PDA

View Full Version : GF 6800 or X800XL?



RIO_66
03-20-2005, 05:02 AM
hi there!

i'm after a new graphics card (PCI-e). the GF6800 (without any extension XT, ultra...) is still a bit more expensive than the X800XL. it has the new shader model 3.0, which ati cards don't have, but the X800XL has more pixel power in higher quality modes.
so the question is go for the new shader and enjoy the nice water in PF, or go for more fps with lots of AA and AF.
does the fps drop with perfect water (on the 6800) so much that you have to disable it anyway to get good performance (1280x960x32 resolution)?
in this case it would be better to go for the X800XL card.
what do you think?

apart from that the noise is also a point - ati cards seem to be more quiete and consume less power...

my system specs:
A64 3200, 1GB OCZ RAM (2x512 in dual channel mode), Asus A8N-SLI (so a later add on 6800 card would be possible, but the prices speak against that, at least for now)
WinXP SP2

RIO

RIO_66
03-20-2005, 05:02 AM
hi there!

i'm after a new graphics card (PCI-e). the GF6800 (without any extension XT, ultra...) is still a bit more expensive than the X800XL. it has the new shader model 3.0, which ati cards don't have, but the X800XL has more pixel power in higher quality modes.
so the question is go for the new shader and enjoy the nice water in PF, or go for more fps with lots of AA and AF.
does the fps drop with perfect water (on the 6800) so much that you have to disable it anyway to get good performance (1280x960x32 resolution)?
in this case it would be better to go for the X800XL card.
what do you think?

apart from that the noise is also a point - ati cards seem to be more quiete and consume less power...

my system specs:
A64 3200, 1GB OCZ RAM (2x512 in dual channel mode), Asus A8N-SLI (so a later add on 6800 card would be possible, but the prices speak against that, at least for now)
WinXP SP2

RIO

OldMan____
03-20-2005, 06:04 AM
I have almost exact same system as you. But with a 6600 GT 128 MB. At 1280x960 2X AA 4X AF and perfect more (with PS 3.0) I get >40 fps inside pit and >70 outside pit.


You should expect about same perfomrance witha 6800.. but at highr resolution or higher AntiAliasing setting. So in no way you will be lacking of fps wiht a 6800.

I had access to both an ATI X800 card and this 6600 GT and the 6800.. I have no doubt on wich card is better when you consider "problems making work", cost, perfomance, quality etc..


And IF you have an SLI MOBO.. no doubt about getting an NVIDIA card.

you might also get a 6600 GT then another one later.. so you will have a little bit more firepower than a 6800 GT.

WOLFMondo
03-20-2005, 06:19 AM
I got a X800XT a couple of months ago and apart from some texture issues with FB it flies along. 8XFSAA, 16XAF, 1152X864 res, everything turned to quality in the settings and FB/PF in perfect it is very smooth even on big DF servers, no jumps or freezes. It gives me a 3dmark05 of 5992 without being overclocked.

BelaLvgosi
03-20-2005, 06:57 AM
From pure specs, the x800XL should be a much better card (underclocked XT with still 16 pipelines unlike the x800 pro). It's at least on pair with a 6800gt.

WOLFMondo
03-20-2005, 09:20 AM
You might be able to flash the bios of the X800XL to X800XT.

RIO_66
03-20-2005, 09:54 AM
thanks for the hints.

@old man:
i was thinking to go for a GF6600GT (the leadtek winfast extreme) but that thing is out of stock - hard to get here in germany, so i was looking for alternatives. i'm currently using an outdated elsa winner 2MB pci card, since i have no AGP slot, and pci cards are rare...

the sli mobo is crying for nvidia, but the X800XL offers more power for less money - i'm stuck here...

RIO

EFG_beber
03-20-2005, 10:12 AM
http://www.behardware.com/articles/542/page4.html

Cess-SGTRoc
03-20-2005, 10:49 AM
On having both a 6800 and the x800xt pe and the Ati that you are speaking of here, I like the ATI cards better, less issues with games of all types so far. And the ATI's get better frame rates than the Nvidia card. Not by much though.
There both great cards, so you should not go wrong by getting either one.

Jumoschwanz
03-20-2005, 08:12 PM
This is what I am trying to figure out. I have run 1200X1600 for a long time with 32bit rigs. First a AMD xp1700 with a GF3ti500, then a xp2500 with a 9700pro, and now an xp3200 with a 128mb 9800pro. I always ran this high resolution on EXcellent settings with these rigs no problem. It was only in the recently availiable Perfect mode that I had problems running this high resolution.

With the latest ATI drivers I can run perfect at 1200X1600 online in cockpit on servers like greatergreen and WarClouds with this rig. I like to run this resolution simply because things look better.
What I don't understand is why poeple with these newer video cards and 64-bit rigs are running lower resolutions than I am. They should easily be able to run perfect mode at 1200x1600 unless A: something is wrong with their setup, or B. The new hardware is not really any better, it is just the companies coming out with something different to get us all to spend money.
I would love a more powerful video card and more performance, and have been thinking of getting ATI's top of the line offering for my AGP motherboard. But if all these poeple with 64-bit athlon's, PCI express, and the latest cards are not even running as high a settings as my 32-bit rig, then I don't really have any proof I would benefit from purchasing any newer hardware.
$hit I can run Perfect mode all day with my 32-bit Athlon XP at high frame rates if I drop to any resolution lower than the 1200X1600 I am running now.
I won't be impressed with any of this new Krap until someone is running HIGHER than 1200X1600 resolution at Perfect landscape settings and getting high frame rates.

