Upgrade Time - Advice Needed - X1900 to?

[das müffin mann]

my 2 cents- both cards are great get either one you wont be disappointed, ones cheaper and ones a bit better

 

[freeboy]

Really has to do with preference, what do you want to do with the card? SUPER high end sli or crossfire, buget but fast sps games? For me, oddly, there is an old game that still has no fix for fog tables and my GREAT ati cards will allow me to cheat with smoke, but does not quite do it!
Also I want FAST 1920 x 1600 res aon a new 24 lcd! so the GT, and maybe the GT in SLI in the future is my choice. nothing againt ATI, I LOVE my 1950! best card I ever had and well worth the money!, may just keep it for hte VIVO! lol

 

[das müffin mann]

i love my 2900, but for that beast of a monitor that may be a good choice to go with a gt but you may want to wait a bit for the newer 8800's btw my 1950 also served me very well you wont be dissappointed with either the 2900 or the 8800's

 

[yogurt_21]

based on the psu, i'd say the 8800gt is probably the best bet, as you moght be able to get a gtx for that price, but your psu may not run it. as for teh 3870, probably too early to buy at this point, wait for better drivers. it can get really frusterating not being able to play your favorite game due to lack of support believe me. (happened both with the 2900 and the x1800)

 

[Huxley2k7]

Memory interface and memory quantity are different things. How they influence in performance varies a lot depending on the settings you use. You need more ram, if you use high Anti-aliasing and to lesser exrent higher resolutions. Below 1920X1200 4XAA/16XAF 512MB seems right nowadays, but could change. IMO 1Gb isn't going to be neccesary until 2009, and even then other things are going to be more a lot more important.
Memory interface determines how much interconects are between the ram and the chipset. For example 512bit interface gives you double the bandwidth than 256bit at the same memory clock. And how does memory bandwidth influence on performance? As I said it depends. You need higher if you use higher settings, but it also depends on how much memory you have. As everything the more the better, but sometimes at a high price premium it doesn't make sense. As an example you have old 8800GTS/8800GT: GT with less memory bandwith and quantity it performs a lot better.

Thankyou Darkmatter, very informative.

based on the psu, i'd say the 8800gt is probably the best bet, as you moght be able to get a gtx for that price, but your psu may not run it. as for teh 3870, probably too early to buy at this point, wait for better drivers. it can get really frusterating not being able to play your favorite game due to lack of support believe me. (happened both with the 2900 and the x1800)

I'm pretty sure my PSU could handle a single GTX, a friend of mine is running a quad-core GTX/Raptor Raid setup on the same PSU.

 

[DarkMatter]

Thankyou Darkmatter, very informative.



I'm pretty sure my PSU could handle a single GTX, a friend of mine is running a quad-core GTX/Raptor Raid setup on the same PSU.

Glad to help.

And yeah, of course, you are right about your PSU. I think people here are such serious enthusiast and overclockers that seem to forget about how much PCs consume at stock, with more standard components...

See you!

 

[Tatty_Two]

So to get it right. You weren't saying his links were selective and you weren't comparing the HD2900XT to the 8800GTX based on selective reviews?
Well if that's the case, sorry. But understand that I got confused by this:



In order for me to understand your post as not an opposite to his post, all those "but" and other things should be out.

No, not he in particular, I think I said any review can be selective (depending on the one a person chooses to post as evidence, of course if they feel they need to substantiate a theory or point then the poster (any poster, noone in particular) will more than likely post the one that best serves their purpose, even though they may be aware of another review that perhaps tells a slightly different story. As for the "but's, they were correct in the context they were intended, the but's were there because the selective review showed his comments to be wrong therefore the "but's" were correct, we just know that across the board the "selective....(read my example) comments are wrong but of course the selective review didnt show that........but......hey......never mind.

Also the poster that was critisized for his comments on how good the 2900XT was/is was talking (as I was) in relation to the GTX, none of the links posted were comparing the 2900XT against the GTX?? GT yes but we know the GT can beat the GTX in a couple, the Toms hardware tables does not I beleive get revised with driver releases so that could have been compiled at the time that the 2900XT had Cat 7.8's which is like 20% less performance than the card had with Cat 7.10's, I have no doubts that the GTX is the faster card, all I was saying is that it is not faster at everything and does occasionally get beaten by a card considerably cheaper, of course to a degree thats immaterial now as the 8800GT has come along that is cheaper than both of them and has raised the anti somewhat.

