A Tale of Two GTs: Radeon X1900GT

[yyrkoon]

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.

 

[sojrner]

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. 😉

 

[Ranari]

Taken from the test setup page:

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?

 

[Sq7]

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.

 

[4745454b]

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?

 

[Stonedbunny]

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: