Radeon X800 Vs. GeForce 6800 Ultra


Which is Better? Radeon X800 VS Geforce 6800 Ultra  

100 members have voted

  1. 1. Which is Better? Radeon X800 VS Geforce 6800 Ultra

    • Radeon X800
      73
    • Geforce 6800 Ultra
      27


Recommended Posts

I have been NVIDIA brand loyal for ever. Tried ATI once and just wasn't impressed. Kinda wish Voodoo was still around to give NVIDIA and ATI a run for their money but alas its pretty much a two horse race....

By the way, anyone know when either card will be hitting store shelves? Anyone taking pre-orders?

You forgot about Intel.

Then again, even through Intel has a nice chunk of the market, to my knowledge they aren't really competitive performance wise in graphics, probably to avoid Anti-Trust lawsuits.

I voted for Nvidia on this. Now everyone is going to probably go what are you stupid? Well before you start flaming me and telling how dumb I am I will explain why I use nvidia graphics cards. I run linux on my desktop. Nvidia has had great linux drivers out for years now. ATI currently has linux drivers and while some people state they are alright they are still nothing amazing. Now I could go buy a X800 but why should I do that when I know there will be a lot of bugs and glitches. So until ATI's linux drivers become both fast and stable I will continue to use Nvidia.

I also voted for Nvidia although ATi does have an advantage when AA/AF is implemented. But my real focus is the value of each card. The Geforce 6800 is a mere $300 and uses only one molex connection and retains the past one-socket size as compared to the other variations of the 6800. It is able to produce some startling benchmarks (especially in OpenGL driven titles) even though it's over $100 cheaper than any of ATi's current offerings in the X800 series. Personally, The Geforce 6800 is to the current generation of cards as what the Radeon 9600 Pro was to the past generation before the 9800 Pro underwent several price deductions.

Queen of Budget Cards: Nvidia 6800 GT

King of High-End Cards: ATi Radeon X800 XT

Edited by Chouzan
Personally, The Geforce 6800 is to the current generation of cards as what the Radeon 9600 Pro was to the past generation before the 9800 Pro underwent several price deductions.

Comparing 6800 to 9600 Pro ? Nvidia to ATi ? Not good analogy.

I will say it again: 6800 GT is the best card of all these new cards on the horizon. Single molex, single slot design with 16 pixel pipelines (more than X800 Pro). On top of that its a great overclocker, going past Ultra Extreme's benchmarks. In conclusion, the 6800 GT will be what 4200 in the 4000 series.

Above conclusion valid unless Nvidia screws up its pricing or something else.

I'm comparing it's stature the high-end cards available to consumers as far as pricing to performance follows. It's the best 'bang for the buck' in other words.

Best bang for buck ? 9500 Period :devil:

I'm not trying to argue with you, respect your opinion. So dont get me wrong. :no:

Get the X800.

From Tom's Hardware:

Until then, the new performance leader is ATi's Radeon X800 XT Platinum Edition.
From AnandTech:
Clearly, both camps have had their wins and losses, but it is safe to say that ATI comes out on top when it comes to DX9 and PS 2.0 performance, NVIDIA leads the way in OpenGL performance, and NV40 and R420 split the difference when it comes to DX8 (and older) style games.

From [H]ard|OCP:

When it comes right down to it the X800Pro matches or beats the GeForce 6800Ultra in game performance and IQ. Compare the price, performance, and IQ of the ATI Radeon X800Pro with the GeForce 6800Ultra, and the X800Pro definitely stacks up as the better value than the 6800Ultra.
From FiringSquad:
As of right now, we?d take the X800 XT Platinum Edition over NVIDIA?s GeForce 6800 Ultra if we were in the market for a graphics upgrade.

Seems like the winner is clear.

A lot of different opinions, and a lot of different benchmarks...

What needs to be done is to take a whole new level of games and benchmark them - great, let's buy a card that kicks super ass on a game made now - but in 2 years am I still going to be playing that game?

Doubt it.

In two years, I will probably kicking myself in the ass that I didn't get the n40.

If you want performance for games you got now, definitely the bang for the buck is the ATI.

However, only the future can tell us who the real (long-term) winner is going to be,....

