Which is better: 1900XT or 7800GTX 512mb?

[Jbirney]

Yes, but what does that have to do with FP16 blending or texture filtering?

You made the statement that ATI lacking these was a major draw back. And your right, they lack texture filtering but have the blending covered. As a counter point I pointed out that two of the top developers seem to agree that more shader power is very important to them now which the 1900x cards seem to have and neither of them said one word on the importance of texture filtering in their games. I only bring that up to show which feature is more important to the top two atm.

So the question becomes is it more important to have texture filtering for a some one buying a new card? Your posts seem to indicate it does. Yes you develop games so thats important to a developer, but for 99% of the rest of us here at HardOCP, things like AA+HDR are more important to us then some feature that may or may not see any use during the lifetime of the card. You forget that most people here that spend $600 on a video card want the fastest card with the best IQ that they can get today. They are probably gonna to update their video card with in a year too, so any lacking feature has only a short lifespan to raise its head to be a real drawback to the end user.

I think the majority here would tend to agree that the 1900 cards are for now the best single card you can get. They are cheaper, usally faster, much better availbility, better IQ (angle independent AF), have some features that end users can make us of, and while it lacks one or two features that may or may not be important, it does have plently of shader power wich should give it longer legs to run the games that are do out this year.

 

[Fanofnone]

You made the statement that ATI lacking these was a major draw back. And your right, they lack texture filtering but have the blending covered. As a counter point I pointed out that two of the top developers seem to agree that more shader power is very important to them now which the 1900x cards seem to have and neither of them said one word on the importance of texture filtering in their games. I only bring that up to show which feature is more important to the top two atm.

So the question becomes is it more important to have texture filtering for a some one buying a new card? Your posts seem to indicate it does. Yes you develop games so thats important to a developer, but for 99% of the rest of us here at HardOCP, things like AA+HDR are more important to us then some feature that may or may not see any use during the lifetime of the card. You forget that most people here that spend $600 on a video card want the fastest card with the best IQ that they can get today. They are probably gonna to update their video card with in a year too, so any lacking feature has only a short lifespan to raise its head to be a real drawback to the end user.

I think the majority here would tend to agree that the 1900 cards are for now the best single card you can get. They are cheaper, usally faster, much better availbility, better IQ (angle independent AF), have some features that end users can make us of, and while it lacks one or two features that may or may not be important, it does have plently of shader power wich should give it longer legs to run the games that are do out this year.

Nice post. Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Scali]

You made the statement that ATI lacking these was a major draw back. And your right, they lack texture filtering but have the blending covered. As a counter point I pointed out that two of the top developers seem to agree that more shader power is very important to them now which the 1900x cards seem to have and neither of them said one word on the importance of texture filtering in their games. I only bring that up to show which feature is more important to the top two atm.

They probably don't bring texture filtering up, because they take it for granted.
Sure, more shader power is nice, but they probably mean that they want the shader power to implement more complex algorithms, not because they want to burn this shader power on emulating things like texture filtering. Which as I said, was the reason why eg 3DMark06 is so slow on ATi cards, compared to NV cards.

things like AA+HDR are more important to us then some feature that may or may not see any use during the lifetime of the card. You forget that most people here that spend $600 on a video card want the fastest card with the best IQ that they can get today.

Well, there are just two things I can say to that:
1) Both AA and texture filtering affect IQ considerably, and historically texture filtering has been more important for IQ than AA.
2) Both AA and texture filtering can be emulated on cards lacking these features, at a performance cost. Question is, which is more efficient to emulate, or which has less impact on IQ, when omitted?
Add to that the fact that multisampling AA doesn't work on per-pixel lighting, so the IQ is only marginally better than no AA, only edges are affected, not bumpmapped surfaces and such... Emulated AA may be the better and more popular solution on all cards in the future.

And apart from that, there's the lack of vertex texturing, which cannot be emulated, except with CPU-based T&L, which is obviously not an option with today's polycounts in games.

They are probably gonna to update their video card with in a year too, so any lacking feature has only a short lifespan to raise its head to be a real drawback to the end user.

