Which of these 2 cards are faster in Crysis?

[spoonboy]

is the x1900 faster than a 7900gtx in crysis?? cant find any comparisons on the internet to show this. Any help??
Just trying to gauge how good my 7900gtx is thats all

Cheers

 

[spoonboy]

Anyone??

Bump.

 

[pauldh]

Which X1900? Base on GF7 VS X1950 performance, I'm guessing the X1900XT 512MB and up(X1900XTX, X1950XT, X1950XTX) would surpase the 7900GTX. The top X1950XTX would have a decent lead IMO. But at least unlike UT3, the GF7's are NOT (edit) doing that bad in crysis vs X19xx.

 

[pauldh]

Only benchie I've seen shows the X1900XTX (and even X1950 pro) beating the 7900GTX, but neither are doing all that well at 12x10 high.
http://www.amdzone.com/index.php/component/content/article/37-gaming/46-crysis-demo-dx9-gpu-and-cpu-core-scaling-performance

 

[Maziar]

X1900XTX VS 7900GTX:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/gigabyte-1900-7900.html


To cut the long story short, Gigabyte Radeon X1900 XTX and Gigabyte GeForce 7900 GTX have their advantages and drawbacks and it all depends on the game. The performance of Gigabyte’s both flagship solutions is quite high for gaming with enabled full-screen antialiasing, however if we look at them from the long-term prospective, then the ATI R580 model will be preferable, because the shader effects with complex mathematical calculations is going to grow bigger with the time.

As for the peculiarities of these two particular graphics solutions, there are not too many of them worth mentioning here. I would certainly like to point out great packaging design and free games included with the cards. And although Gigabyte GeForce 7900 GTX comes bundled with only one free game, the quality of the game makes up for the single title included. I have the feeling that they could have made a bit richer bundle for the high-end cards like that, but if you do not really care about the availability of free software, then either of these cards may become a great choice for you



X1950XTX VS X1900XTX VS 7900GTX:
ATI’s new Radeon X1950 XTX is a worthy successor to the Radeon X1900 XTX, the previous flagship product in the R580-based series. Equipped with new-type memory, capable of working at an unprecedented frequency of 1000 (2000) MHz, the card has got faster and better than the GeForce 7900 GTX where the Radeon X1900 XTX used to lag behind. As might have been expected, the biggest performance growth is observed when full-screen antialiasing is used along with high resolutions. The value of this growth varies from 5% to 20%, but is zero in some cases, e.g. in Call of Duty 2, F.E.A.R., and Tomb Raider: Legend. Anyway, this is an excellent achievement considering that the new card’s specs differ from the older model’s in only one point.

We also want to single out the fact that having the same or higher performance than the GeForce 7900 GTX, the Radeon X1950 XTX provides a much higher quality of anisotropic filtering. This is not too conspicuous in the heat of a battle, but the difference is striking in some cases. The Radeon X1950 XTX is undoubtedly preferable in this respect. Besides that, like any other member of the Radeon X1000 family, the new card from ATI permits to use FSAA and enhanced floating-point color representation (HDR FP) simultaneously which greatly improves the visuals in some games, e.g. in TES IV: Oblivion. Having two G71 chips under the hood, the Nvidia GeForce 7950 GX2 cannot offer anything like that with regards to image quality, but is ahead of the Radeon X1950 XTX in performance across a number of applications.

 

[spoonboy]

Great! just the kind of comparison I was looking for!
Some quick and rough maths says I would need a gpu speed of about 850mhz to equal a x1900xtx!

With my target resolution (1152x864) at all high settings with my gpu overclock (700mhz), I worked out I'll get between 19-20 fps average.

Factor in a huge leap forward in driver and full-game performance and I got 25-30fps!

Cheers

 

[spoonboy]

Yeah cheers Maziar, but Ive been around long enough to know how the gtx and x1900's squared up to each other, with the radeon having the edge most of the time. I remember reading about the x850 versus 6800ultra even.

What I was after was what the other guy posted, a link to a comparison under crysis, to see if the radeons extra pixel pipelines extended the cards useful life and was as forward looking as it seemed at the time. Yes on both counts then.

Now my 7900gt oc'd to higher than gtx speeds finally looks a bit sad. I'll have to do what the guys with videos on youtube of their crappy cards playing crysis maxed out have done, trim shadows down to medium, keep rest high, and plunge the resolution down to the depths of 1024x768. That should give me about 27-30 fps average.

But cheers anyway for the post.

 

[samuelpyne]

I am running the Crysis on the X1900XTX on stock speeds and I must say so far so good. Anistropic Filtering is great although I can see a few very minor glitches when viewing the skin textures on the KPA soldiers from a crouching position. AF enhances surface texture atcertain viewing angles,; a fact that makes for great graphics (especially for water and land environments) but these minor aesthetics are quickly unappreciatedin the heatof the battle. I got my card of Ebay for less than $150 so I must say I am getting more than a bang for my buck (NPI) lol.
- Samuel Pyne