 

[Scrizz]

I understand you clearly

 

[Tatty_Two]

I understand you clearly

Lol I'm glad you did....cause I didnt!

 

[imperialreign]

IQ: Subjective, for me they look identical. At least so close, that it doesn't justify the enormous performance gap. I am talking about newer ones, where Nvidia has a >20% advantage in the same price point.

Drivers: Don't worry, this happens to every Ati fanboy: "At Ati they work pretty hard to release a new driver that performs better. In the meantime Nvidia goes on vacances, from Hawaii they increase the wersion of the drivers and release them (without any change to it, of course). Then they call game developers to make the games run slightly better on Ati cards, but run still better on theirs. Conclusion: we can expect new Ati drivers to perform a lot better, we can't expect this from Nvidia, they are cheating in order to make their cards to magically perform better." <-- The whole paragraph is sarcastic, if you didn't get it already.

GTX at $800+??? That made me smile, thank you. GTX performs around 20% faster overall. It sells for around 25% more, nothing special there.
EDIT: BTW it is not me that I compare them. It's Ati fanboys who keep trying to say that those cards are close in performance. I know very well that 2900XT competed against 8800gts 640 in price, and that it performed a little better. But still it couldn't compete with GTS 320 in price/performance.


3DMark: this isn't any representative of how the games are. Indeed id, epic, crytek and many other developers have already said that the algorithms used by Futuremark are very different to how game engines are programmed, making this test useless. And of course game developers are easy to be bought, but Futuremark, a company who's work is to compare graphics performance is incorruptible. Not accusing, only pointing out the posibility of exixtence.

TWIMTBP program in no near of being a way to cheat, or make games run better in Nvidia hardware than on Ati hardware. Well, indeed it is. But not making Ati perform worse, but making Nvidia perform better. The only thing that they do is send one or 2 Nvidia technicians to help the developer (read Crytek, if you want) in the optimizations for their hardware and provide all the cards that they ask for long before they are released, they don't pay anything at all. That is a lot of help for the game developer and they do it for free, wich is a lot. All vendors should have an initiave like this. Personally I don't care if a game runs better on a certain card because hardware is better, or because they have coordinate themselves to make a better product. In the end it's better. Period. The thing about TWIMTBP is that they reveal hardware specs long before release dates to game developers, something that it seems that Ati doesn't like doing so much. And that is why those games are specifically optimiced for Nvidia hardware...

I always buy the better bang for the buck. Now this is Nvidia. Back then wuen X1950XTX was the better one, I was fighting Nvidia fanboys, just as I am doing right now with Ati fanboys. History repeats itself, but with different protagonist.

Sorry for the long delay in rsponse to this - sleep last night and work today

I just wanted to make some comments here, but I don't want to detract any further from the topic in this thread - so, after my comments, I'll drop my end of the debate, here.

As for IQ between the cards - the majority of reviews still give the nod to ATI - especially when it comes to performance with AA/AF enabled and all the other goodies on. But, it's hard for us to actually judge that, even with screenshots, as sometimes the screenshot taken is not the final rendered product that is drawn to the screen. But, I don't know anyone personally that takes a new video card on a "test drive" before final purchase, or is willing to buy one, then swap it for the competition, and decide which one they like better, know what I mean?

But, with nVidia's TWIMTBP campaign - it wins buyers because there are alot of people who will buy a product just because they recognize the logo, and when they see the nVidia logo in 90% of the games they play, they're more liable to go back to nVidia. IMO, this was a brilliant marketing move on nVidia's part - no one can deny that (except for maybe the uber-1337 ATI fanbois). But, I think ATI needs to push some campaign in a similar fashion - but go after the IQ market which is what they're more known for.

A really good idea for ATI would be to market their logo and hardware to the companies that are making all these computer animated movies - Dreamworks, Pixar, etc. and get the ATI logo in at the beginning of the film with a slogan just as catchy as TWIMTBP. IMO, it would come across to viewers that ATI care about image quality, and if their hardware has helped in production of said movie, people might be more apt to purchase ATI products. Don't get me wrong, ATI is slowly catching up to nVidia - but I think that has more to do with nVidia's complacency over the last year and a half, they've known they were far in the lead for too long. ATI is poised to be able to regain a decent portion of the market, but if they make another mistake (i.e. initial release of the 2900), it will set them far behind again.

