Another ATi question

2007-01-27 11:10:18

#1

daffytag: cheese-it!; +104|7036

First of all, I apologise. This has probably been asked/debated already. Or somthing very close to this topic.

Im interested in getting either an x1950XT 256MB priced at £175.07
http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/spec … xt&P=1

or an x1950 pro ultimate priced at £136.30
http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/spec … pu&P=1

+ Is the going to be a noticable performance difference?
+ Will either run BF2/2142 on high at 1280 X 1024?

The card is only intended to last me until I buy a ATi DX10 card.

Thanks Daffy*TaG*

2007-01-27 11:15:31

#2

kylef: Gone; +1,352|6954|N. Ireland

I have an X1900XT 512MB and it plays 2142 and BF2 all on high w/ full everything, and on HL2 vertical sync on etc. I'd recommend going for a cheaper card until April '07 when DX10 ATI Cards are out.

2007-01-27 11:17:34

#3

daffytag: cheese-it!; +104|7036

leetkyle wrote:
I have an X1900XT 512MB and it plays 2142 and BF2 all on high w/ full everything, and on HL2 vertical sync on etc. I'd recommend going for a cheaper card until April '07 when DX10 ATI Cards are out.

I wont be getting a dx10 ati straight away. Not if they are priced like the 8800s.

2007-01-27 11:24:04

#4

The#1Spot: Member; +105|7000|byah

i would go with nvidia for dx10 they are already lowering their prices with the 8800 series and the rest of the 8000 series line up are hard to beat prices.

2007-01-27 11:26:20

#5

daffytag: cheese-it!; +104|7036

The#1Spot wrote:
i would go with nvidia for dx10 they are already lowering their prices with the 8800 series and the rest of the 8000 series line up are hard to beat prices.

Dont be silly, anybody with brains know ati are better. Even if they are less common. But either way I want the post to stay focused on my original question. Not an ati vs nvidia battle.

2007-01-27 12:48:31

#6

Bell: Frosties > Cornflakes; +362|7010|UK

8600 Ultra is about the same price as these things and is dx10. But yeah no point in an ati vs nvidia discussion/bitch fight, do you mean a noticeable difference between those two cards? Yea, but probably not enough to justify £40. X1950 pro should do you fine till you get the dx10 card, whatever that may be .

Martyn

2007-01-27 13:32:07

#7

kylef: Gone; +1,352|6954|N. Ireland

ATI released benchmarks against the 8800 that torched every game except in BF2, with a 3FPS difference.

2007-01-27 21:51:56

#8

claor: Member; +39|6875|Australia

go for the x1950PRO... you dont want to spend to much on a card.......
i have the x1950pro.. it plays everything on ultra high 1440x900 4x aa around 80fps...

2007-01-28 02:06:47

#9

Stormscythe: Aiming for the head; +88|7010|EUtopia | Austria

leetkyle wrote:
ATI released benchmarks against the 8800 that torched every game except in BF2, with a 3FPS difference.

A reason to stay with nVidia! As long as they're cheaper.
_{lil' stormscythe is going for a mainstream card anyway and here nVidia has also been the king with the 6 and 7 series...}

Oh, and to the OP: Go with the Pro - will run everything you need (at your resolution) beautifully.

Last edited by Stormscythe (2007-01-28 02:08:00)

2007-01-28 02:30:48

#10

kylef: Gone; +1,352|6954|N. Ireland

Stormscythe wrote:
leetkyle wrote:
ATI released benchmarks against the 8800 that torched every game except in BF2, with a 3FPS difference.
A reason to stay with nVidia! As long as they're cheaper.
_{lil' stormscythe is going for a mainstream card anyway and here nVidia has also been the king with the 6 and 7 series...}

Oh, and to the OP: Go with the Pro - will run everything you need (at your resolution) beautifully.

Excuse me? Maybe I didn't make myself clear. ATI's card blew the 8800 away in EVERY game they tested except in Battlefield 2.

2007-01-28 03:01:25

#11

Stormscythe: Aiming for the head; +88|7010|EUtopia | Austria

leetkyle wrote:
Excuse me? Maybe I didn't make myself clear. ATI's card blew the 8800 away in EVERY game they tested except in Battlefield 2.

<points at the url>
forums.bf2s.com

And don't think nVidia wouldn't come up with something new at the CeBit - if they've got the same speed increase from a 8800GTX to a 8900GTX like they had from 7800GTX to 7900GTX, then ATI can hide in a deep deep hole again.

2007-01-28 04:07:08

#12

spray_and_pray: Member; +52|6952|Perth. Western Australia

Stormscythe wrote:
leetkyle wrote:
Excuse me? Maybe I didn't make myself clear. ATI's card blew the 8800 away in EVERY game they tested except in Battlefield 2.
<points at the url>
forums.bf2s.com

And don't think nVidia wouldn't come up with something new at the CeBit - if they've got the same speed increase from a 8800GTX to a 8900GTX like they had from 7800GTX to 7900GTX, then ATI can hide in a deep deep hole again.

So would anyone wishing to buy the Nvidia card.

2007-01-28 21:05:24

#13

GR34: Member; +215|7006|ALBERTA> CANADA

leetkyle wrote:
ATI released benchmarks against the 8800 that torched every game except in BF2, with a 3FPS difference.

20$ syas if the bf2 test was run on 1.03 the ATi car would own it

BF2S Forums Another ATi question

leetkyle wrote:

The#1Spot wrote:

leetkyle wrote:

Stormscythe wrote:

leetkyle wrote:

leetkyle wrote:

Stormscythe wrote:

leetkyle wrote:

leetkyle wrote:

Board footer