Madshrimps Forum Madness

Madshrimps Forum Madness (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/)
-   WebNews (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f22/)
-   -   GeForce 8800 Ultra vs. Radeon HD 2900 XT (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f22/geforce-8800-ultra-vs-radeon-hd-2900-xt-35397/)

jmke 18th July 2007 10:56

GeForce 8800 Ultra vs. Radeon HD 2900 XT
 
The hardcore enthusiast with really deep pockets will want more than reference performance, and ASUS doesn't oblige. That, in a nutshell, is the inherent problem of releasing such an expensive product; a stock-clocked GeForce 8800 Ultra, whilst undeniably fast, is bordering on the pointless.

Out of the two, then, we'd opt for the ASUS EAH2900XT. That may appear to be, prima facie, contradictory advice given the EN8800ULTRA's benchmark dominance, but exorbitant pricing and default-clocked status means it's a generic card in a niche market - £400+, remember - where performance is everything.

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=9309

jmke 18th July 2007 10:57

Correct answer would be "neither", with 8800 GTS 320Mb being much cheaper than HD 2900 XT and delivering on par performance, you'd be quite a fool to NOT opt for that it:)

Kougar 18th July 2007 18:00

Unless you need the 512mb / 640mb of onboard VGA RAM, of course. 320MB just does not cut the cake at 1920x1200 resolution. :no:

jmke 18th July 2007 18:02

Not sure, but GTS 640Mb doesn't run new games fluently at that resolution ;)

Kougar 18th July 2007 19:29

It still runs them better than a 320mb GTS, I've seen the numbers! I also own a 320MB GTS, and it cannot handle new games at 1920x1200 with settings on high. Especially if I wanted to use AA/AF.

jmke 18th July 2007 20:12

Neither can the GTS 640Mb, extra memory space can only do "so much", you need faster GPU core:)

1920x1200 R6 Six: 8800GTS: 26
1920x1200 R6 Six: 8800GTS 320: 25.8
~both unplayable, 26FPS is too low.

1920x1200 4AA Battlefield 2 8800GTS: 105.7
1920x1200 4AA Battlefield 2 8800GTS 320: 67.5
~both playble 60+ is good

1920x1200 4AA Oblivion 8800GTS: 21.8
1920x1200 4AA Oblivion 8800GTS 320: 22
~both unplayable, barely over 20FPS

1920x1200 4AA Prey 8800GTS: 49.6
1920x1200 4AA Prey 8800GTS 320: 49
~both playable, no difference

1920x1200 4AA STALKER 8800GTS: 33
1920x1200 4AA STALKER 8800GTS 320: 26.2
~limited playable, 33FPS is "okay" at best, no comfortable, 26 is too LOW, at 1600x1200 640mb has bigger lead, 38 vs 28.

if you put them in SLI (640SLI vs 320SLI) difference is negligible, even with games which showed larger difference in single GPU

source: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2988&p=1


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:04.

Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO