Radeon X800 Vs. GeForce 6800 Ultra

[bigdawgfoxx]

I think sperm is Jizz

[Shining Arcanine]

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.

[slapnuts_ox]

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.

[Chouzan]

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 May 6, 2004 by Chouzan

[jerry]

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.

[Chouzan]

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.

[giga Veteran]

Too many polls... :sleep:

Ati..

[jerry]

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:

[jkinzer]

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.

[Chouzan]

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

I know you didn't have any intention to do so, it's alright. ;)

[sks447]

my voodoo 2 owns joo!!!

[johngalt]

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,....

[karma_police]

The difference is 2 or 3 fps max 10. I've read Tom's Hardware and Anandtech review and to be honest I cant see a clear winner. if I get enough money I'll choose NVIDIA anyway my monitor max resolution is 1280x1024.

[johngalt]

My 19 inch has a max of 2048 X 1532 - I always run 1600 X 1200 in windows, but my poor lil GF4 MX 440 can't handle much above 1024 in the gaming world - and that is going lite as it is ....

[nonick]

its a tie, eventhough all sites say ATi wins this, but with a really tiny difference, price is the major issue in this case(PLUS your PSU). the cheaper card wins.

[Arrowhead]

Just wait and see guys, this argument is pointless.