7900GS or X1950PRO?

Fendrix

Fendrix

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 9, 2006
Messages
2,263
Having a little trouble figuring this one out...

Going to be buying a new video card here in about a week. My roommate has the 7900GS and I was REALLY impressed with the price/performance ratio. I mainly will be playing WoW, CS:Source, and Portal/Team Fortress when they come out. Nothing too big, but I do want to see some good frame rates and also will be able to step up and play some higher end games when they come out.

I'm running a X2 3800+ and Rosewill RP500-2 500W power supply. I know the 1950Pro runs a little faster but I heard that it requires 30amps on the 12v rail, and mine doesn't support that much. I also heard it runs a little hot.

Anyway, what do y'all think? It's definitely going to be between these 2 cards.

BTW... I know this has probably been discussed before but I can't use the search option. Also, I'm talking about the 256MB version.
 
I just bought the 7900GS a couple weeks ago and I've been very happy. HL2 EP2 runs smooth at 1440x900 (16x10 wide screen) with 2xAA & 16xAF. I'm sure my processor is holding me back so you're faster X2 should do very well.

I was hesitant about the power consumption as well but with an Antec Tru-Power 430 Watt I haven't had any power issues. My temp seems to hover in the low 50s while not in games, I haven't monitored it under load.
 
Alyosha said:
I just bought the 7900GS a couple weeks ago and I've been very happy. HL2 EP2 runs smooth at 1440x900 (16x10 wide screen) with 2xAA & 16xAF. I'm sure my processor is holding me back so you're faster X2 should do very well.

I was hesitant about the power consumption as well but with an Antec Tru-Power 430 Watt I haven't had any power issues. My temp seems to hover in the low 50s while not in games, I haven't monitored it under load.
Click to expand...

when did EP2 come out?
 
stock performance 1950pro wins. Overclocked. it should be dead even.
 
o ya ditch that rosewill psu you'll regret using it. I speak from experience
 
rcf1987 said:
o ya ditch that rosewill psu you'll regret using it. I speak from experience
Click to expand...

http://www.jonnyguru.com/review_details.php?id=48&page_num=4

I beg to differ. Rosewill USED to be a poor power supply company but they're now using better OEMs and making a name for themselves. I was looking for a great budget PSU and I found one.

Back on topic... If they're about dead even (the 7900GS I'm looking at is the KO version) then that's my best bet, huh? It's slightly cheaper too (the eVGA version at least).
 
1950pro does have better image quality than Geforce 7 series though.
 
But they're much more power hungry than a 7900GS and for what you'd play you couldn't really tell the difference between the two.
 
Either card should do you fine, I would suggest you get the 512mb version though. It will extend the usefulness of your card considerably for just a little more cash (about $30).
 
Kinda surprised to see ATi > nV here after all those 2900 suxx0rs threads!:eek:
 
450 said:
Kinda surprised to see ATi > nV here after all those 2900 suxx0rs threads!:eek:
Click to expand...

I'm gonna create a thread discussing this...

the X1950 XT 256mb and X1900XT 256mb were godsends, everyone who bought them got themselves an increadible deal. They outperform the 7950GT's consistantly, and are cheaper then the 7900GS's, and this has always been the case, since their launch. EVEN with the 8 series I STILL sell the X1950XT 256mbs because of there increadible performance/price ratio, falling, performance wise, between the 8600GTS and 8800GTS 320mb (which is WAY to big a gap and is beginning to piss me off), and falling, price wise, between the 8600GT and 8600GTS, at least up here in Canada, I havn't checked newegg in a while. (actually as I write this the wind is taken out of my sails as recently there have been a couple price cuts to the 8600's)

If it HAS to be between the 7900GS and the X1950Pro, go with the X1950 Pro as it is technically superior, and, with its mass of shaders, will be better equipped to deal with future games, and gets you some free stuff from steam :)

HOWEVER! I have other suggestions!

I think you might try one of the things I discussed in my first paragraph, one of these

also, you might look into the midrange 8 series. While its performance/price is a little low right now, it does give you SM4.0.

anyways, everything you need to know is right Here!
 