I know I was exaggerating a bit with a price tag of $800 on a GTX, but, the average price starts near $150-$200 more than the 2900XT, and there are still quite a few that are $800 or more. It's still trying to compare a tangerine to an orange, IMO.

As for the reviews that pop up here and there - it's all to be taken with a grain of salt. As I've mentioned before, for the average tech web site, I can't take what they say as full-boogey truth if they're stouting either nVidia or ATI advertising on their page, and there are a lot more sites that advertise nVidia than ATI . . . and a lot more sites giving the 2900XT crap reviews comparitivelly.

If you want some decent, unbiased reviews, it takes a lot of digging - but some of the best sources come from trade publications and the like. Although a little outdated, here's some unbiased reviews from MaximumPC:

Diamond Viper 2900XT

XFX 8800 Ultra XXX


Anyhow, I'll be the first to say I'm ATI loyal, but if nVidia is kicking ATI's ass (which they've been doing for the last two years), I don't have a single problem admitting it. I have a few issues with some of nVidia's tactics, but I don't go around saying their hardware is tripe, either . . . I just won't ever buy any of their equipment.

 

[Tatty_Two]

Imperial....nice words, I agree!

 

[HookeyStreet]

Sorry for the long delay in rsponse to this - sleep last night and work today

I just wanted to make some comments here, but I don't want to detract any further from the topic in this thread - so, after my comments, I'll drop my end of the debate, here.

As for IQ between the cards - the majority of reviews still give the nod to ATI - especially when it comes to performance with AA/AF enabled and all the other goodies on. But, it's hard for us to actually judge that, even with screenshots, as sometimes the screenshot taken is not the final rendered product that is drawn to the screen. But, I don't know anyone personally that takes a new video card on a "test drive" before final purchase, or is willing to buy one, then swap it for the competition, and decide which one they like better, know what I mean?

But, with nVidia's TWIMTBP campaign - it wins buyers because there are alot of people who will buy a product just because they recognize the logo, and when they see the nVidia logo in 90% of the games they play, they're more liable to go back to nVidia. IMO, this was a brilliant marketing move on nVidia's part - no one can deny that (except for maybe the uber-1337 ATI fanbois). But, I think ATI needs to push some campaign in a similar fashion - but go after the IQ market which is what they're more known for.

A really good idea for ATI would be to market their logo and hardware to the companies that are making all these computer animated movies - Dreamworks, Pixar, etc. and get the ATI logo in at the beginning of the film with a slogan just as catchy as TWIMTBP. IMO, it would come across to viewers that ATI care about image quality, and if their hardware has helped in production of said movie, people might be more apt to purchase ATI products. Don't get me wrong, ATI is slowly catching up to nVidia - but I think that has more to do with nVidia's complacency over the last year and a half, they've known they were far in the lead for too long. ATI is poised to be able to regain a decent portion of the market, but if they make another mistake (i.e. initial release of the 2900), it will set them far behind again.

I know I was exaggerating a bit with a price tag of $800 on a GTX, but, the average price starts near $150-$200 more than the 2900XT, and there are still quite a few that are $800 or more. It's still trying to compare a tangerine to an orange, IMO.

As for the reviews that pop up here and there - it's all to be taken with a grain of salt. As I've mentioned before, for the average tech web site, I can't take what they say as full-boogey truth if they're stouting either nVidia or ATI advertising on their page, and there are a lot more sites that advertise nVidia than ATI . . . and a lot more sites giving the 2900XT crap reviews comparitivelly.

If you want some decent, unbiased reviews, it takes a lot of digging - but some of the best sources come from trade publications and the like. Although a little outdated, here's some unbiased reviews from MaximumPC:

Diamond Viper 2900XT

XFX 8800 Ultra XXX


Anyhow, I'll be the first to say I'm ATI loyal, but if nVidia is kicking ATI's ass (which they've been doing for the last two years), I don't have a single problem admitting it. I have a few issues with some of nVidia's tactics, but I don't go around saying their hardware is tripe, either . . . I just won't ever buy any of their equipment.

