Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

A Tale of Two GTs: Radeon X1900GT

Last response: in Computer Brands
Share
August 9, 2006 12:36:02 PM

ATI\'s Radeon X1900GT is a new upper mid-range product that packs a punch.
August 9, 2006 2:22:38 PM

bravo to this article! I hope the benchmarks are added to the interactive chart soon. I have always found it frustrating that the chart does not include "budget" versions such as GT, GTO, etc. One has to make some educated guesses themselves, rather than have true comparisons.

I hope more such articles are written for those of us gamers who are looking for the best performance value for our (limited) budgets. For those of us with girlfriends/wives to live with, we have to consider the almighty dollar more than we'd like to sometimes. :) 

also, it's nice to see that although the ATI cards did overall fare better for a (slightly) lower price, the competition and pricing are such that buying the Nvidia card would not be a total loss. It is good to know the budget line video cards are pricing their cards appropriately.
August 9, 2006 2:40:53 PM

The artical is wrong.

"Nvidia first used this marking in conjunction with its GeForce 6600 GT. It continued to use the GT moniker with subsequent generations (GeForce 6800 GT, 7300 GT, 7600 GT, 7800 GT and 7900 GT)."

The first one was the Nvidia geForce 2 gt and GeForce 2 gts.
Related resources
August 9, 2006 2:53:16 PM

Quote:
also, it's nice to see that although the ATI cards did overall fare better for a (slightly) lower price, the competition and pricing are such that buying the Nvidia card would not be a total loss. It is good to know the budget line video cards are pricing their cards appropriately.


yep, competition is always good for us. Good competition is even better. lol
August 9, 2006 3:19:36 PM

Sapphire x1800xts are about US $20 less than a x1900gt at certain etailers. I still recommend it plus an Accelero X2 cooler as the best $250 range video card, but have yet to find any articles which compare it directly to a x1900gt. 8O
August 9, 2006 3:32:36 PM

looks like the sapphire is going for $230 at newegg...
August 9, 2006 4:55:11 PM

Uh....Home -> Consumer Electronics -> Dell?

Now we're really grasping at straws!

Why no X1800XT in the compared cards?
August 9, 2006 5:32:20 PM

Quote:
The artical is wrong.

"Nvidia first used this marking in conjunction with its GeForce 6600 GT. It continued to use the GT moniker with subsequent generations (GeForce 6800 GT, 7300 GT, 7600 GT, 7800 GT and 7900 GT)."

The first one was the Nvidia geForce 2 gt and GeForce 2 gts.


Hi Comptia. I'm not sure the GTS used back in those days had the same meaning. In fact, I'm sure of it. Geforce2GTS meant, "Giga-Texel Shader". If you'll recall, a measurement of performance back then (and maybe now, I'm not sure) was the "textured pixel" or texel. The Geforce2GTS was the first one that could process one billion Texels per second, therefore Giga-Texel Shader. There was no Geforce2 GT, only GTS and MX200. Hope this helps!
August 9, 2006 5:45:39 PM

Quote:
Uh....Home -> Consumer Electronics -> Dell?

Now we're really grasping at straws!


LOL took me a minute to figure out what you were talking about there (I just linked from the article). I cannot figure out any meaningful pattern to where article discussions are posted.

Is it that difficult to make a new forum called "Article discussions" or the like? then sub-forums for each Tom's site (News, Hardware, Network, etc).

If I am looking through the forums (not direct linking from the article), I find it impossible to predict where the discussion could be posted.

Also, I have seen this question asked more than once, and have not yet seen an answer. Maybe if we ask enough times, someone will answer us?
August 9, 2006 6:17:53 PM

The problem is Tom really doesnt exsist.
There is nobody running this site, it is completly AI driven. They just want you to think a human is in charge! mwhahaaa.


Now, if only the AI had beter judgement on were topics go, unless the point is to consume and confuse us all (aka the pingwen MTG)
August 9, 2006 7:21:02 PM

I to am upset about that also. Two 1900GTs, check. A 7900GT, check. A 7800GT, check. Then they compare it to a 7600GT instead of a x1800XT??? I'm thinking people have been asked not to compare the x1900GT to the x1800XT. Seeing as the x1900GT is the replacement card, I suspect the x1800xt might be better...
August 9, 2006 7:33:46 PM

well if they add the benchmark results from this article to the VGA charts, we can compare ourselves to the x1800XT.

of course, they may wait so long to do so, you will not be able to find them any longer in stores. I smell conspiracy. :)  On the other hand, I ALWAYS smell conspiracy!
August 9, 2006 7:36:11 PM

you telln me i should get the x1800xt now and not the x1900xt (xtx).


