They are both good cards. Pricy in PCI-e compared to AGP though, but at least prcies have dropped. I have an AGP BFG GF6800U OC and am very pleased I went for the Ultra. But They have to be priced closer to be worth it in my opinion. $40-$50, fine, but $100, I think the GT is the better buy for sure offering 90+% of the performance for $75% the cost.
Anyway, unless you are buying an SLI motherboard and hope to use 2 in SLI, or you just only want NVidia, you may want to consider the X800XL. It is basically on par with the GF6800GT, but costs alot less. It really depends on the game, as the 6800GT takes Doom 3, the X800XL takes HL2, and other games like Farcry are about a tie. Both are fine cards though and each has it's advantages.
Yeah, if the 6800U is within budget, he could always do a PCI-e GF6600Gt for a good cheap temp card, and then sell it and upgrade to R520/NV50 or whatever it's called, when they come out. Next gen will spank the GF6800U.
My views are slowly shifting as rumors of 2 x 850XTpe performance for R520 are getting to me. This generations top cards seem less appealing to me now, and it's more get the most for your money now and think about an upgrade later. X850XT doesn't have the future features, and GF6800GT/U don't have the performance needed to really use their features. So nothing really strikes me as being future proof, with possible the exception of 6800GT SLI getting fine tuned. Personally I like the sounds of the X800XL or cheaper for now and an upgrade within a year to next Gen card better than a SLi future plan. But there are plenty of people would would dissagree I'm sure. Anyway, you could still do 6800GT and decide later if SLI or R520/NV next is your next move, it will just cost ya more now.
My opinion is 6800GT or X800XL for you. The Ultra isn't worth the extra cash. If you think you might want to go SLI, just read up on it as lately there seems to be talks the cards having to be matched to be compatible. It's a little scary if a eVGA 6800GT you buy today possibly might not work with an eVGA 6800GT you buy 6 months from now. Not trying to scare you, just a small caution to read into that for yourself and decide if it looks like it will work or you are OK that it just might work.
i disagree on waiting for next gen, because it is going to be awhile. trust me. as far as price/performance you cant get any better than the 6800 GT for an nvidia card. X800 XL is a great choice as well but much less oc potential and no opportunity for SLI. go with the 6800 GT, and get the Leadtek or the ASUS versions, because those coolers allow you to turn the card into a 6800 ultra easily for only a slightly higher price than the eVGA model. good luck with your system.
LOL, that was a really dumb comment about the 6800's not being able to use their features, they sure can. I can run Farcy on all high at 1024x768 with HDR and it runs just as fast as it does with on same settings with 4xAA. PS3.0 isn't a image enhancement feature, its a performance inhancer and CAN make a difference in heavily pixel shader dependent areas, up to 10 FPS average in FarCry. So saying the 6800's are to slow to use their features is really dumb. ATi doesn't even have any new featuers, 3DC has never been implemented in a game, that is its only new feature, and i believe the 9800's had a simpler version of 3dc, so its not that new. And you canot run SLI either. Who gives a crap about the R520 and NV50, are they out right now? No, so why do you compare them to the current genereation? That's like comparing a 9800 Pro to a X850 XT PE, they are two different generations. And the product cycle for a new card is now 2 years according to tomshardware, go back and look at articles close to the releas of the X800's and 6800's. I can tell you the R520 and the NV50(or whatever its called) is more like a year away from release, the Xbox 2 which uses the R520 is scheduled for release and the END of the year or the beginning of 06, which is about the same time the next gen will be released. So do you really think he wants to wait another year? Then his whole system will be outdated. So why not just make suggestions based on current products, only mention future cards if they are close to release, like 1 or two months, not almost a whole year away. And i suggest the GT if you have AGP mobo cause you can't get XL in AGP yet and XL if you PCI-Express cause its cheaper and about the same performance(faster in HL2 and slower in D3).
Asus A8V Deluxe(rev. 2.00) / A64 3200 (winchester) / 1024mb OCZ DDR500 (2.5-3-3-8) / BFG 6800GT@stock / Baracuda 120GB / Lian-Li PC-65 / Syncmaster 700NF / OCZ Power Stream 520<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Captain_insano on 03/25/05 04:20 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Wow, easy there. Did I strike a nerve and take a shot at your precious card. You are certainly welcome to feel however you want about the power of the 6800 series. I feel they are too weak to really use what they can do besides low res demo-ing. But what do I know, I am just a BFG GF6800U OC owner.
Let me try to explain why I say it; don't take it personally. I'd love the 6800U to be able to smoke through all future titles thanks to SM3 abilities, I just don't think it will handle enabling any checkboxes without sacrificing resolution.
So you can use HDR at 1024. Big flippin woop de do. Is that really the resolution you'd like to be using? How's it look on a 21" CRT or large LCD? Personally, i hate being reduced to under 1280x1024. I've got NV's top of the line card, do you think I really want to game at 1024 no AA and already see a game that gives sub 30 fps at times? Yeah that makes me feel real good about my powerful beast of a video card for future SM3 titles. That's pathetic for a $500 list price card...and is the reason I say they are too weak. Load up Splinter cell Chaos Theory, and run 1280x1024 DEFAULT settings. How is the 19 fps slide show????? Looks amazing, but enable fraps and check out those framerates, that will explain the strange feel of the game.
Yes SM3 is about performance enhancement I agree, but hey the comparable ATI cards still outperform their ATI counterparts in farcry. So you and I can do Farcry at 1024 with HDR, while a X850XT owner can play at 1600x1200 2XAA/8XAF. Which is a better gaming experience? Do you actually play farcry at 1024 with HDR? I play at 1280x1024 2X/8X instead; which is all my 6800U can handle even with the patch 1.31 and the Sm3 speed boost. So wow, SM3 gives a performance boost over patch 1.1, but it just helps them almost compete, OK great feature compared to ATI? Don't get me wrong, I'd rather have an SM3 card, but honestly what is it giving you that an ATI can't do just as fast, besides getting to play with the PS3 beauty like HDR and soft shadows, oh, all while severly reducing your resolution and turning AA off. Is nice to be able to do it and see just how good a game like Splinter cell can look, but it needs next gen or maybe SLI to keep the resolution up and game with those features. Last I checked, 10x7 isn't the desired resolution of hard core gamers who buy top of the line rigs.
I feel a top of the line card being reduced to sub 30fps at 1024x768 in Splintercell just to use the PS3.0 eye goodies like HDR and soft shadows, is a clear sign they are too weak to use their features. A 9800 pro actually outperforms the 6800U in framerates at deafault settings because the ATI is rendering PS1.1 and the 6800U is rendering PS3.0 with HDR on. Set the 6800U to PS1.1, it smokes the 9800 pro. So 1280x1024 with AA/AF, or 1024 with HDR? Which is it? Anayway, I'd prefer the higher framerates and 4XAA at 1280x1024 over no AA 1024x768 and HDR. And believe me, i have spent hours testing it, even with a 6800U overclocked to 430/1200.
Again, don't take this as an attack on you, NV, or OUR Geforce cards. It's simply just discussing the situation, and to me while I am glad I get a boost of framerates with SM3, is that better than a non-SM3 Radeon outperforming my card? But besides that, the extra eye goodies, HDR and soft shadows, are they going to be a part of your gaming and mine, or are our cards really too weak to utilize them? That's my point.
I think a 6800U in PCI-e for $500 and a $575 X850XTpe would be a weak return on the investment. R520 will be out in less than a year. The card is supposed to be anounced in May/June, and I would expect the by end of Summer. If he wants top end, and doesn't mind replacinging it in 6 months to a year fine. I'd rather save a couple hundred bucks now for a little less performance and upgrade later. It's my opinion that X850XT and GF6800U will look slow by years end. How mighty did the King of cards, the Radeon 9800XT look, as soon as NV40/R420 came out? Maybe you wouldn't but I'd be ticked to have spent $500 on one within half a year of the next gen release. Be better off doing a 9800 pro for half the price. Same will be the case for this next gen, and only a fully functioning (yet expensive) SLi could change that. So I think 800XL or a 6600GT is a great filler card.
Sure that is a wait I know. But I didn't suggest he hold off buying. I suggest he not buy top of the line/ top dollar now, when X800XL or even GF6600GT and GF6800GT offer a good bang for the buck. SLI is shaping up, but it is far from set in concrete that you will find a matching card and that it will work in your favorite game. Not a bad Idea to buy a 6800GT in case, but the X800XL would save enough cash to buy his first 2-3 hit games.
I typed 4,000 words and left out the original though I had. :smile: , My reasoning for bringing up the power/features goes aline with it not being worth alot more money to have future features if the card can't utilize them at typical gaming resolutions. I see SLI could push someone over the edge to spend a bit more, but being all set for the future because it's an SM3 card, is wishful thinking and not worth a $75+ premium IMO. I see ATI and NV's next offerings as crushing 6800GT/U in PS3 effects, and GF6x00 series struggling to utilze them. I'd like to be wrong though and get more out of this 6800U than I expect.