Good read and I agree. nVIDIA cards are the card of choice (by Joe Public) mostly because of there great advertising (ie TWIMTBP etc) I dont know why but ATi sit back and let this 'cornering of the market' by nVIDIA happen! (BTW Im no ATI fanboy, I like nVIDIA and ATi)

ATi do need better advertising (in game and out) thats a fact. FFS most people dont even realise that ATi developed the awesome GPU in the XBOX360

Actually, this will do:

(joke)

 

[DarkMatter]

It's 6 AM here so I don't know how this post is going to end.

@tatty_one

You keep saying >90% of reviews are selective and biased! Maybe you don't notice what are you doing, so here is an example of how this thread between you and me would be if it was about cars:
- It_is_me says Bugatti Veyron is the fastest street car in the world.
- You say it's true but that on some places, like in the countryside a Hummer is faster. And say that his links from Car&Driver are selective in that respect.
- I say that's true, but that isn't enough to contradict the guy, because 90% of times it's faster.
- You keep saying the links are selective, making me think that you are saying that the Hummer is a better option (speed wise) than Bugatti Veyron and that Hummer is being underrated in those links.
- I try to understand why you keep saying those are selective and why you keep trying to make Hummers's performance look better than it is, even when you say you are Bugatti fanboi.
And the thing goes around and around and around...

LOL you just made me to lost my mind... ok back to world.

Here you have some reviews with all the cards, and latest drivers (cat 7.11 beta and 7.10 in anandtech) as a proof. Because these are objective reviews, they paint the same picture, same proportional results.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/15/amd_radeon_hd_3800/index.html
http://techreport.com/articles.x/13603/1
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3151&p=1
http://www.techspot.com/review/76-asus-radeon-hd-3870/

These are between others, first sites that I read before any assumption.
On all those 2900XT is still way behind GTX and GT and both 8800GTS pretty close to XT, just as in previous reviews, despite new drivers are used. And 2900XT consumes more power than the 8800GTX and Ultra. Are those reviews, despite giving similar results, "selective" or biased?
Provide true reviews then.

@imperialreign

I've been working on a computer store for some time and part of my job there was to ask people why they were buying that particular product, where did they heard of the store and the product and such...
More than 90% of the people that spent more than 200€ in a PC component said it was because someone recomended it in a forum. No one ever mentioned TWIMTBP. That's why I fight so hard all the false claims made by fanboys in forums. And yours are coming close to be symptoms of fanboism. One of the easiest weapons that fanboys use is price diference wich they tend to inflate (800$ anyone?). Providing subjectives as facts: IQ and that most reviews say IQ is a lot better on Ati, when most that I have read say they are on par (not to mention my eyes and those of the rest of humanity)... Claiming unfair behavior of the competence, under any oportunity (cough* Crysis, cough*)... And many many others.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/12458/16 for an example of objetivity.

BTW read the reviews that I provided. Those are objective, thorough and complete. If you really believe the ones you posted are examples of good reviews, then I think no one is going to be able to save your soul. And I say this because those only show some numbers and provide poor info about the testbed used. No mention to drivers anywhere and to finish (drums please...) a numer representing its value!! Every serious poster here must agree with me on this.
But if that's the better you can provide...

And last, now there are more sites advertising Nvidia cards, wich BTW aren't of Nvidia but it's partners (XFX, BFG, Asus...), because now they are the most popular, and thus it makes sense for that partners to invest in advertising. Back in the X1950 days it was the other way around.

In the end, I don't know if both of you are Amd fanboys or not. I do know that you are acting as such. When you feel the urge to keep arguing to a post saying X product is faster than Y product, when it actually is. With such arguments as "but at higher price, not at 100% of cases, it will improve in the future, the company of X cheats". When the counterarguments are "True, but it's faster". And you go again and again with the above... I call that a clear symptom...

EDIT: Just for the record. Do you realize how easy would be for a Nvidia fanboy to counter your arguments, with your same arguments using them on the 8800GTS 320?? Because the difference in performance is smaller between them.

 

[imperialreign]

In the end, I don't know if both of you are Amd fanboys or not. I do know that you are acting as such. When you feel the urge to keep arguing to a post saying X product is faster than Y product, when it actually is. With such arguments as "but at higher price, not at 100% of cases, it will improve in the future, the company of X cheats". When the counterarguments are "True, but it's faster". And you go again and again with the above... I call that a clear symptom...

And now you're at the point of taking everything we are saying out of context to support your side of an argument.

I've already said here that the 8800GTX is faster than the 2900XT. When have I said otherwise? The 8800GTS and GT are on an equal playing field with the 2900XT. In some benches/reviews they score higher, and in other reviews it's the other way around - equal ground. The one area that the 2900XT does edge out the GT/GTS is in HD playback, but only by a slight margin right now. nVidia has done a great job over the last year of tackling their reputation with poor IQ, and have come a long way in a short amount of time.

And last, now there are more sites advertising Nvidia cards, wich BTW aren't of Nvidia but it's partners (XFX, BFG, Asus...), because now they are the most popular, and thus it makes sense for that partners to invest in advertising. Back in the X1950 days it was the other way around.

and this is true, during the heyday of the 1950 there was a decent amount of advertising, but nVidia (just nVidia, none of their partners) still advertises (and has) nearly twice as much as ATI and their partnered brands. I can't fault nVidia on this, either, but I do wish that ATI and their buddies would step up to the plate a bit more. Sadly, since AMD has taken hold of ATI, their advertising is slowly disappearing . . .

BTW read the reviews that I provided. Those are objective, thorough and complete. If you really believe the ones you posted are examples of good reviews, then I think no one is going to be able to save your soul. And I say this because those only show some numbers and provide poor info about the testbed used. No mention to drivers anywhere and to finish (drums please...) a numer representing its value!! Every serious poster here must agree with me on this.
But if that's the better you can provide...

I have read the reviews you posted and will say that those were by far better than most - but you can't equally dismiss the couple that I pulled up . . . you say you work in a computer store, than you should quickly recognize the name MaximumPC (unless you live outside of the US, I'm not sure of their distribution internationally) as being a highly respect trade magazine publication, and if you don't believe me - ask any of the other US members of this board. Their reviews of hardware are short, to the point, and don't get too much into all the technical and nitpicky information most of us here care about - but, instead get down to the point that the average newstand reader will understand and care about. If you search their website some, you'll find all the information regarding their testbeds and their testing procedures. They use as up-to-date drivers as are available at the time of publication, and are unbiased in their final say. At the end of their reviews, they highlight both the major pros and cons of the hardware, the average price of the component at press time, and rate it on a scale of 1-10 and explain their score of the product.
Just because there isn't 5+ pages of technical jargon to a review doesn't mean you should be so quick to jump to conclusions.

I've been working on a computer store for some time and part of my job there was to ask people why they were buying that particular product, where did they heard of the store and the product and such...
More than 90% of the people that spent more than 200€ in a PC component said it was because someone recomended it in a forum. No one ever mentioned TWIMTBP. That's why I fight so hard all the false claims made by fanboys in forums. And yours are coming close to be symptoms of fanboism.

again . . . you'd have to be absolutely foolish to take what customer A says at the checkout line as gospel. If most of your customer says it's because it was recommend on a forum somewhere, what forum did they go to?! And on top of that, what basis were users on that forum using for recommending said hardware?!
The comments I made about nVidia's TWIMTBP capaign were not meant to be deragatory or degrading towards nVidia - hell! I even complimented them on this marketing strategy! But you act as if I'm pointing fingers at a specific thing as to why ATI is doing so horribly right now, and have the nerve to say my comments are borderline fanboism?! Funny, because your arguments have been just as borderline - although you claim no loyalty to one brand or the other (which is by all means fine and dandy), which a few other users here not siding with you have said they owe no loyalties either - but you aim them up as fanbois, also.

IQ and that most reviews say IQ is a lot better on Ati, when most that I have read say they are on par (not to mention my eyes and those of the rest of humanity)...

I've seen the difference, too - and to me, ATI's image quality is better, a few reviews I've seen say the difference is negligible, but most reviews I have read give the nod to ATI in this area, oh well, then, difference of opinion - my opinion sucks, your opinions sucks, end of story.

Claiming unfair behavior of the competence, under any oportunity (cough* Crysis, cough*)... And many many others

When have a claimed unfair behavior of the competence . . . what?! I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, honestly.