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • It STILL has horrid theme support. Hard to look at for me. The white is too bright, and the black too dark. I'm using classic outlook for the Dark Grey theme. It's just right for me.
    • inb4 someone leaves the usual "what an unfortunate name" comment
    • Cuktech 10 Ultra charger review: big display, four ports, 110W total power by Taras Buria Cuktech recently announced a couple of Ultra-branded chargers, including a desktop 300W charger, which I reviewed a few weeks ago. For those who do need that much (or who do not want to spend that much on a charger), Cuktech also offers the 10 Ultra, a traditional wall charger with similar features. Four ports, a big display, and up to 110W of power output. After using it for a few weeks, here are my impressions. Disclaimer: Cuktech provided the review unit without any editorial input or pre-approval. Like the 30 Ultra, the 10 Ultra arrived in a box made of nice cardboard with quality print all over it. Inside, besides the charger, you will find a 240W 6A charger, which, this time, is fully braided. While Cuktech always bundles high-power cables with its chargers and power banks, they are usually regular and unassuming. This time, the cable is much nicer, matching the charger's $59.99 price tag. The charger itself measures 67 x 76 x 33 mm or 2.6 x 3.0 x 1.3 inches and weighs about 250 grams. Considering the charger has four ports and a big display, I would say the compact size is quite impressive, albeit a little hefty. The overall design is similar to other chargers from the manufacturer, minus the chrome Cuktech logo next to the four ports. The Cuktech 10 Ultra has retractable prongs for better portability. Its front side is covered with piano black plastic housing two elements: a capacitive button with backlight and a quite large display for various charging stats. Ports are downward-facing, and I have mixed feelings about such a design. It is not the most convenient when you frequently connect and disconnect cables. It makes you bend over to find the right port to connect, and it is a no-go with outlets mounted closer to the floor. On the bright side, design like this eliminates clutter and sagging, especially when using four cables at once. Plus, you get plenty of space for a big display. Ports include two high-speed USB Type-C ports, one Type-C for less demanding devices, and one classic USB Type-A. The first two ports deliver full 100W, while the third is capped at 45W. As for the Type-A port, its maximum output is 18W. In total, the charger delivers 110W of power, but in my testing, I managed to squeeze 117W when charging two power banks and a tablet. Quite impressive. Type-C1 Type-C2 Type-C3 Type-A Single-port 100W 100W 45W 18W Two ports 80W 20W - - Three ports 65W 20W 20W - Four ports 65W 20W 10W 10W The charger can detect handshake protocols and balance power across all four ports according to each device's needs. As such, power is not limited to the values in the table above. You can have two ports charging at 55W, three ports at 45W + 20W, and more. For some reason, Cuktech is not listing the supported protocols, but a quick test showed that it is compatible with PD3.0, PPS, QC5, DCP, and UFCS. When you connect a compatible device, the charger automatically detects its charging standard and displays it on the screen, for example, Apple 6A or Samsung 3A. Speaking of the screen. The main highlight of the 10 Ultra is its 1.57-inch display with a maximum brightness of 700 nits and 160-degree viewing angles. The display takes up most of the front, and it shows various charging-related information, including total output power, current temperature, power distribution across ports with watts, volts, and amps, a screensaver, and more. You can toggle between the different views by tapping the button, and holding it changes the screen orientation (portrait or horizontal, plus flipped) according to your socket position. The screen is very nice. It is sharp, vivid, and the fonts are easy to read. As for settings, you can change the following: Keep the screen on or off Lock the screen orientation (hold the button to change the screen orientation) Keep the USB Type-A port on Toggle power modes The charger has three power modes: AI: standard mode that automatically allocates power to each connected device. Power Priority: prioritizes power for high-demand devices, such as laptops or power banks. Balanced: splits power evenly across connected devices according to their needs I was skeptical at first, but after testing a few devices in different modes, I can see the benefit of these three modes. The most useful is power priority, which gives the first Type-C port more power. When I was charging a 100W power bank (port 1) alongside a 140W power bank (port 2), Power Priority split the total output about 75-30. Balanced mode, as the name suggests, splits the total output between the two ports more or less equally. As for AI mode, the charger uses its brain to detect which device needs more power. In my testing, it figured out that the 140W power needs a bit more juice. As I said, I expected this to be more of a gimmick, but the three built-in modes turned out quite useful. For example, you can prioritize your laptop while giving other ports a little less power, but still enough to charge at acceptable speeds. Unfortunately, unlike the 30 Ultra, this charger cannot display the battery level of the device being charged. This small feature turned out to be very useful when I was testing the 30 Ultra, as it allowed me to see my phone's battery level without picking it up. Like other Cuktech chargers I tested, the 10 Ultra one proved itself reliable and well-made. It uses Gallium nitride semiconductor technology to reduce the charger's size and improve efficiency. It is also better at dissipating heat, but I have to say that when charging two power banks at 117W total, the charger got hotter than what I would call comfortable (hold it for a few seconds, and you start feeling a burning sensation at your fingertips). However, the built-in thermal indicator remained below the temperature threshold, with the screen reassuring that the device operated at "High performance" (I tested it in a 21 °C / 69 °F room). Overall, the Cuktech 10 Ultra is a solid choice. If you need four ports and you like to nerd out on various stats, it is a very easy recommendation. It will take care of your laptop, phone, tablet, and power bank without breaking a sweat, plus the build, material, and cable quality are top-notch. The mode switcher is handy when charging different devices with different power needs, too. I cannot say a display is a must-have in a charger, especially when it makes you more conscious about where to plug it, but it is a neat addition if you have a socket at your table or bed level, so that you can actually use the display and its features. The more important fact is that despite its size and quality, the display does not make the charger that much more expensive than similarly powerful chargers from competitors. Plus, you can save 10% on the 10 Ultra with a promo code on Amazon. Buy Cuktech 10 Ultra charger - $53.99 on Amazon with a promo code As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Last week I was investigating an issue with contacts and tried using the new Outlook. In the real (Classic) Outlook, you can easily go to any Outlook folder and present it in a Table View, then customize the columns to show/sort any field, which was exactly what I needed. But of course, the new Outlook doesn't have this feature at all. I gave up. Oh, and can we possibly stop claiming the new Outlook has PST support? What it really has is the ability to use the real Outlook in the background to pretend to have PST support. There is no PST support without the real Outlook installed.
    • Honestly just before Panos left it started to feel like MS just wasnt interested in them so they were being less innovative with them, and then when he DID leave for Amazon its kind of clear the direction is gone. It felt like Panos had both goals and drive, and a vision, but it felt like no matter what his title/department was the Surface devices never had the full interest of the rest of management and he was just pushing a bolder up a hill that MS was adding dirt to as he went.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      mobandz earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Apprentice
      fernan99 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • One Month Later
      nothanks earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      B2Proxy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      MadMung0 earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      477
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      247
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      79
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      76
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      60
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!