Will I miss any 'new' features if I buy a 7800 GT?

I know that the current 7800 (GT, GTX, GTX 512) are all based on the same technology but of course differ in speed and larger amount of GDR, but what about the X1900XT or the upcoming G71 (7900 GT)?

I just bought a DELL 2405FPW LCD and would like to able to play SiN Episodes, F.E.A.R, Prey, Quake4 and upcoming UT 2007 at a 'comfortable' resolution.

If I get a XFX 7800GT will I miss out on the 'newer' technology?

Thanks for your comments and insights, I really appreciate them in advance.

If you're hoping to play UT 2007 at 'comfortable' resolutions/quality settings, I'd recommend the X1900XT/G71. From what I understand that game is going to be pretty difficult to power.

From what I know about LCD's is that if you do not run at native resolution you can get lots of crappy things to happen in the image quality. Now I have never owned one so take that with a grain of salt. But if you ask some of the guys with the 2405 I think they would agree. (I think..)

So the 7800gt is a great card but at that high of resolution if you really like 4xaa and 16xaf you might be held back a bit by the 7800GT. Of course this is all really personal preference, I like high frame rates compared to picture quality and I love my 7800GT. But if you want both, then you either should wait or go SLI.

However, since movies are 26? IFRC FPS the 7800GT will make those things beautiful.

I can't imagine that game being more strain than Call of Duty 2 at the highest detail.

My 1900XT eats that game with ease - so I would go 1900XT over the 7800GT.

My 7800 GTX had various slowdowns during intense fighting - 1900XT barely noticable in frame rates during heavy fight.

Go with the GTX.

The faster the card you have now, the better off you'll be.. ultimately.

the 1900XT seems to be doing better than the 7800s. If you have the money get the 1900XTX. If not, id hold off a little so you wont have to do more upgrading down the road.

M Powered said:

I can't imagine that game being more strain than Call of Duty 2 at the highest detail.

My 1900XT eats that game with ease - so I would go 1900XT over the 7800GT.

My 7800 GTX had various slowdowns during intense fighting - 1900XT barely noticable in frame rates during heavy fight.

Go with the GTX.

The faster the card you have now, the better off you'll be.. ultimately.

Click to expand...

I believe you meant to say go with the XT didn't you?

Well, I had the money but this guy (in my signature) ripped-me off and stole $400 for a phony BGFTech 7800 GTX

Uhh.. yes, XT

From what I know about LCD's is that if you do not run at native resolution you can get lots of crappy things to happen in the image quality.

Click to expand...

You would have to get an older or pretty bad LCD to have this. Its a thing of the past. You can check any review of the 2405 and they all say the same things its great for gaming. Native resolutuion or not.
I can run my 2405 at any res it supports, and although I dont make it a point of going low it can do it.

When Dell came out with the 2001FP like 2 years ago or more it was one of the first LCD's to be able to do this. Received hi ratings in reveiws and its been all good ever since.

M Powered said:

I can't imagine that game being more strain than Call of Duty 2 at the highest detail.

My 1900XT eats that game with ease - so I would go 1900XT over the 7800GT.

My 7800 GTX had various slowdowns during intense fighting - 1900XT barely noticable in frame rates during heavy fight.

Go with the GTX.

The faster the card you have now, the better off you'll be.. ultimately.

Click to expand...

That is a grade a bologna. It turns out if you save money now and just get something adequate, by the time ut 2007 comes out you will be able to buy a card which simply wipes the floor with the x1900xtx or the 7800gtx, probably for the less than twice the difference in the amount your going to spend now.
Just something to think about, buying hardware for 'future performance' is a bad idea, it loses value very rapidly. A 7800GT will probably get you by just fine, if you wait awhile you might be able to get some kind of stupid price on one in the classifieds. I'd also look for an x1800xt, even an the higher end x800 series cards, which aren't the best but can be had for relatively cheap provided you are patient. Not that $300.00 for a video card isn't ridiculous to begin with.

I don't believe UT2007 is going to be around until the very end of this year so you might end up with 2 iterations of cards up on the current generation, possibly 3. (2 from nVidia and 1 from ATi). At the very least, there will be an incremental upgrade to the 7900 series and 1900 series before the years end.

Just something to think about.

Save money and getting the best. Two principles that doesn't mix.

If you get something "adequate" for the sake of saving money, you are compromising.

Sure, technology will always depreciate, and there is no sure method of "future proofing" anything. However, it is safe to say, given a year time period of keeping a card, would you rather buy a 7800GTX or a 1900XT? I think its pretty obvious. Then again, it would all depend on who you ask as well, someone who is on a tight budget would probably try to justify saving an extra 50-100 dollars and just get the 7800GTX, when in reality that $50-100 will probably cost more later than it does now.

Now, if we were comparing the GT vs the GTX, then yea... your theory might be accurate.

Quite honesty, I don't believe in this whole "saving money" logic, especially when it pertains to a component less than $1,000. Sure, save money to buy a house or a new car, but a video card; thats a losing battle.0

Because believe me, like inflation - technology will grow faster than you can save.