One of the easiest weapons that fanboys use is price diference wich they tend to inflate (800$ anyone?).[/

I said my original statement was a bit of an exaggeration. The GTX tends to be between $150-$200 more than a 2900XT - average price of an 8800 GTX in this region is $550, but the price of the GTX does go a lot higher, especially from certain manufacturers.

 

[Xaser04]

The HD2900XT is not on an equal playing field with the 8800GT. It isn't anywhere close.

Its slower, ALOT more expensive (here in the UK), and draws more power.

If you has said the HD3870 then it would make more sense.

Also most of the reviews I have read have stated that the AF performance of the 8800 series is superior to that of the HD2900 series. (those funky circle diagrams). IIRC it was stated that the HD2900 is using as default the HQ setting from the X1900 series which is inferior to the implementation provided by the 8800 Series.

I havn't read anything to the contrary on this. BTW I am not saying you are wrong I am just posting what I have read from numerous reviews.

 

[HookeyStreet]

This is turning into an nVIDIA/ATi fanboy debate (even when Imperial & Tatty are clearly not fanboys)

Ive owned the following top end cards, 8800GTS 640mb, 8800GTX 768mb & HD2900XT (well x2 now) and all of these cards are great performers.

Ive used all 3 so I can speak from experience. And I personally think the 2900XT performs better than the 8800GTS but is below the 8800GTX (when it come to ingame performance) but it does beat the 8800GTX in benchmarks like 3DM06.

Im more than happy with going back to ATi (admittedly Ive had a soft spot for ATi cards since the awesome X850XT ) and when you consider the big price difference between the XT and GTX, I know which one I would go for (or even better, grab a 2900Pro and flash it to XT, or get one of the new, cheap and cheerful 3870 )

PS: to DarkMatter: most people that use actual PC/electrical stores to buy graphics cards dont have a clue about what they are buying (if they did they would get it off the net cheaper!)....they are usually swayed by the guy behind the desk (who usually knows less then the customer) to buy an expensive POS (I know this because I got sold a POS GeForce FX 5200 many years ago and was told it was great LMFAO)

PPS: I realise the 8800GT has now been thrown in the mix, but as I havent owned one, I wont comment on them......but in all fairness they do look amazing! (but not cheap enough in most places for my liking)

 

[das müffin mann]

This is turning into an nVIDIA/ATi fanboy debate (even when Imperial & Tatty are clearly not fanboys)

Ive owned the following top end cards, 8800GTS 640mb, 8800GTX 768mb & HD2900XT (well x2 now) and all of these cards are great performers.

Ive used all 3 so I can speak from experience. And I personally think the 2900XT performs better than the 8800GTS but is below the 8800GTX (when it come to ingame performance) but it does beat the 8800GTX in benchmarks like 3DM06.

Im more than happy with going back to ATi (admittedly Ive had a soft spot for ATi cards since the awesome X850XT ) and when you consider the big price difference between the XT and GTX, I know which one I would go for (or even better, grab a 2900Pro and flash it to XT, or get one of the new, cheap and cheerful 3870 )

PS: to DarkMatter: most people that use actual PC/electrical stores to buy graphics cards dont have a clue about what they are buying (if they did they would get it off the net cheaper!)....they are usually swayed by the guy behind the desk (who usually knows less then the customer) to buy an expensive POS (I know this because I got sold a POS GeForce FX 5200 many years ago and was told it was great LMFAO)

PPS: I realise the 8800GT has now been thrown in the mix, but as I havent owned one, I wont comment on them......but in all fairness they do look amazing! (but not cheap enough in most places for my liking)

well saidive also played on a gts and a xt and the xt does beat it a little cant say about the gtx never used one would like to if some one wants to send me one for free

 

[Scrizz]

Geez everyone's just going back and forth about: you're selective, I'm selective, we're all selective....with all these rants and ridiculously long posts, Honestly I just don't read past the first paragraph. with regards to ATI vs. NVidia most people have their minds set already. People each have their preferences, some want the most fps possible and some want the goodies(HDMI, vivo, etc...)...We should all stop accusing each other of being "selective" and focus on what truly matters, blood pressure

 

[Tatty_Two]

