Thursday, April 26th 2007

NVIDIA 8800 GTX beats AMD ATI Radeon HD 2900 XTX

After impressive benchmark results for the Radeon HD 2900 XT, the Radeon HD X2900 XTX (AMD’s flagship DirectX 10 card) has failed to impress in the same way. When compared to NVIDIA’s 8800 GTX, the 2900 XTX is lagging behind in frames per second when it comes to games such as Company of Heroes, F.E.A.R., Half Life 2: Episode 1 and Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion. You can see the results for yourself (as well as pictures of the card) by clicking the images below – all tests were run on an ASUS P5N32-E SLI motherboard with a Core 2 Extreme QX6800 processor and 800MHz Corsair XMS2 RAM. The HD 2900 XTX is based on the same GPU as the HD 2900 XT, but uses GDDR4 memory running at 1010MHz instead of GDDR3 memory running at 800MHz. There aren’t any comparisons between the cards when they are overclocked, nor is there any data on DirectX 10 performance, but at present it looks like NVIDIA could be a step ahead of AMD. The card used by DailyTech was a sample released to board members in the second week of April, and the benchmarks were made with the drivers AMD plans to provide when the new cards hit retail.

Source: DailyTech
Add your own comment

79 Comments on NVIDIA 8800 GTX beats AMD ATI Radeon HD 2900 XTX

It's hard saying what will happen. If AMD/ATI looses this bout, it'll be hard for them to pull out of the top-end loser rut. But they can still pull off the mid range, where I've been a fan of since I bought my 9600 pro years ago. They need to have their pro be unlockable and oc-able up to the xtx or xt. Kind of like my x850 pro was unlocked to 16 pipes and surpasses the xt pe 540/590 speeds.

Maybe they have some tricks up their sleeves they are waiting to unleash, or maybe these results show the true meaning to going back to the green side. I will be waiting and using my x1950 pro for a while to see what happens and how far prices come down to once again get the most bang for my buck.
Posted on Reply
Mussels said:
Double post, but this is a big quote so it deserves its own message.

Your ATI comments are spot on with my observations, except that ATI dont support disabling aspect scaling on widescreen monitors. If the game doesnt support widescreen (Battlefield 2, BF 2142, both modern games that dont) the game just distorts and goes blurry.

Nvidias latest drivers have a new driver panel, fair bit easier to use - but i get taht bug where you cant see the options til you mouse over them. They also get me better FPS in Vista than i got in XP (Excluding 3dmarks - those are slower, games are faster)

Oh and i dont use TV out, sorry i cant comment there.
lol it works for who? I cant rescale my HD tv sizes at all. it doesnt even recognise im trying to rescale my destop size.. I hook up my 2 thousand dollar 50" HD 1080 tv and use my 130 dollar gold plated cables and my 50 dollar platinum nvidia pure decoder with my 250 dollar graphics card on a system that would retail for about 3-4 grand.. and i cant even use my dam HD cables.. the second i go from pc to hd my picture becomes to big to fit on my screen.. and the rescaling does not work for xp.. so here i am with thousands of dollars of high end equiptment and I can't even use the stuff.. yea the drivers half the time.. the other half of the time their to busy causing conflicts for me to think about the good they actually do.. Hence the common "Nvdll" has stopped working, etc etc etc.. thir drivers are still crap lol.. just because you can play a game on them doesnt make them stable..
Posted on Reply
full screen theater mode works perfectly with certain players?


1.full screen theater mode works perfectly with certain players?

Does any one Know What players do this???? :confused:

Originally Posted by raymerjacques
well, it comes down to preference really.

i have 3 pc's. an old pentium 2 i use for internet connection sharing, a athlon 3400 and a athlon 3800 dual core. the 3400 has a nvidia 6600gt, the 3800 has a ati 1650 pro. both the athlons run on vista ultimate.

my problems with nvidia :

1. nvidia menu does not function properly, alot of features are missing, greyd out etc .. )
2. TV-out full screen mirror function does not work, and nvidia has announced that this feature is dicontinued permanently. ( i use this ALOT. )
3. even the tv out itself sometimes resets for no reason when i reboot and i have to set the tv format back to pal again, it keeps jumping to ntsc.
4. fps is alot lower in vista than in xp.
5. nvidia are sloppy in delivering updates, they do 1 driver release in about 3 months.
6. i also HATE the new menu, it just sucks piles.
the list goes on ....


1. Menu works perfectly, with new 7.4 release all tv-out features that i need are working, even before 7.4 there were definitely far more features working than nvidia.
2. full screen theater mode works perfectly with certain players, i can't stress enough how important this is for me.
3. ATI has released 3 drivers in the last 2 months, and they have made noticable difference in performance and features in windows vista.
4. i have noticed that with each driver release fps has gone up alot in vista.
5. the ATI menu is just so much better than the nvidia one, atleast you have many more options to work with and it just feels so comfotable doing it.

in the end it really comes down to 2 things, i can handle nvidia's pethetic excuse for a menu if i must, but i cannot handle waiting around for 6 years for them to release new drivers, and most of all I NEEED FULLSCREEN VIDEO MIRROR FEATURE, i live on it, and nvidia has dicontinued this feature, and altho it only works with certain players on ati in vista, atleast it is working and they have not written it off. I am sure that ati does not see it as a priority at the moment, but they will get to it in due time, this is a comforting thought for me.

also have you tried their latest drivers ? it is a vast improvement over the last ones.

so in the end it comes down to preference, i prefer ati, it feels more stable to me, more features are working, drivers are less bugged. in the end ati gives me less headaches. but others might feel the same way about nvidia.

my point of the post above was that only little 12 year old children will go around and compare the top 2 cards and make 12 page threads about a 10fps difference when you really won't notice it with the avarage user, to me features and stability are more important than fps, unless the fps gap is huge.
Posted on Reply


I have been drooling for a while imagined ATI HD 2900 XTX performance...:cry:

It's not fair. ATi/AMD HD 2900 XTX at its pure speed, not OCed like Nvidia 8800 GTX!! :banghead:I hope ATi/AMD could fix 2900 XTX's perf... Perhaps the next Catalyst could fix it. Anyway, what's the mean of benchmark score? I think, if my graphic card could run the most "heavy calibre" game in the max AA and AAF and the best image (of course in highest resolution) in above 79.99 FPS, it is more than good...:nutkick:

Long live AMD/ATi !!!:toast:
Posted on Reply