But then you're assuming that people will upgrade again within a year. I was assuming that you want to use such an expensive high-end card for 2-3 years at least, which is also why I think that the 7800's features may be more valuable in the long run. Obviously for today's games, both cards are fine, and you can't really go wrong with either card. But still my bet is on the 7800 for the future.

 

[ClearM4]

Scali give it up, the x1900xtx is by far the bettter card with better features, price, and performance.

 

[Scali]

Scali give it up, the x1900xtx is by far the bettter card with better features, price, and performance.

At least I have arguments to back up my point of view.

 

[Trimlock]

well you can't argue against the current performance in games we can play today, if texture filtering does make its way into a few games in the near future and we start seeing these cards really duke it out, will be interesting

also with extra features, the X1900 does offer more then the 7800's do, not to mention already having an AIW version out in stores

whats funny is pricewatch doesn't have any listings for the GTX512

 

[fallguy]

With the prices the way they are, I dont know how anyone can even consider a 512MB GTX over a X1900XT. The GTX is at least $250 more, and generally much more than that. If you can even find one, and not have to resort to ebay. You can get a XT for $480 (OEM) right now, are there any places that even have the 512MB in stock? newegg shows prices of $750, but havent had in any stock in forever. Not only that, but the XT is a more advanced video card, and has better IQ with higher AF quality, and HDR+AA if you play a game that is capable of it. The HDR+AA isnt a big issue to me at all, but the better AF certainly is.

If the GTX was actually widely available, and about the same price, there would be many good reasons to get one. Its still one heck of a fast card. But as it is, with the prices and severe lack of availability, I wouldnt even entertain the notion of getting one right now.

All of what I said has been said before. Some people lean so far towards the Green Team, they will try to rationalize a 512MB GTX purchase. I just dont see how anyone can come to that conclusion with the prices as they are right now.

whats funny is pricewatch doesn't have any listings for the GTX512

Neither does, CompUSA, Best Buy, Circuit City, etc. Something that the X800XT/PE at least did. Both are press editions as far as Im concerned.

 

[RoffleCopter]

I would have to say the X1900 is better by far. The future for graphics seems to be around shaders, and ATi is going in that direction. Games like FEAR run so much better on the X1900 series because of the 48 shaders alone. How many games actually take advantage of texture filtering? There's 3dmark, but there's pretty much a general opinion in these forums regarding it.

 

[rackus]

You’d have to be real jolly green giant to even consider a GTX512 at this point.

 

[Scali]

I would have to say the X1900 is better by far. The future for graphics seems to be around shaders, and ATi is going in that direction. Games like FEAR run so much better on the X1900 series because of the 48 shaders alone. How many games actually take advantage of texture filtering? There's 3dmark, but there's pretty much a general opinion in these forums regarding it.

You mean other games don't have a workaround, so you get nice unfiltered textures?
Well, who cares, as long as you get the highest framerates, right?

 

[pwnererr]

With the prices the way they are, I dont know how anyone can even consider a 512MB GTX over a X1900XT. The GTX is at least $250 more, and generally much more than that. If you can even find one, and not have to resort to ebay. You can get a XT for $480 (OEM) right now, are there any places that even have the 512MB in stock? newegg shows prices of $750, but havent had in any stock in forever. Not only that, but the XT is a more advanced video card, and has better IQ with higher AF quality, and HDR+AA if you play a game that is capable of it. The HDR+AA isnt a big issue to me at all, but the better AF certainly is.

If the GTX was actually widely available, and about the same price, there would be many good reasons to get one. Its still one heck of a fast card. But as it is, with the prices and severe lack of availability, I wouldnt even entertain the notion of getting one right now.

All of what I said has been said before. Some people lean so far towards the Green Team, they will try to rationalize a 512MB GTX purchase. I just dont see how anyone can come to that conclusion with the prices as they are right now.



Neither does, CompUSA, Best Buy, Circuit City, etc. Something that the X800XT/PE at least did. Both are press editions as far as Im concerned.

Quoted for truth.