@ darkmatter....do you actually read what is being said? I NEVER said that 90% of reviews are biased what I have said is that the use of reviews as evidence can be biased to prove a posters point, I quote from his first post where he basically said that the 2900XT in comparison to the GTX was crap and posted the links that "posting reviews can be selective" , I then posted 2 "selective" contrary extracts to show an example.....I have never said the content of a review is biased....please read again, it's how the review is used that can be biased, 2 reviews on the same card may show different strengths and weaknesses because of different benches, if a poster wants to prove a particilar point he will link the best of the 2 reviews that prove that point.....there is that clearer? perhaps I didnt explain well enough but other members have said they understood what I was saying.

I have only read the first sentance of your post above as TBH I cannot afford to fall asleep at my desk at work! the rest will have to gather dust in my TPU archives of time

 

[DarkMatter]

Now you are talking in a diferent fashion, wich is good. You are staying more objetive, and don't trying to pose opinions as facts. But I still have many thing to make clear.

First of all, about the store. The questions were made to know if the advertising methods that we used did pay off. It was an specialized store and prestige was more important than making great profit. We were small and new, and had to make our niche in the market. Most people back then asked for products recommended in forums. More than half the people willing to spend some money in a graphics card wanted X1950 cards, and most of the times that was ok, with some exceptions. But there were lots of them that wanted 7900GS cards, because they had been told it was better. That is why we have the responsability to be clear in techie forums. And in this case that means making clear that 8800GTX and GT are about 20% faster than HD2900 and HD3850 and in most games and overall. After this is well establiced we can start talking about price and IQ.

IQ: When gaming (not looking at screenies) the differences that could exist between the cards are from unnoticeable to totally nonexistent. Another fact to my words about performance>IQ is that IQ doesn't affect gameplay where framerates does. Also 1600x1200 vs 1280x1024 is a lot bigger difference in IQ than between cards, or 4xAA vs 2xAA. Higher in-game settings are bigger difference in IQ than the existent between cards. 8800GT enables all that higher options where Ati can't. So recommending Ati cards right now based on this is a blasfemy. You did it, and I argued with you. That's all.

Price: Here in Euroland 3870 and GT 512 are at the same price. 3850 and GT 256 are at the same price. HD 2900XT was always 50€ more expensive than GTS 640. Amd cards discarded. Easy.

TWIMTBP: You have despised this initiative when you said it is only a marketing strategy. It's much more than that. It is support to developers providing them with all the hardware even months before these are released. It is human power exclusively dedicated to those developers to help make algorithms to run better on that hardware and much more. Either you accept that it actually works wonders making nvidia hardware perform better on said games (besides from a marketing standpoint), or you are saying that both companies cheat. Cough ... Cough formula here is used mostly when you want to mention something obscure or when you want to nombrate an example of something bad. Nevertheless it's always used in a negative fashion.

About your links. Never said that site or store or whatever is it, is a crap. But I do say those reviews are crap. They don't offer enough info to let people decide or contrast that review with the others. So your only alternative is either believe what they say or not. With the ones that I linked, if they were biased you could easily notice it, when compared to others. Also they mention all the pros and cons of the cards reviewed in comparison to other alternatives.

Continue discussing me if you want, but all that I said were these points:

- 8800GTX is faster than HD2900XT, a few reviews showing the XT outperform GTX doesn't change that. The GTX being more expensive doesn't change that. New drivers didn't change that. Newer ones won't change that.
- You have to methodically choose selective reviews to show 2900XT above GTX, when you can randomly choose one to show the reality.
- Nothing of that matters anymore, because of new gen cards. The picture is the same though. 3870 is 15-20% slower than GT 512 (seems it's 15-20% cheaper too on US), and nothing will change that. GT 256 is 30-50% faster than 3850 and nothing will change that.
- The reviews that it_is_me linked were extensive, thorough and objetive reviews just as the ones that I posted, and in no way selective as Tatty stated.
- IQ difference between cards is unnoticeable when playing games. Graphics cards are mostly for playing games.
- TWIMTBP is not only a marketing strategy. Nvidia and Crytek worked hard to make Crysis run well on their cards. Crytek and Ati worked hard to make theirs to run well.

Those are facts. Depending of how you respond to them, if you do at all, I wold definately mark you in my book as fanboy or not.