MrWizard6600 said:
between the 8600GTS and 8800GTS 320mb (which is WAY to big a gap and is beginning to piss me off)
Click to expand...
I would kill for something like a "8700 GTS," basically a cut down 8800 GTS with 64 SPs, a 256-bit bus with the rest of the specs similar to the 8600GTS.

That or some sort of "8800 GS" to actually fill in the mid range some.

I think you might try one of the things I discussed in my first paragraph, one of these
Click to expand...
Thats a pretty damn good deal.

I'm currently rolling along with an OCed 7900GS, it's served me well and still plays my games at 1680x1080 with everything set on high but when games like Crysis start coming out I expect for it to start choking more and more on them. I'm going to wait for NV to refresh their line later this fall, hopefully they'll have some sort of decent midrange option like the 7900GS was.
 
450 said:
Kinda surprised to see ATi > nV here after all those 2900 suxx0rs threads!:eek:
Click to expand...

Contrary to popular belief most of us dogging ATI for its poor HD 2x00 generation are not NV fans, we are unbiased and are pointing out reality. I buy whichever CPU/Graphics option is best at the time. Brand loyalty is moronic and childish.

The best high end cards are currently NV 8800 series. The best midrange card is the ATI 1950 pro.

Low end/midrange DX10 cards are an oxymoron. Because the HD 26/24 and NV 86/84 cards will never have the power to play DX10 games and they are beaten by better DX9 cards as a DX9 platform. The only point to this series right now seems to be getting a HD 2400 for Home Theater PC.


CrimandEvil said:
I would kill for something like a "8700 GTS," basically a cut down 8800 GTS with 64 SPs, a 256-bit bus with the rest of the specs similar to the 8600GTS.

That or some sort of "8800 GS" to actually fill in the mid range some.
Click to expand...

Many of us are waiting for exactly this, because there is no mid range new generation card, only high end and low end. If you want midrange you are much better of with last generation midrange. But even when it arrives it will likely be overpriced and last gen cards like 1950pro will continue to make a lot of sense.
 
Gotta echo what Snowdog said. 1950pro is the better card hands down with its superior AF quality and ability to do HDR+AA.

Also there are still people in this forum who look through unbiased lenses so to speak. I have no problems aknowleding that the 8800 series owns the highend currently and that the last generations highend ATI cards can be considered best mid range cards currently. Its easy to get a wrong impression especially right after a major launch from either company, thats when the rabid fanboys are on the barricades.
 
sam0t said:
Gotta echo what Snowdog said. 1950pro is the better card hands down with its superior AF quality and ability to do HDR+AA.

Also there are still people in this forum who look through unbiased lenses so to speak. I have no problems aknowleding that the 8800 series owns the highend currently and that the last generations highend ATI cards can be considered best mid range cards currently. Its easy to get a wrong impression especially right after a major launch from either company, thats when the rabid fanboys are on the barricades.
Click to expand...

²nd that, but with every new driver release of ati catalyst, the performance increases. Hope it continues like this :p (2900XT > 8800GTS 640 atm..)

http://www.hwbot.org/hardware.compare.do?type=gpu&id=1042_1&id=1103_1

At this moment, the 2900XT is comparable with an 8800GTX...

http://www.hwbot.org/hardware.compare.do?type=gpu&id=1043_1&id=1103_1

greetz,

Techie
 
Techie87 said:
²nd that, but with every new driver release of ati catalyst, the performance increases. Hope it continues like this :p (2900XT > 8800GTS 640 atm..)
http://www.hwbot.org/hardware.compare.do?type=gpu&id=1042_1&id=1103_1
At this moment, the 2900XT is comparable with an 8800GTX...
http://www.hwbot.org/hardware.compare.do?type=gpu&id=1043_1&id=1103_1
greetz,
Techie
Click to expand...

Ummm... offtopic much?

Noone gives a shit if ATI's latest drivers have squeezed some more perf. We're talking about midrange cards here.

