7800GTX gets slaughtered in BF2 vs the X1800XT

I average over 90FPS in BF2 @ 1280 x 1024 res with everything @ ultra high quality.
 
He's only using 1GB of memory on his test system. If he was using 2 then there wouldn't be such a difference. 512MB on board does help out in BF2 since its such a memory hog.
 
Redefined said:
its kinda funny... 16 pipes vs 24. 16wins :p
Click to expand...

we need to get away from this train of thought

it is not an accurate way of measuring up video cards

they are so much more than "pipes" these days, they are more like seperate processor units
 
Doesnt the 7800GTX have 16pixel pipelines and 24 shader pipelines? lor something along that line 0.0
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
Doesnt the 7800GTX have 16pixel pipelines and 24 shader pipelines? lor something along that line 0.0
Click to expand...

24 fragment processors and 16 raster pipes
 
^^ Brent while I value your opinion because I know you at least know where you are coming from, I'm getting tired of hearing it from guys that have "half-cooked" ideas on it. Because you know that: Pipes and so on, was and is used, in theoretical computations, and then benched later to see if the rubber meets the road so to speak. Guys like this poster seem to not realize in these computations and so on that 16pipes*600MHz equals 24*400MHz EXACTLY on the nose. They show a lack of knowledge as to how the count was even used in the past. As the clockrate to compensate this is there, this particular situation adds zero credibility to pipelines being dead, nV's being weak, or any combination thereof. As used by redefined: lack of knowledge to begin arguing pipes don't matter.
 
Brent_Justice said:
24 fragment processors and 16 raster pipes
Click to expand...

so then tis pixel fill rate is lower then the x1800? does that make a difference with all the texturing going on now :p?
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
so then tis pixel fill rate is lower then the x1800? does that make a difference with all the texturing going on now :p?
Click to expand...

so by the numbers

7800 GTX

10.3 Giga/Texels a second (fragment fillrate)
6.8 Giga/Pixels a second (on raster)


X1800 XT

10 Giga/Texels a second (fragment fillrate)
10 Giga/Pixels a second (on raster)


But I Highly Suggest not letting that dictate to you how performance is going to compare in games.

Those numbers might have been useful 3 years ago, but with today's games, not so much.
 
I really wish the gtx had 512 ram so we could get a good grasp on who's arcitecture was better.
 
Bigjohns97 said:
I really wish the gtx had 512 ram so we could get a good grasp on who's arcitecture was better.
Click to expand...
I think nVidia has announced that they will make a GTX with 512mb of RAM. :D
 
GFreeman9 said:
I think nVidia has announced that they will make a GTX with 512mb of RAM. :D
Click to expand...
Yup, that will take care of the Battlefield 2 "slaughter"...perhaps even turn it around. We'll see. :)
 
It will definatly keep these "OMG ATI ROXORZ NVIDIA R520 @ 240900x323092 res" threads :D
 
CleanSlate said:
Why'd he get banned?
Click to expand...
Gee-whiz, d'ya think it might have been because of this stupid-ass flame-bait thread he started?
 
Did anyone see those benches?

bf2-1-48-bar.gif



Doesn't seem to trounce the 7800GTX at all IMO, and it has 1/2 the memory. Before I swap out my 6800GT I want to see a 512 version of the 7800 go toe-to-toe
 
Anyone see an Xt with 256mb benched yet? Redefined failed to notice the XT trouncing the XL (with the same architecture), by boat loads more than the clockrate would indicate. Knowing how nasty a page file hit is when you are playing a game on your sytem, going over the pci-e bus to system memory doesn't sound fun. Especially not when graphic cards are used to having 30GB/s+ available. I found that very interesting in FEAR and COD2... I'll give ATi the upper hand on DX paper benching, I think the jump is good enough were there to be availability. Just in the trouncing benchmarks, the XL does not look like a down clocked XT if were to apply our "512mb doesn't help that much" mentality to it.
 
O-P-M said:
I average over 90FPS in BF2 @ 1280 x 1024 res with everything @ ultra high quality.
Click to expand...
I average 80fps on those settings with my X850XT Oc'd.
Whats your point?
 
digitalx0 said:
Do people actually use Direct3D?

Maybe see those same benchmarks, but in OpenGL?
Click to expand...


As far as im aware BF2 has no OGL path, its dx only.
 
Redefined said:
O-P-M said:
I average over 90FPS in BF2 @ 1280 x 1024 res with everything @ ultra high quality.
Click to expand...
try doing 1600x1200 :eek:
Click to expand...

Yeaaa, something doesnt add up for me there, I have an eVGA 7800GTX max the ingame settings and force my resolution to 1680x1050 and the game runs like butter. Using the fps log thing in fraps, I get max 91 min 38 and average 78... and thats if my venice 3200 is at stock, at 2.6 average fps is 90


Specs
DFI SLI-DR
1x7800GTX eVGA (stock)
Venice 3200
2x1gb Crucial Value

[EDIT] spelling and included specs
 
typhoon43 said:
Did anyone see those benches?

bf2-1-48-bar.gif



Doesn't seem to trounce the 7800GTX at all IMO, and it has 1/2 the memory. Before I swap out my 6800GT I want to see a 512 version of the 7800 go toe-to-toe
Click to expand...