 

[HookeyStreet]

recommending Ati cards right now based on this is a blasfemy.

LOL, thats a classic quote! You make yourself sound like an nVIDIA fanboy when spouting that kind of nonsense!

The 2900XT (and Pro) are still going strong and the HD3870 will sell well due to the great price (as little as £140 delivered in the UK)

At this moment in time, if you want high quality gaming on a budget, you cant go far wrong by getting an ATi card (namely the HD3870) Yes, the 8800GT is better, but it is also more expensive (and the price will continue to rise because the word is out on how good they really are! Supply and demand they call it )

You make some valid points, but in doing so you sound like an nVIDIA rep or something, not an unbiased PC gamer!

Im ATi atm because I have a CrossFire motherboard. If I had an SLi motherboard I would still be nVIDIA, its as plain as that. So please dont label me as a fanboy because of what Ive said

 

[DarkMatter]

@ darkmatter....do you actually read what is being said? I NEVER said that 90% of reviews are biased what I have said is that the use of reviews as evidence can be biased to prove a posters point, I quote from his first post where he basically said that the 2900XT in comparison to the GTX was crap and posted the links that "posting reviews can be selective" , I then posted 2 "selective" contrary extracts to show an example.....I have never said the content of a review is biased....please read again, it's how the review is used that can be biased, 2 reviews on the same card may show different strengths and weaknesses because of different benches, if a poster wants to prove a particilar point he will link the best of the 2 reviews that prove that point.....there is that clearer? perhaps I didnt explain well enough but other members have said they understood what I was saying.

I have only read the first sentance of your post above as TBH I cannot afford to fall asleep at my desk at work! the rest will have to gather dust in my TPU archives of time

I know very well all that, but since his posts weren't selective AT ALL, all your arguments and later responses to my posts are pointless to say the least. He wasn't linking a pair of images, he linked a whole review with many cards tested, many games and resolutions and lots of comments and comclusion to that their results...

About the rest of your last post, there's a quote in spanish for what you say there: Cree el ladrón que todos son de su condición. That means: The thief believes everybody acts like him. Hope that's clear enough for you...

 

[das müffin mann]

good ol' ati vs nvidia debates

 

[DarkMatter]

LOL, thats a classic quote! You make yourself sound like an nVIDIA fanboy when spouting that kind of nonsense!

The 2900XT (and Pro) are still going strong and the HD3870 will sell well due to the great price (as little as £140 delivered in the UK)

At this moment in time, if you want high quality gaming on a budget, you cant go far wrong by getting an ATi card (namely the HD3870) Yes, the 8800GT is better, but it is also more expensive (and the price will continue to rise because the word is out on how good they really are! Supply and demand they call it )

You make some valid points, but in doing so you sound like an nVIDIA rep or something, not an unbiased PC gamer!

Im ATi atm because I have a CrossFire motherboard. If I had an SLi motherboard I would still be nVIDIA, its as plain as that. So please dont label me as a fanboy because of what Ive said

OOh yeah! Let's take sentences out of context. Nothing more to say there.

IQ: When gaming (not looking at screenies) the differences that could exist between the cards are from unnoticeable to totally nonexistent. Another fact to my words about performance>IQ is that IQ doesn't affect gameplay where framerates does. Also 1600x1200 vs 1280x1024 is a lot bigger difference in IQ than between cards, or 4xAA vs 2xAA. Higher in-game settings are bigger difference in IQ than the existent between cards. 8800GT enables all that higher options where Ati can't. So recommending Ati cards right now based on this is a blasfemy. You did it, and I argued with you. That's all.

 

[DarkMatter]

good ol' ati vs nvidia debates

I would fight with the same impetus if someone said PS3 is much better than X360, Blu-ray better than HD-DVD (from a market point of view, not specs), LCD better than CRT in IQ, and basically all other things that are not true, and that different kind of fanboys would try to demostrate with false claims.

I am not saying and I never was that Nvidia is better than Ati/Amd, and I never did (many fanboys don't find the difference in this: HD2900 < 8800GTX --> Ati < Nvidia). But their products are faster right now, and IMO and counting on worldwide prices, they are better right now. Remember, same price in Europe for HD3850/8800GT 256 and 3870/GT 512.