To be ontopic myself, I've got a 256meg X1900XT which I got last september for 300euros in a killer deal. Aside from ATI driver issues the odd time I've gotta say it's a killer card. It eats Supreme Commander, BF2142, CS, CoH, CNC3 and anything else I throw at it. Sure I can't immediately go into a game and bang everything to highest anymore, but I nearly can. And the card is approaching a year old, impressive card.
 
Demon_of_The_Fall said:
Ummm... offtopic much?

Noone gives a shit if ATI's latest drivers have squeezed some more perf. We're talking about midrange cards here.
Click to expand...

sam0t said:
Gotta echo what Snowdog said. 1950pro is the better card hands down with its superior AF quality and ability to do HDR+AA.

Also there are still people in this forum who look through unbiased lenses so to speak. I have no problems aknowleding that the 8800 series owns the highend currently and that the last generations highend ATI cards can be considered best mid range cards currently. Its easy to get a wrong impression especially right after a major launch from either company, thats when the rabid fanboys are on the barricades.
Click to expand...

Samot says "highend ATI cards can be considered best mid range cards currently". I was replying to this. The 2900XT kicks ass at this moment. (bang for the buck)
 
well, the 7000 series pretty much was something to be overlooked. it was instantaneously bested by x1900 series cards AND it couldnt handle aa/af as well, or hdr. hdr = modern beautiful graphics. AA = powering up FPS's and AF on x1900 takes no performance hit if cranked up. 8000 series, eh well, we all know how that has gone for ati (sad face insert here).

that being said, the x1900 aiwonder card I have gets whacked off the charts by the x1950. I would get the 512 meg version if I could, gives it some future proofing. Initially I was like, well, screw dx9 cards, even if they went 20% faster than my own for a "cheap" price. Then, I saw dx10 benchmarks with dual 2900xt's or gtx's in sli. Ew. anandtech showed how crappy current HIGH end cards work dx10.

It is a case of the 6000 series. Yes, it made doom3 ultra happy. then... it couldnt do HDR in the more modern games at higher resolutions (i.e., your native lcd resolution). It did HAVE the technology, and yes, a 6600gt or a 6800GS was a great buy, but.... it couldnt use the technology it had, it was too slow. It's like these ghetto people around queens ny that put in drilled brembo or whatever they are called brakes on their very used honda's. eh, they wont ever see the speeds and the track to utilize them, but the technology is there.

the x1950 is like putting a larger turbo on a 1995 porche. it will work, it will beat most things, it just isnt 2008. 7900 series is like putting a flair tip exhaust on a 1988 toyota tercel. BUZZZZZZZZ . yeah. useless.
 
All this is interesting because I was always slightly leaning to the 1950Pro, I was just worried about the power consumption and the heat. To be honest I thought I would see more people that supported the 7900GS but the 1950Pro IS probably a better card and I'm really not even sure you can beat the price right now...

I'm currently drooling over this until they get them back in stock:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102075
 
ever notice how people say: 7000 series can be fast cards! but image quality on the x19xx series is often better.

isnt a graphics card supposed to show graphics? If you cant crank the quality, you are getting... less quality? I am not a fanboy of ati, as I am trying to purchase a 8800gts 640 at the moment. x1950 with 512 megs will probrably rule the roost for the next year. yeah, on kiddie benchmark places it will get trashed but not many if any have 1920x1200 24-26 inch monitors, let alone care about Vista and the 1-2 decent dx10 games comming out in the fall.
 
Snowdog said:
Contrary to popular belief most of us dogging ATI for its poor HD 2x00 generation are not NV fans, we are unbiased and are pointing out reality. I buy whichever CPU/Graphics option is best at the time. Brand loyalty is moronic and childish.

The best high end cards are currently NV 8800 series. The best midrange card is the ATI 1950 pro.

Low end/midrange DX10 cards are an oxymoron. Because the HD 26/24 and NV 86/84 cards will never have the power to play DX10 games and they are beaten by better DX9 cards as a DX9 platform. The only point to this series right now seems to be getting a HD 2400 for Home Theater PC.