 

[Apple740]

I'd say the 7800 is newer technology, because of the features it already supports and the X1900 still lacks

You're funny. GTX512: No MSAA support on FP blending HDR and no angle independant AF, 2 important things you can enjoy in current games, and you're saying it has more features.

 

[Trimlock]

Scali's argument comes from the lack of what could be a key feature on the X1900, to call it inferior because it could fall behind in games if a developer would want to use it is how ever being increadibly skepticle, the X1900 does offer far more features, and better IQ over the competition, if he wants to put his money on longevity going to the GTX thats him, and its his own opinion no matter how strong it looks for the other part

to me a single card being able to take away the bottle neck that is with TMU's is more worth while to bet on longevity then a feature that needs to be coded for

 

[Scali]

You're funny. GTX512: No MSAA support on FP blending HDR and no angle independant AF, 2 important things you can enjoy in current games, and you're saying it has more features.

Current games? Afaik only Far Cry has some unofficial patch to enable MSAA+HDR on ATi cards.
Same Far Cry also use filtered float textures, I believe.
So that's 1 point to ATi, and one point to NVIDIA.
Angle-independent AF... how much does that really matter in IQ? It's not like NV doesn't have AF at all. I think this is really being overrated, just like MSAA.
Besides, I was never arguing about current games, I have always argued about future games.

 

[Scali]

X1900 does offer far more features

Care to give me a list? So far in this discussion we've only seen that ATi has MSAA, while NVIDIA has texture filtering, PCF shadowmapping, UltraShadow, vertex texturing...
I don't consider angle-independent AF a feature, it's just another implementation of the AF feature. NV supports AF, although the quality may not be equivalent, then again, it never was.

 

[Rash]

how do the 2 cards stack up against each other in latest games like fear, prince of persia the two thrones, call of duty 2, serious sam 2 and quake 4, any links to comparisons anyone?

 

[Shadow27]

Angle-independent AF... how much does that really matter in IQ? It's not like NV doesn't have AF at all. I think this is really being overrated, just like MSAA.

You clearly haven't seen High Quality AF Believe me, there is a difference.
Who in their right mind would pay more for a 512gtx (if they can even find one), when they can have a equivalent or faster card for cheaper?
Please.

 

[Fanofnone]

I am such an Nvidiot!!! Even though I know the X1900XTX is faster, cheaper and available, I will never admit it.

Scali, you have like 8 posts in this thread alone, almost everyone agrees the X1900XTX is the better card, just deal with it.

 

[Warrior]

come ON people.. dont stack this card aginst the GTX512.. at least wait till Nvidias new card so we really have a brawl... cause atis had a long enough time to come out with something better.. we all know that... but while ati was touching itself, nvidia was doing what it does best and thats making cards for the PC enthusiest. ATI now has a product worth talking about and it seems to be a really nice, and it seems to blow some socks off... now just wait for a comparable product from nvidia

 

[Jodiuh]

come ON people.. dont stack this card aginst the GTX512...

Ok, how bout the GTX256 then? It's in the same price bracket I had 2 in SLI and moved to ATI's latest. It's one card with performance that comes damn near close to SLI. It's also ATI and I haven't had one of those in awhile. Too much of one company gets boring imo. Now I have all these other fun features, control panels, and oc tools to learn!

 

[sabrewolf732]

come ON people.. dont stack this card aginst the GTX512.. at least wait till Nvidias new card so we really have a brawl... cause atis had a long enough time to come out with something better.. we all know that... but while ati was touching itself, nvidia was doing what it does best and thats making cards for the PC enthusiest. ATI now has a product worth talking about and it seems to be a really nice, and it seems to blow some socks off... now just wait for a comparable product from nvidia

Comparable is whatever is out at the time, just like the 7800 only had the x850 to compete with for a while.As of now, nv's 7800 series is what's competing. In fact, you could go as far to say that the 7800gtx 512 competes with the 1900 since the gtx512 is a refresh just as the 1900 is the 1800's refresh.

