Unfortunately, it has everything to do with Doom 3 and HL2. Nvidia will do better in OpenGL engine (Doom 3), and Ati will do better in Direct3D (HL2).
As of right now, the 6800GT is considered as a better card. However, the future will have to depend on what kind of engine the software developers use. Personally, I will say go with the 6800GT. Fry's price both the BFG 6800GT and the Visiontek X800 pro at $350.
I would say the 6800gt is a more powerful card, but I would probably get the X800, mostly because like Ati drivers a lot better. Ati is adding lots of new features as well, who knows what they will come up with?
Personally I would get the 6800 GT because it has pixel shader 3.0 and 16 pipes versus the X800 Pro's 12 pipes. Not much of a speed difference really, but you know you'll be happier with a 16 pipe card in the long run..
they can't even do previous pixel shader versions correctly yet.
if there are ever cases where 3.0 is needed, ati simply has to do one or 2 more passes in ps2 for the SAME output. and it would get done faster than in ps3.0 natively.
I'd get the 6800GT over the X800 Pro, if only because structural crippling (-4 pipelines with the Ati) is too heavy-handed for mainstream positioning IMO.
There is a new option in the form of the X800 non-pro/non-PE though. They'll be introducing this type in AGP format now too. This is the GT of Ati- full structural similarity to the PE, but lower clock speed. I'd check it out if I were you, might be worth it.
If it's the 6800 series, I'm interested to know which article talks about it. I'm in the mids of shopping for my video card, and I am still debating between 6800 and X800. If that really is a problem, I like to know about it.
There *were* problems with old games that were heavily optomized for the FX series. The 6800s have no issues with shading.
Id like to see the proof of your claims and under what context
If it's the 6800 series, I'm interested to know which article talks about it. I'm in the mids of shopping for my video card, and I am still debating between 6800 and X800. If that really is a problem, I like to know about it.
they can't even do previous pixel shader versions correctly yet.
if there are ever cases where 3.0 is needed, ati simply has to do one or 2 more passes in ps2 for the SAME output. and it would get done faster than in ps3.0 natively.
Don't mean no offence, but if you want to make claims like that, please show some articles that actually proves it. Otherwise, most of the people here are going think that you create these claims out of thin air.
Between the Pro and GT, I'd go for the GT. It seems to be a tad bit faster, has PS3.0 (even though nothing uses it ), has all 16 pipes, and I've never owned an nVidia card (which I think would be interesting to have given my history of being a fanATIc).
If you let me choose between a Pro VIVO and GT though, I'd get the Pro VIVO. A modded VIVO is > a GT IMO.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@beatbox:
I've heard of problems with the 6800 not doing PS2.x/PS1.x correctly, though I believe it was related to tests being done with Shadermark. If I remember correctly, a variable type that the program used for PS2.x operation was not available on the 6800, causing it to fail several tests. The variable type they used was not required to be supported by Microsoft, so it really was a problem with the program instead of the card.
Unless you're referring to something different, in which case I'd be interested in whatever sites (or forum topics) you can link up on this topic
Hey nvidia 6800 gt is better but if you download the beta driver 8.07 x800 XT PE beat the 6800 GT ultra by 800 pts in 3dmark 2005 (this is a ****ing huge difference) at stock speed even me with my x800 pro and my 12 pipline overcloack at 540/570 i beat the 6800 gt ultra and some will say that you can overcloack the nvidia too, but you almost need a water cooling because the 6800 GT is far more hotter and if you buy the ultra you need 2 molex connector. So i stay with ati for this generation
I say get one of each and swap them pending what game you want to play
You can't draw a clear winner with either one of these and I don't see that chaning anytime in the near future. This is like arguing who makes a better car/truck is it Ford or Chevy. Bottom line both are excellent choice and you can't go wrong with either. Thank goodness there both in business because without the direct competition we'd be paying $800-900 for the same video cards.
I'd get the 6800GT over the X800 Pro, if only because structural crippling (-4 pipelines with the Ati) is too heavy-handed for mainstream positioning IMO.
you of all people should know better that pipelines alone don't make or break a vid card.
the 5900u had only 4 pipes, the 9800pro had 8 pipes.
they were basicly the same performance wise.
one cards winning some, and the other winning the rest of the benchmarks.
jigpu, if you think that the 5900's can do well in SM2.0, then go ahead a look at the scores on 3dmark05, or the beta HL2 stress tests.
then there is my new investigation on the 6800 cards.....LOOK.
it seems that the 6800's now don't do FSAA.
add a lack of FSAA in many games to the (what I understand now as DTS) poor shadows and missing light sources of farcry with the recalled 1.2 patch...
pic by Sentential
DTS shadowing on 6800 cards in 3damark05, now has futuremark giving us a test that we now can't use for "apples to apples" IQ testing, AGAIN.
I have to say, get a ATI card if you want IQ, and get a nVidia card if you can't jump ship.
shoot, my 12 pipe x800pro at 540/550 can keep up or beat a 6800u at stock speeds.
my mem bandwith is just as fast as the x800xt(pe), and my 6 vertex engines are running faster then the x800xt(pe).
who needs the extra pipes?
with my first run in 3dmark05 being 5392, with IRC and xFire running in the background, I have to say that it is a great score.
and my IQ is better then the nVidia cards in this test too (due to futuremarks adding DTS for nVidia cards).
ATI has never intentionaly lowerd IQ to rise benchmark scores like nVidia has on the 5900's, and what now looks like the 6800's too.
I say get a x800pro if you like IQ in all your games.
get the 6800gt if you like.....well I can't find a reason to get a 6800gt at this time.
it's sad, nVidia is up to it's old tricks again with no FSAA and texture shimmering in some games this time around.
when will they learn?
note: it is futuremark that is trying to dupe us with 3dmark05, not nVidia.
- better image quality overall
- hoping that I would get a bb ati vivo and flash
- knowing that that they can clock very high even with the stock cooler
- 1280 x 1024 and 1600 x 1200 benches with aa/af almost always goto the x800 pro over the 6800 gt, as i have a monitor capable of 1600 x 1200 @ 85 hz.
- my bb ati 8500le has never let me down
- the 6800 gt is a huge card, and my case is already cramped enough/it would interfere with my ram fanage
that's about it. the 6800 gt is a very nice card though, and i would take either. basically i got the x800pro 40$ cheaper than i could get a 6800 gt, so i went for it. also doom 3 sucks, and i don't play many open gl games.
just pick one, you won't be dissapointed either way.
don't about it, just get a card and start gaming/benching.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.