Many of us are waiting for exactly this, because there is no mid range new generation card, only high end and low end. If you want midrange you are much better of with last generation midrange. But even when it arrives it will likely be overpriced and last gen cards like 1950pro will continue to make a lot of sense.
Click to expand...

QFT. When building my new system I really would have liked a solution between the 8800 I ended up with ( love it don't get me wrong) for 259, and a crippled 8600. Give me an 8700 in the 175-200 sweet spot that's got 75% of the 8800 performance or so. I'd be on that like white on rice. The gap between 88 and 86 is more like a gaping chasm.
 
Marvelous said:
http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q4/radeon-x1950-pro/index.x?pg=10

3 watt difference at idle.

16 watts at full load.

You can find many articles showing Radeon 1000k series owning 7900gs in AF. On top of that you can apply AA and HDR at the same time.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Performance is there, the image quality is better, and you can do HDR+AA.

Regarding "showing AF" difference, this page actually does a very good job showing the difference, including some very illuminating "in game" shots from Half-Life 2. (And yes, it shows how the GeForce 8-series is superior to both, but it does highlight how poorly the 7-series does compared to ATI's X1K cards when you scroll down to the 'high quality' section)
 
I had the same question half a year ago and I got a 1950 Pro. A bad move. Really bad. I've had nothing but problems with it, card is cool, but drivers are shit. I'd say if you have an LCD, both are ok, but with CRT 7900 is way better. There should be no performance difference overclocked. So I recommend 7900GS, just because it's not that much slower, if any. This is just my biased opinion, but I had to learn the hard way, never touch Ati again.
 
Don't worry, I'm not getting good driver results on my 7900GS either.

Rivatuner fan speed's get completely ignored by my card, so if the summer heat kills it, I can't really blame myself as I'm back to running stock. The only place I get control is in Ntune and Ntune is the biggest POS that was ever released. Nothing but constant crashes for me.

Other then that, I like my 7900GS. I'll just need to find a cooling solution that plugs directly into the motherboard.
 
Fendrix said:
All this is interesting because I was always slightly leaning to the 1950Pro, I was just worried about the power consumption and the heat. To be honest I thought I would see more people that supported the 7900GS but the 1950Pro IS probably a better card and I'm really not even sure you can beat the price right now...

I'm currently drooling over this until they get them back in stock:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102075
Click to expand...


Back in stock!
$174.99
3 Business Day Shipping $5.84
 
X1950PRO is a nice card, my friend has that card in AGP and performs incredible considering he has a P4 Prescott 3GHz which will bottleneck the card. It has higher image quality than any GeForce 7 and supports HDR+FSAA. Also it's SM3.0 implementation is more efficient allowing performance gains using SM3.0 Dynamic Branching capabilities, something that will incur in a performance hit using GeForce 7, also has more pixel shaders units, all that will be more suitable for current and future games.
 
Let's be honest here.... isn't the correct answer...


"Buy what I bought because what I bought has to be the best"

*smiles*

IMHO the x1950 is much better off for newer games that use shaders.

-JB
 
novemberrain said:
I had the same question half a year ago and I got a 1950 Pro. A bad move. Really bad. I've had nothing but problems with it, card is cool, but drivers are shit. I'd say if you have an LCD, both are ok, but with CRT 7900 is way better. There should be no performance difference overclocked. So I recommend 7900GS, just because it's not that much slower, if any. This is just my biased opinion, but I had to learn the hard way, never touch Ati again.
Click to expand...

Drivers are bad?

Really now?

Hmmm they have been rock solid for me.

Care to say why the card is bad if you have a CRT?

-JB

P.S. In shader games it is much slower
 
jrb531 said:
Drivers are bad?

Really now?

Hmmm they have been rock solid for me.

Care to say why the card is bad if you have a CRT?

-JB

P.S. In shader games it is much slower
Click to expand...

er, well, nvidia in the past, not too distant, like a year ago and forever back, had normally poor analog out on the vga cable. it just never was as clear as ATI. I think this is due to nvidia never making its own board fully. but thats the way it was. so that is due to "ramdacs" right? poor dig to Analog converters is the lynch pin in times past. I duno about now though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top