I am running 1200X1600 on excellent settings smoothly on a 1333mhz thunderbird with my old Gf3 and 768mb of ram. So lets hear some big numbers from these newer rigs ok? Otherwise no one should spend a dime on new hardware for the next year and a half or two years until Bob will be out. S!

Jumoschwanz

LEXX_Luthor
03-20-2005, 08:50 PM
Jurmo:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>What I don't understand is why poeple with these newer video cards and 64-bit rigs are running lower resolutions than I am. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
~~&gt; dot size

Von_Rat
03-20-2005, 11:39 PM
yep dot size, i can run 1600x1200, no problem. but if i do i can't see stupid dots. so i run 1024x768.

LEXX_Luthor
03-21-2005, 07:38 PM
Von_Rat:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>yep dot size, i can run 1600x1200, no problem. but if i do i can't see stupid dots. so i run 1024x768. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, 1024x768 -- internet Dogfight resolution for GF800UltraPro (or whatever). http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I can't Believe that Oleg wants us to stay at 1024x768. The future of flight simming is 1600x1200 and higher, much higher. This amazes me.

OldMan____
03-22-2005, 06:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RIO_66:
thanks for the hints.

@old man:
i was thinking to go for a GF6600GT (the leadtek winfast extreme) but that thing is out of stock - hard to get here in germany, so i was looking for alternatives. i'm currently using an outdated elsa winner 2MB pci card, since i have no AGP slot, and pci cards are rare...

the sli mobo is crying for nvidia, but the X800XL offers more power for less money - i'm stuck here...

RIO <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

take 2 eVGA cards.. they are cheaper and are the standard reference for NVIDIA.

I work in game dev. and If you knew the amount of problems these ATI new cards are giving with certain features that we wanted to use in a way that is 100% correct by specs, but is not how other games do it.

ddsflyer
03-26-2005, 09:10 PM
I have both and have tried both (actually similar cards) in my system, an ATI X800XTPE AGP (Cat 5.3 drivers)and a BFG (Nvidia) GF6800UltraOC AGP (Forceware 71.84 drivers). Intel 875 chipset, 800Mhz FSB, 1Gb PC3200 Dual channel DDR High speed ram, P4 3.4 Extreme edition CPU. I run 1600x1200x32, 6xAA, 6XAF terrain=Perfect, Water=0. I have noted the following:
1. The ATI card is superior in all regimes except with no AA or AF enabled. It is noticeably smoother with no stuttering and the IQ is better but with slightly less color saturation
2. Water=3 is vastly overrated and slows the machine down far too much to be of any use at these high resolutions.
3. Overclocking using ATItool is easy and beneficial and increases performance more than NVTweak does.
4. These are the top of the line AGP solutions for these companies and as such are directly comparable. I have no doubt that between these two, the ATI is the better product.

OldMan____
03-27-2005, 03:14 AM
Well only at your machine. The 6800 i have access runs smooth on perfect at more than 50 fps anytime.


And perfect water CANNOT be overrated when you fly over see. You don't have idea how much your depth peception improves. Never crashes in water anymore and now dont need to look at alt gauge to do that.


I use only 2X AA and 4X aniso because more than that is irrelevant for a flight sim (and blurs away distant contacts). Also dont run at 1600x1200 cause my monitor only gets 1280x960

RIO_66
03-27-2005, 05:49 PM
thanx for the hints guys - my choice was the X800XL.
i did an excel survey with card gives the most bang for the buck. here is my result:
fps 1280x960
price 4AA / 8AF "/fps dfps d"/dfps
X800XL 273" 47,3 5,77 16,3 7,48
6800GT 345 54,5 6,33 23,5 8,78
6600GTSLI 302 53,4 5,66 22,4 6,74
6600GT 151 31,0 4,87 0 0

i'm an egineer, so forgive me on that table :-)
so what does that thing tell me?
i used 1x6600GT as a reference

most bang for the buck would be 2x6600GT in SLI mode, but this is just for IL-2/PF, and the driver hast to be suitable - it is here, but probably not for other games. i read about the hazzle getting stuff to work, and sometimes the fps drop instead of rising. always waiting for a nvidia optimized driver? - probably not.
next best result X800XL, and that was available in my local store. i went for the gecube with the slim one-slot design and the silent fan/heatpipe combo.

cheers

RIO

runs very smooth, but i'm still experiencing with the omega driver balancing the performance...

OldMan____
03-28-2005, 04:22 AM
well... you made your choice.. but dont complain in next gen openGL games when they don run in current ATI cards (like the one I work on). Shader model 3.0 rules!!