2900 Pro/XT vs 8800 GT

[Darren]

I'm planning on upgrading my graphics card in the next few weeks, been researching and I've out ruled the 9600 GT, 3850, and 3870 completely. My budget is about £130 and I'm considering the 8800 GT and the 2900 Pro in which I'll flash to XT.

Prices:

8800 GT - £130
2900 Pro and passive cooling - £127

Edit:: No fan boy comments, just facts and reviews accepted with backed up arguments.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edit 2:

I've made my decision and purchased an Inno3D 9600GT Armor Edition, thank you for everyone that helped. Now i've got another isuse!

I'm getting extremely low scores benchmarking in 3D mark 2006 and scored a crappy 5440. Although my CPU is a huge bottle neck I'm sure my score should be a few hundred points higher.

I've tried everything! re-installed Nvidia's driver v175.16 twice, re-installed chipset drivers, reseated my graphics card. GPU-z states I'm getting a full PCI-E 16x @ 16x

I found a thread where someone has a similar spec to mine (graphics card and CPU wise) and he has managed to get a full 8118 points in 3d mark 2006

Done running 3dMark06 and the result was 8118 points. Normal result? What about updating chipset drivers; have never updated them before so they are kinda out of date.....

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=57460

 

[PyroX1040]

2900 Pro flashed to XT is deffently better

The 8800GT's run at about 55-65C load depending on the cooling of it and the case,

My 2900 Pro flashed to XT runs at about 45-55C Load,

the GT can be overclocked to about 600/2000 from my knowledge without seriuosly increasing heat and stress,

the 2900Pro can go to about 700-750 :X!

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

hwat res do u game at? what size galitor

 

[das müffin mann]

i would go for the 1gb version of the pro flashed to an xt, it will be much better

 

[DaMulta]

2900 Pro flashed to XT is deffently better

The 8800GT's run at about 55-65C load depending on the cooling of it and the case,

My 2900 Pro flashed to XT runs at about 45-55C Load,

the GT can be overclocked to about 600/2000 from my knowledge without seriuosly increasing heat and stress,

the 2900Pro can go to about 700-750 :X!

uMM NO, the GT is without a doubt is the better card.

I have had 2 2900Pros 1 Gb that I have ran at 900Mhz, and 3 8800GT 1Gb cards with one of the clocked at 800Mhz.

 

[Darren]

hwat res do u game at? what size galitor

I tend to game at a resolution of 1280x720, sometimes 1440x900 but because I'm spending big money I expect to run full detail.

uMM NO, the GT is without a doubt is the better card.

I have had 2 2900Pros 1 Gb that I have ran at 900Mhz, and 3 8800GT 1Gb cards with one of the clocked at 800Mhz.

Tell me more about the performance of the 2900Pro, was it the 512bit architecture or the crappy 256-bit version and did you attempt to flash it to XT. Also do you have any tangible evidence such as benchmarks or statistics.

 

[das müffin mann]

the pros you can oc the hell out of them---look at mein, not even flashed to an xt (never got around to it) the gt is a great card, i personally cant tell the diff between the two in most games, i can show you benchmarks where one is superior over the other and vice versa, both are very close matched cards, the gt will give a few more fps but not much, it really for me anyway come down to price between the two, but with your setup i would go with the 2900

 

[DaMulta]

They were the 512-bit versions of the card. I did flash both of them into XT cards, and I didn't really test them with the PRO Bios. Which I did hear, had better ram timing than the XT does.

With the 2900 card, I could not run AA in my games very well. For example in COD4 I had to run my res lower at 1440x900 to get a steady frame rate. With my GT I can run COD4 at 1920x1200 full maxed out about 70-100FPS at all times.

However I do have to admit, that internet/DVDs movies with my 2900XT were better than this GT.

If you look here, you can see that I have some of the best clocks on video cards for those.
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=25995

Here is a GT review
http://www.techpowerup.com/printreview.php?id=/Zotac/GeForce_8800_GT

 

[FatForester]

Seeing how you have strict requirements for any replies as if everything is all of a sudden under the MLA writing system, I have a bit of advice: Google is your friend. Personally I'd say the 8800GT gives you a better lifespan since it has the PureVideo which offloads HD content to the GPU unlike the 2900's. It is also a lot easier to cool and doesn't use up nearly as much electricity. If you buy the evga variant for the 8800GT you can use their step-up program and nab a 9800GTX when they become available.

 

[Psychoholic]

I have a 512bit 2900 pro, i just edited the pro bios with my stable clocks of 820/1900, and it rocks. COD4 1920X1200 everything maxxed (without AA) ~80fps.

If they're the same price, i'd probably go with the GT, the cards are really close performance wise and the GT sucks less power.

 

[DaMulta]

Psychoholic what about when you turn on AA? I know that it really kills the performance.

 

[Darren]

Google is your friend.

I've been researching and Googling for months, hence why I disqualified the 9600 GT, 3850, and 3870 cards. The scores on the 2900 XT and 8800 GT is close according to the reviews, I need a Tech Power Up decision to swing my purchase.