Because maybe I will just buy a matrox 750.... oh what now ???
August 9, 2006 7:48:28 PM

Quote:
you telln me i should get the x1800xt now and not the x1900xt (xtx)


No, the question is which is the better card, the x1900GT, or the x1800XT? I, and others, are surprised that this article didn't include an x1800XT. If the x1900GT is the new card to compete against the 7900GT, why not show how it competes against the old card that did? ATI released the x1800XT, Nvidia fired back with the 7900GT, now lets see all three cards so we all know which is best, x1800xt, 7900GT, or 1900GT. To answer your question, the x1900xt(x) is the best card out of all four, no doubt about that...
August 9, 2006 7:51:37 PM

perhaps you missed a part of this article discussing nomenclature? we are suggesting the x1800xt graphics card COULD be equivalent in performance to the x1900GT (notice the GT suffix, indicating the SECOND best performing card in this x19xx product line, behind the obviously superior x1900xt/x).

Most of us would not consider buying a 1900xtx card, just because of the cost. If you can afford it go nuts, it's one of your best possible choices at the moment.

the x1800XT or x1900GT are FAR more affordable (and around the same price), and therefore very interesting to value-conscious consumers.

EDIT: please note this post was in response to Comptia Rep, I was typing while the next post came up.
August 9, 2006 7:53:03 PM

Quote:
you telln me i should get the x1800xt now and not the x1900xt (xtx)


No, the question is which is the better card, the x1900GT, or the x1800XT? I, and others, are surprised that this article didn't include an x1800XT. If the x1900XT is the new card to compete against the 7900GT, why not show how it competes against the old card that did? ATI released the x1800XT, Nvidia fired back with the 7900GT, now lets see all three cards so we all know which is best, x1800xt, 7900GT, or 1900GT. To answer your question, the x1900xt(x) is the best card out of all four, no doubt about that...

I think you mean 1900GT there yes?
August 9, 2006 8:46:37 PM

OOPS....
Thanks for the heads up, we really don't need to be confusing anyone here... My posts has been corrected, thanks again. (for anyone still confused, I did mean the x1900GT there.)
August 10, 2006 10:09:20 AM

How come I have "Club 3D ATI X800GT 256MB 256bit" if ATI has never released GT card before? 8O

Quote:
However, ATI has never used the same naming scheme Nvidia has used until now


All the benchmark programs report, that I have X800GT! including all versions of 3dMark, Everest and other 8O
August 10, 2006 5:40:13 PM

hmm... no OpenGl tests! Why? We all know that the 7900GT would have destroyed the X1900GT but is Quake4 still playable at max quality on the X1900GT? I think this is rather important to potential buyers. I know it is for me. Also testing it against the x1800xt should also have been done to see how they compare.
p.s. someone needs to move this topic
August 10, 2006 6:16:18 PM

Im curious to see benchmarks for the 512MB Saphire x1800GTO2, newegg lists it for $239, looks like an interresting card, and is SUPPOSEDLY flashable to a x1800xtpe
August 10, 2006 6:35:07 PM

Quote:
x1800xtpe


:?:
August 10, 2006 6:42:38 PM

Quote:
x1800xtpe


:?:

Something one of the reviewers on newegg said about the card, I'm personally not into ATI cards, but would be interrested in its benchmarks all the same.
August 10, 2006 7:00:12 PM

Quote:
x1800xtpe


:?:

Something one of the reviewers on newegg said about the card, I'm personally not into ATI cards, but would be interrested in its benchmarks all the same.

my question was about the "pe" moniker... there was an x1800xt, but the pe (platinum edition) was in the X series. (x850xtpe) it was dropped in the x1k series.

1800xt was the top for the 1800s... and I would bet that a 512 meg 1800gto2 would get stomped by an 1800xt 256 meg easily, and right now anoobis picked one of those up for $200 even. so why risk the fact that it may not flash up and just get the real McCoy for less $?
August 10, 2006 8:41:06 PM

Quote:
x1800xtpe


:?:

Something one of the reviewers on newegg said about the card, I'm personally not into ATI cards, but would be interrested in its benchmarks all the same.

my question was about the "pe" moniker... there was an x1800xt, but the pe (platinum edition) was in the X series. (x850xtpe) it was dropped in the x1k series.

1800xt was the top for the 1800s... and I would bet that a 512 meg 1800gto2 would get stomped by an 1800xt 256 meg easily, and right now anoobis picked one of those up for $200 even. so why risk the fact that it may not flash up and just get the real McCoy for less $?

Because the 512MB x1800XT is actually $50 more, and Im willing to bet the GTO2 runs cooler. the XT's core and memory are clocked higher however.