Karkand is looks like one of those maps which would benefit from the 7800GTX's higher texture fillrate.
 
justin82 said:
Yeaaa, something doesnt add up for me there, I have an eVGA 7800GTX max the ingame settings and force my resolution to 1680x1050 and the game runs like butter. Using the fps log thing in fraps, I get max 91 min 38 and average 78... and thats if my venice 3200 is at stock, at 2.6 average fps is 90


Specs
DFI SLI-DR
1x7800GTX eVGA (stock)
Venice 3200
2x1gb Crucial Value

[EDIT] spelling and included specs
Click to expand...


Dude that is ALL I needed to see. I run my Venice at 2500 and change with 2 gigs of OCZ Plat. 90 at 1600x1200 sounds too good to be true. Now I just need to make sure my DD Acteal Maze 4 will fit the 7800GTX without too many probs.
 
Take this with a grain of salt, but with my rig this is what I average on BF2 at Stike at Karkand. I used Fraps benchmarking abilities.
This is running High Everything, 4xTAA (Gamma Corrected, Super Sampling), 16xAF, 1600x1200.

Min - 35
Max - 101
Avg - 58.994
-------
Min - 38
Max - 97
Avg - 62.517
-------
Min - 38
Max - 101
Avg - 58.384
 
I definitely agree that the extra ram is what's really pushing the XT ahead in these benches...the XL's performance is testament to that, since the clockspeed differences are not that big yet the performance delta is huge between it and its nearly-identical cousin the XT. Although some may disagree, I think the more "fair" comparison is the XL to the GTX (both with the 256mb framebuffer) and sure enough they end up neck-and-neck. Futhermore, ATI has taken so much more time to release these cards that I think ATI's top end is not a fair comparison to the GTX...at this point their next-to-highest card is the more equivalent part of the product lineup. They hadn't even finalized the chip design when the GTX was released...and as such, the XT SHOULD be faster, otherwise I'd really wonder what those extra 6 months were spent doing. :rolleyes:

Also, don't forget that you win some, you lose some. Just as the XT destroys the GTX in those BF2 benches, we could just as easily go to the next set of benches and discuss how the GTX rapes the XT in doom III. Cards have their strengths and their weaknesses...we all know that. Farcry for ATI architectures, anyone? Doom III for nvidia? That's just the way it works.
 
First, I friggen LOVE BF2 and I'm a pretty decent player too. I go by the name "OMGLOLROFLWOOT".


Second, I built my PC for BF2

2 gigs o' ram
3200+ OC'ed
SLI 7800GTX


SLI seems to make a big difference in this game. I run everything on "high" including lighting, 1280x1024, 4xAF 16xAF and all the goodies on in the video control panel.

Running the SLI cards at 490/1300

I wonder if the 1800XT would be faster at all still than my SLI'ed GTXs?

Is the 1800XT going to come in crossfire?
 
Huggles said:
First, I friggen LOVE BF2 and I'm a pretty decent player too. I go by the name "OMGLOLROFLWOOT".


Second, I built my PC for BF2

2 gigs o' ram
3200+ OC'ed
SLI 7800GTX


SLI seems to make a big difference in this game. I run everything on "high" including lighting, 1280x1024, 4xAF 16xAF and all the goodies on in the video control panel.

Running the SLI cards at 490/1300

I wonder if the 1800XT would be faster at all still than my SLI'ed GTXs?

Is the 1800XT going to come in crossfire?
Click to expand...

Lol, don't you think you've spent enough money?
To be serious though, XT availability is supposed to be in November...so when that time comes, then I suggest you re-evaluate your situation...lol I'm sure alotta of us would love to have to make that decision.

"Gee, Crossfire X1800XT's vs. 7800GTX SLi's?"

Fact is...you are already in the luxury dept. I guess if it really matters, then you could do it, but unless u have serious problems with the GTX's...I don't see the point.
 
I'm going to try and pick up a 37" 1080p ( 1920x1080 ) LCD screen this month, and I don't know if GTX SLI will be enough to handle everything on max, 4xAA 16xAF
 
Huggles said:
I'm going to try and pick up a 37" 1080p ( 1920x1080 ) LCD screen this month, and I don't know if GTX SLI will be enough to handle everything on max, 4xAA 16xAF
Click to expand...

If you're talking about bf2, GTX SLI will do it.

I have bfg gtx oc SLI, an fx-55, and I drive an HP L2335 at native res(1920x1200) in bf2 with *everything* maxed. As long as I am on a good server, the game is butter smooth. The much better/smoother framerate compared to my old x800xl has made me a better attack copter pilot, imho. I can pull stuff off I never could before, and I don't think it is just experience.

On dalian plant last night, an enemy copter tried to duck around behind one of the cooling stacks, I just rolled sideways, snugged my rotor up close to the stack and circled right around it, in behind the guy and then my gunner dropped a tv missile on him. When I am on the stick and I've got a guy who can tv missile, flying an attack copter in bf2 is freaking incredible.
 
the only thing i can think to say is that well... Nvidia has had their cards out for awhile giving ATI more time to work on their cards, ATI's card is good, but man, with all that extra time i thought it would have been a little better. im abit disappointed.
 
maximum in game fps online in BF 2 is 100 fps. So you'll never see anything beyond that, and anything over about 40 fps is total meaningless dribble anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top