 

[das müffin mann]

im not sure how efficient your psu is, if you something on the little less of the power hungry side go for the 8800

 

[FatForester]

I've been researching and Googling for months, hence why I disqualified the 9600 GT, 3850, and 3870 cards. The scores on the 2900 XT and 8800 GT is close according to the reviews, I need a Tech Power Up decision to swing my purchase.

Since that's the case, then by all means the 8800GT is the better purchase.

 

[Rurouni Strife]

just wondering, why did you eliminate the 3870? it's basically a 2900xt. that uses less power. costs or something?

 

[Psychoholic]

Psychoholic what about when you turn on AA? I know that it really kills the performance.

Yes, my only complaint about the card. it does hurt alot.. thats one reason i leave it off, and to me it doesnt do much for the game at 1920X1200.

 

[flashstar]

I can play COD4 with my 2900pro/xt at 1680 x 1050 with full 4x AA and 16x AF at 50-60 fps even with my slow cpu.

 

[CrackerJack]

I have a 512bit 2900 pro, i just edited the pro bios with my stable clocks of 820/1900, and it rocks. COD4 1920X1200 everything maxxed (without AA) ~80fps.

If they're the same price, i'd probably go with the GT, the cards are really close performance wise and the GT sucks less power.

wow 80fps at 1920x1200!!! i only get 65fps with 2900gt crossfire. but that's in my old 939 x2 4200+ i'm waiting for my board to get RMA. i'm hoping to get around 80fps, when it gets back.

 

[Darren]

just wondering, why did you eliminate the 3870? it's basically a 2900xt. that uses less power. costs or something?

The 3870 is a great card, the majority of benchmarks I've seen it's slower than 8800 GT and 2900 XT, it's even slower than the 9600GT which is only £15 cheaper, that's why I eliminated it.

DaMulta, what I've noticed from reviews is that the first batch of drivers for the 2900 series were rubbish and didn't portray the card in a good light, but in the later reviews late 2007 early 2008 the card seems quiet competitive. I'm really confused here as I've seen some reviews where the 8800 GT kicks the 2900's ass, but I've seen other reviews where the 2900 XT has kicked the GTS ass and shamed the GTX.

 

[Wile E]

The 3870 is a great card, the majority of benchmarks I've seen it's slower than 8800 GT and 2900 XT, it's even slower than the 9600GT which is only £15 cheaper, that's why I eliminated it.

DaMulta, what I've noticed from reviews is that the first batch of drivers for the 2900 series were rubbish and didn't portray the card in a good light, but in the later reviews late 2007 early 2008 the card seems quiet competitive. I'm really confused here as I've seen some reviews where the 8800 GT kicks the 2900's ass, but I've seen other reviews where the 2900 XT has kicked the GTS ass and shamed the GTX.

I'm the same as Damulta, I came from a real 2900XT, to these Palit 8800GT's. The 8800GT wins, hands down, in almost everything. Not really even a contest. This is coming from an ATI fanboy. Do yourself a favor, and buy the 8800GT. I guarantee, you will not regret it.

 

[wolf]

+1, bought an 8800GT, coming from an x1950Pro 512 and 8600GT's......never looked back

 

[yogurt_21]

from a power consumption per frame perspective, the 8800gt will win hands down, from an overclocking perspective, it really depends on the card, both damulta's and wile's 2900's fell quite short of mine and mandelors on air, and then both me and mand went to water. Most 8800gt's can go to record high 3dmarks with uberclocks, but I haven't seen them really dominate the 2900xt in gaming, a few frames here and there sure, but when both are oced it's a matter of which game. I'd say it's a matter of preference, which do you prefer features or aa? the 2900 has the features, the 8800gt can handle aa much better.

 

[Psychoholic]

they only pull ahead of the 2900s when AA is enabled (which to me isnt that big of a deal when im at 1920X1200). IMO its not enough to justify getting one, if i was going to upgrade tomorrow, it would be a G92 GTS, not a GT.

I did come from a G80 8800GTS to the 2900, I can say the games do look a tad better on the 2900 for some reason.

My 2900 was $159 too

 

[Darren]

It seems that most people who have suggested the 8800 GT opposed to the 2900 XT have used poor anti-aliasing performance as justification. But I've found a review using "Catalyst 7.10" from FiringSquad.com which indicates the 2900XT's strong point is indeed anti-aliasing at high resolutions, from most benchmarks it's able to defeat the 8800 GTS but loose against the GTX. Why is there so much anti aliasing ambiguity with the Tech Power Up recommendations in comparing the to the reviews I'm reading?

I'm confused FiringSquads.com's indicates that the 8800GTS is weaker with AA and AF, but you guys are saying the 8800 series is better with AA, which one is it?

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/powercolor_amd_radeon_hd_2900_pro_review/default.asp (look at the XT not the Pro)

thanks

 

[DaMulta]

That review is before the updates to the N cards.

Trust me, I am a major ATi fan. I still like my 2900PRO card alot. It's just not the same in games right now. The GT blows it away in performace.

AA killed the 2900 cards badly. When you turn it on your performace just goes out the window. I don't honestly know why that is.