'd pick a consistant X1950 XT with superfast memory over a 7900 GTO which **might** overclock well, and if I'm lucky give me similar performance to a stock X1950 XT...
November 13, 2006 2:47:59 PM

Quote:

3. The X1950XT has only 256MB of RAM wich means it's performance is actually lower in most games, even at lower resolution and it's extra memory bandwidth dosent do much good. X1900XT is better.


THIS IS NOT CORRECT.


NO IT ISN'T, SIT DOWN

The X1950XT would appear to have faster memory, but its only GDDR3 overclocked to 900Mhz (much like the 8800 GTX). This means that the X1900XT and X1950XT can overclock to the SAME memory clock speed.

At STOCK speeds, is the X1950XT still better? a little, but we need to take into consideration that less memory means less performance, in current games and mostly in future and upcoming DX10 titles.

I dont think anyone here wants to use "Medium" sized textures on the highest end X1950XT..
November 13, 2006 3:17:31 PM

Once again you make a statement that is unprovable:

Quote:
we need to take into consideration that less memory means less performance, in current games and mostly in future and upcoming DX10 titles.


Where are these DirectX 10 benchmarks you're referring to, Track? Or is this more of your assumptions-quoted-as-gospel-truth that we're so used to seeing from you? :roll:

Sigh.

Track, most people are looking to buy what performs better stock, not what overclocks better. Not to mention, you're making huge generalizations without even mentioning that your conclusions assume overclocking. If you're talking about OC performance, mention it in your first post without making us remind you, OK?

You are too stubborn to admit it when you're mistaken and you prefer to cling to your statements even when they are wrong instead of learning something from it and moving on.

Admitting error is a good way to gain respect.

On the other hand, pretending your false assumptions are true is a good way to get everyone to laugh at your advice.
November 13, 2006 5:20:05 PM

All i said was that there could be a performance decrease with 256MB.

Get over urself.
November 13, 2006 5:34:30 PM

Quote:
Get over urself.


lol.

Yeah Track, it's all about me... not your $hitty advice. :roll:


P.S. I noticed you didn't respond to my question as to where you have the evidence to support your statement about Dx10... just thought I'd point that out in case you missed it the first time. :) 
November 22, 2006 1:03:31 PM

Track - You're saying that the fact that the x1900xt has GDDR3 means that it can overclock to 1800MHz as well ?!?!
Have you ever heard of memory speed certification?
Have you ever heard of memory latency??
Do you know what ns means???

From what you're saying I could conclude an absurd idea that all GDDR3 cards can overclock to 1800MHz!!!

If you check and compare detailed 7950GT specs against 7950GT KO specs, you'll find that the 7950GT KO users lower latency GDDR3 chips, which gives it the ability to work at a higher ram clock.

Face it, there's no guaranty what so ever that the x1900xt can overclock to 1800.

Regarding the difference between 512MB to 256MB.
Benchmarks have shown that in even the highest detailed games, with the biggest textures, the performance advantage of 512MB (on the same card model) is between 5%-10%. But at high settings, where memory bandwidth (clock) is crucial, you'll see almost a direct performance advantage relevant to the clock advantage. Now last time I checked 1800/1450=~1.24, which means that you'll get around 15-20% performance improvement.
The benchmark numbers speak for themselves, but you can keep holding onto your wrong ideas and choose the slower card. Your loss...
!