Also, I dont even know if it can be flashed sucsessfully, was a comment by one of neweggs reviewers as I've already said, and wouldnt even be an issue for me personally, I'd leave the card stock. 4 of the main reasons WHY I like the card:

1) 256 bit memory controller
2) rear exaust
3) 512MB memory (very important in some situations, adding third party texture packs into Oblivion for instance)
4)uses GDDR3 memory

I'm pretty much an nVidia guy, however, if I had the extra cash, I would have bought this instead of my current 7600GT(which I've had for 3 days, and am completely happy with it). My eVGA 7600GT KO runs Oblivion very well, but I bet this card would perform better, although, I dont think looks wise, It could get much better, as this 7600GT, looks much much better compared to the 6600GT I had in my older system. *shrug*
August 10, 2006 10:53:01 PM

well, that card could certainly perform better then a 7600... but that is what it is made to compete w/...

I was comparing the 256 meg 1800xt for the simple reason that it would do better and be cheaper then the gto2. That 512 megs may give you better performance in a game like oblivion but reading the firingsquad review on frame buffer size leads me to believe that unless you get the high-end card then the memory is a wasted expense.... I will try to find that article tonight. ;)  I doubt it will give the boost you are really looking for over your 7600 ko though.
August 11, 2006 1:13:42 AM

Quote:
well, that card could certainly perform better then a 7600... but that is what it is made to compete w/...

I was comparing the 256 meg 1800xt for the simple reason that it would do better and be cheaper then the gto2. That 512 megs may give you better performance in a game like oblivion but reading the firingsquad review on frame buffer size leads me to believe that unless you get the high-end card then the memory is a wasted expense.... I will try to find that article tonight. ;)  I doubt it will give the boost you are really looking for over your 7600 ko though.


Well, to be honest, its a moot point, I'm not buying another video card, I was saying IF I had the extra cash at the time, I would have purchased it, but I am still interrested in how well it performs.
August 11, 2006 4:02:29 AM

Quote:
Well, to be honest, its a moot point, I'm not buying another video card, I was saying IF I had the extra cash at the time, I would have purchased it, but I am still interrested in how well it performs.


Fair enough... I agree, as I thnk more performance comparrisons are always good no matter what they are. ;) 
August 11, 2006 4:03:38 AM

Taken from the test setup page:

Quote:
Graphics Cards
Sapphire Radeon X1900GT 256 MB GDDR3
575 MHz Core
600 MHz Memory (1.20 GHz DDR)
PowerColor Radeon X1900GT 256 MB GDDR3
575 MHz Core
600 MHz Memory (1.20 GHz DDR)
XFX GeForce 7900GT 256 MB GDDR3
675 MHz Core
815 MHz Memory (1.63 GHz DDR)

EVGA GeForce 7800 GT 256 MB GDDR3
445 MHz Core
535 MHz Memory (1.07 GHz DDR)
XFX GeForce 7600GT 256 MB GDDR3
590 MHz Core
800 MHz Memory (1.60 GHz DDR)


Am I the only one that's caught this? Aren't those the clocks for a 7900GTX? The fastest 7900GT on XFX's website is 550/1630. I'm not trying to dispute the article. I see it as more of a typo to be honest.

Another thing to consider, why weren't games like HL2: Lost Coast, Doom3, and Quake4 posted?
August 11, 2006 12:38:23 PM

I recently bought a x1900gt and my results on the FEAR test are much higher than what you report in the review. I max out my AA and ASF settings in catalyst and I run FEAR at 1280x1024 at full settings. I consistently get an average of around 57frames on the bench. My minimum is 27 and it goes all the way up to a max of 131 frames a second. Putting it very close to the figures for the 7900 card in the review which gets 61 frames average on similar settings.

Fair enough. My card is a GeCube part so results should be different. I think it is based on the R580xt core. As far as I know sapphire and most other GTs are based on the R580xl or the R580pro cores. Maybe that makes the difference. I have not even unlocked the dormant pipelines yet. I OC'd a little bit, but not much. A couple of MHz here.. A couple there. It's basically still stock.

Sapphire might not be the king of the x1900gt hill this time.

My machine specs are: Atlon 64 +3200, Gig RAM, Audigy sound, I still run on ATA harddrives. I have a Biostar 939 NForce4 ultra motherboard in my box.

Nothing to write home about.
Still seems it kicks butt tho... >)

I'd like to see a review and comparison using a Gecube Card.
August 11, 2006 4:07:03 PM

When I bought my card, I had a choice between the x1900gt, and the x1800xt. I picked the x1800xt. To see what might have been, can you give me/us a 3dmark 2005 and 2006 score?
November 20, 2006 10:36:37 AM

Got 9213 score in 3dmark 05
System:
AMD 64bit 3500+
Biostar Nforce 4 Ultra Mobo
gig ram
160 Gig HDD Sata 300Mb's
Gecube x1900gt stock clocks
Better at advanced shaders than simple shades
run simple shades on 05 and compare it to complex shades it favers heavy loads more than light loads can play all games at full tilt with a minimum 25fps in a few games :twisted:
!