 

[Warrior]

yeah well its like saying.. i think the 04 porsche carrara is better then the 04 Ford focus.. well they were both out at the time.. but ones OBVIOUSLY better.. cause of the technology .. now dont give me that price shit difforence.. lol.. im just saying why not put the porsche with the comparison alon with the Ford GT where it belongs...

 

[Warrior]

i do have a question, ive read somewhere ( 3dmark thread) that someone flashed a 1900xt to a XTX... so they are the same core?... or is this guy full of it

 

[bobzdar]

Yup, same basic card, just one has higher clocks.

 

[bobzdar]

yeah well its like saying.. i think the 04 porsche carrara is better then the 04 Ford focus.. well they were both out at the time.. but ones OBVIOUSLY better.. cause of the technology .. now dont give me that price shit difforence.. lol.. im just saying why not put the porsche with the comparison alon with the Ford GT where it belongs...

The Focus didn't quite cost the same as a carrera....Comparing cards out now in the same price range is about as fair as it gets.

GTX 512 is nowhere near the x1900xt's price range, and to boot isn't any faster.

 

[bluidephatom]

x1900x without a doubt

Yeah, but the x1900x can not do Sli. and if you can afford two of these beasts and have the capability to do it, definately go with the 7800GTX. Dual of these cards just makes me dizzy thinking about it. damn!

 

[Warrior]

Comparing cards out now in the same price range is about as fair as it gets.

GTX 512 is nowhere near the x1900xt's price range, and to boot isn't any faster.

does anyone object to this statement

 

[Shadow27]

Yeah, but the x1900x can not do Sli. and if you can afford two of these beasts and have the capability to do it, definately go with the 7800GTX. Dual of these cards just makes me dizzy thinking about it. damn!

You have heard of Crossfire?

 

[sabrewolf732]

does anyone object to this statement

No I don't.... As right now the fastest cards out are the x1900 series and 7800gtx 512 pe, if you're buying a top card right now, that's what you have to choose from, and obviously the 1900 is a better choice.

 

[BBA]

Care to give me a list? So far in this discussion we've only seen that ATi has MSAA, while NVIDIA has texture filtering, PCF shadowmapping, UltraShadow, vertex texturing...
I don't consider angle-independent AF a feature, it's just another implementation of the AF feature. NV supports AF, although the quality may not be equivalent, then again, it never was.

I could requote myself...but I guess you didn't read about things like dual dual link dvi, high res LCD support, high res full screen acceleration because of the larger z buffer...etc..etc..etc... All things the 512 MB GTX does not have.


Not to mention again, being able to actually buy an X1900XTX, and for less money... I think the list could go on longer but the point is already made.

 

[heatlesssun]

Yeah, there is CrossFire. And yes, the X1900 is the best consumer card out right now.

However, it did me, and all SLI mobo owners no good, unless we bought whole new systems or swapped out our mobo's, which itsn't worth the performance delta, espcially since all current cards are going to be obsolete by the end of the year because of DX10.

So yes, the X1900 is the best card out now. But its not that simple if you are a high-end SLI user unless you want to swap out your mobo or buy a new system. That's alot of money and hassle for not that big of a gain overall.

 

[sabrewolf732]

Yeah, there is CrossFire. And yes, the X1900 is the best consumer card out right now.

However, it did me, and all SLI mobo owners no good, unless we bought whole new systems or swapped out our mobo's, which itsn't worth the performance delta, espcially since all current cards are going to be obsolete by the end of the year because of DX10.

So yes, the X1900 is the best card out now. But its not that simple if you are a SLI user unless you want to swap out your mobo or buy a new system. That's alot of money and hassle for not that big of a gain overall.

Actually it's still cheaper. The 7800gtx 512 is $750, thats the cheapest I could find and it's not in stock. Multiply that by 2 and you're at $1500.A x1900xt is $480, the master card is $600, a CF board is $130 = $1210. $300 cheaper. And you can sell your sli board and get prob $80 or so, so now you're close to $400 cheaper.

 

[BBA]

True...and I am also one of those SLi motherboard owners who is now running an XTX because the GTX 512 never shipped.

I'm a happier person for it too.

 

[Trimlock]

Current games? Afaik only Far Cry has some unofficial patch to enable MSAA+HDR on ATi cards.
Same Far Cry also use filtered float textures, I believe.
So that's 1 point to ATi, and one point to NVIDIA.
Angle-independent AF... how much does that really matter in IQ? It's not like NV doesn't have AF at all. I think this is really being overrated, just like MSAA.
Besides, I was never arguing about current games, I have always argued about future games.

SS2 also supports FP16 HDR + MSAA, and if you are talking about future games only, well heres another one you can add to your list of features that could be added to future games, and i don't know where you got the filtered float textures being supported in FC but i didn't see it mentioned any where in the 1.3 notes

while NVIDIA has texture filtering, PCF shadowmapping, UltraShadow, vertex texturing...

something we have yet to see make its way into games, and being supported for 2 full generations now with out any word or patches of it being added into any games it just looks like marketing fluff, i will not make my purchase decision based on what it could support, but rather what is supported, just as i didn't buy my X1800XL because it supported FP16 HDR + MSAA, i got it because it's a kick ass card

 

[Scali]

Scali, you have like 8 posts in this thread alone, almost everyone agrees the X1900XTX is the better card, just deal with it.

Oh please. I am actually using a Radeon myself, and I have recommended an X1800XT for my brother, on account of its AVIVO capabilities, which are ahead of what NVIDIA has to offer in terms of VIVO.
So no, I'm not an nvidiot at all, I'm just saying that I think NVIDIA may have the better features for future games. That is my professional opinion.
I'm not denying that the X1900 is a fine card, and that it's excellent value for money. I'm just saying that in my opinion the 7800 may have some advantages in future games.

 

[Scali]

I could requote myself...but I guess you didn't read about things like dual dual link dvi, high res LCD support, high res full screen acceleration because of the larger z buffer...etc..etc..etc... All things the 512 MB GTX does not have.

I'm not sure about the LCD support and high-res z-buffer, and dual link DVI, but I'm talking about rendering features here.
I don't consider higher resolutions a feature per se. You can't render more realistic surfaces and effects with that. Games will look sharper, not more realistic, with higher resolutions.
So I think we're not arguing about the same here.
Let's stick strictly to rendering quality, and disregard variables such as resolution. Resolution is limited by performance anyway.

 

[Scali]

and i don't know where you got the filtered float textures being supported in FC but i didn't see it mentioned any where in the 1.3 notes

That's probably because filtered textures are standard. All games have had texture filtering on since the early Voodoo cards.

something we have yet to see make its way into games

No we don't. Doom3 (and all games based on its engine) supports the depth-range extension of UltraShadow. The other part of UltraShadow (double output of z values) is automatically enabled when rendering to a shadowmap, so all games with shadowmapping support it. PCF is at least used by Far Cry, and probably by most other games using shadowmaps (just check Far Cry on NV vs ATi cards, you'll see a slight difference in shadow quality). It is also used by 3DMark.
Vertex texturing is the only thing we haven't seen yet in games afaik, but I think we will, since you can do some nice effects with it, like (animated) displacement mapping.

 

[DandyBear]

So no, I'm not an nvidiot at all, I'm just saying that I think NVIDIA may have the better features for future games. That is my professional opinion.

So who made you a professional? And by the same token, a professional what?

 

[Jbirney]

So no, I'm not an nvidiot at all, I'm just saying that I think NVIDIA may have the better features for future games. That is my professional opinion.
I'm not denying that the X1900 is a fine card, and that it's excellent value for money. I'm just saying that in my opinion the 7800 may have some advantages in future games.

The only indication we have now of future games will need is more ALU usage which the 1900 has more of the the 7800. Thus the 1900x appears have the advatange where it matters most in next gen games....

 

[Scali]

The only indication we have now of future games will need is more ALU usage which the 1900 has more of the the 7800. Thus the 1900x appears have the advatange where it matters most in next gen games....

You make it sound like ALU power is the holy grail for graphics. Care to give some examples on how more ALU power can be used in future games, other than emulating PCF or texture-filtering?