7800GT and really disappointed

[GOREGRINDER]

Originally posted by: lopri
X2 @2.8GHz, GTX 512 SLI

that's hot ,..im needing a new cpu,which x2 you sporting?

 

[Powermoloch]

Originally posted by: T101
Bought an Point of View 7800GT (400/1000 clocked) as well as Fear and Call of Duty 2. I am utterly dissappointed. In fear I have to run medium settings to get 48FPS average (35 minimum) and Call of Duty 2 runs around 40 FPS, dropping as low as 7-12 FPS when there is rain or snow. Both games I play in 1280x1024.
I really thought these cards was supposed to be powerful, but it looks like they are not. Setting games to medium detail is something I expect to have to do at the end of a cards life, not two months after they have got driver support....

Are there something wrong with my card, or is there something wrong with these games?

yo ought to be kiddin me.....I'm getting great FPS on fear @ med settings (no soft shadows i thank you ) 2xaa 1280x1024 ...... having 55 FPS on avg. Pretty sweet.

on my X850XT AGP stock
power of t3h sempron 3100+ ~!

 

[orangat]

Yeah the 7800 generation is (relatively) weak. It doesn't offer 2x performance like the 6800GT-vs-9800pro of the 6800 generation.

 

[TraumaRN]

Originally posted by: orangat
Yeah the 7800 generation is (relatively) weak. It doesn't offer 2x performance like the 6800GT-vs-9800pro of the 6800 generation.

Well considering the 7800 series didnt double the number of pipelines that would be expected....and that statement is kinda untrue and expecting too much...that being side the 7800 series definitely adds speed and playability on higher levels of res and AA/AF,

And last I checked my 7800GT overclocked kicks the living crap out of my old 6800GT @ Ultra speeds even if it 'only' adds 4 more pipes

 

[orangat]

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: orangat
Yeah the 7800 generation is (relatively) weak. It doesn't offer 2x performance like the 6800GT-vs-9800pro of the 6800 generation.

Well considering the 7800 series didnt double the number of pipelines that would be expected....and that statement is kinda untrue and expecting too much...that being side the 7800 series definitely adds speed and playability on higher levels of res and AA/AF,

And last I checked my 7800GT overclocked kicks the living crap out of my old 6800GT @ Ultra speeds even if it 'only' adds 4 more pipes

Eh? Since when did the consumer set caps on fillrates and pipelines? Its Nvidia/ATIs responsiblity to do what they have to. If they don't and performance suffers accordingly then its their own problem.

I'm just saying that the 7800GT does not offer 2x the performance of the 6800GT (like the 6800GT had over the 9800pro at normal _playable_ resolutions). So we can't expect the same phenomenal improvement like the OP stated.

 

[Woofmeister]

Originally posted by: orangat
Yeah the 7800 generation is (relatively) weak. It doesn't offer 2x performance like the 6800GT-vs-9800pro of the 6800 generation.

You're kidding right? A single 7800GT will beat two 6800GTs in SLI in a number of applications, particularly at higher resolutions. Look here.

My own personal experience bears this out as I went from two ASUS EN6800GTs in SLI to my current 7800GT. Particularly in Battlefield 2, the 7800 GT gives better performance.

 

[TraumaRN]

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: orangat
Yeah the 7800 generation is (relatively) weak. It doesn't offer 2x performance like the 6800GT-vs-9800pro of the 6800 generation.

Well considering the 7800 series didnt double the number of pipelines that would be expected....and that statement is kinda untrue and expecting too much...that being side the 7800 series definitely adds speed and playability on higher levels of res and AA/AF,

And last I checked my 7800GT overclocked kicks the living crap out of my old 6800GT @ Ultra speeds even if it 'only' adds 4 more pipes

Eh? Since when did the consumer set caps on fillrates and pipelines? Its Nvidia/ATIs responsiblity to do what they have to. If they don't and performance suffers accordingly then its their own problem.

I'm just saying that the 7800GT does not offer 2x the performance of the 6800GT (like the 6800GT had over the 9800pro at normal _playable_ resolutions). So we can't expect the same phenomenal improvement like the OP stated.

I suppose you'll also say you found the magic way to consistantly double performance with each new generation of graphics cards and you'll go sell that secret to nVidia and Ati so we can all reap the benefits.....:roll:

And about normal playable resolutions....that would be different for every single person! Try a 6800GT vs a 7800GT @ 1600x1200 w/ 4AA and 16AF....big big difference....

You cant expect them to double performance EVERY single time.....thats just not going to happen if it was we'd have 10Ghz CPUs by now....All I'm asking is for a dose of reality and before you say it, I understand at 1280x1024 there might not be a big difference until you turn on AA....and by the way have you heard of SSAA?? It's a wonderful thing my 7800 can do that my 6800 couldnt.

 

[orangat]

Originally posted by: Woofmeister

Originally posted by: orangat
Yeah the 7800 generation is (relatively) weak. It doesn't offer 2x performance like the 6800GT-vs-9800pro of the 6800 generation.

You're kidding right? A single 7800GT will beat two 6800GTs in SLI in a number of applications, particularly at higher resolutions. Look here.

My own personal experience bears this out as I went from two ASUS EN6800GTs in SLI to my current 7800GT. Particularly in Battlefield 2, the 7800 GT gives better performance.

I wasn't talking about SLI. I was referring to performance normal playable resolutions with a single card like most gamers have.
benchies

 

[Cookie Monster]

A 7800GTX 512mb will eat alive a 6800 ultra SLi and spit it back out, and then eat it up again. The 7800GTX 512mb is about 2~3 (the ultra cant handle 20x15 resolution) times faster than a 6800 ultra in 16x12/20x15 resolution with AA/AF turned on.

 

[TraumaRN]

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: Woofmeister

Originally posted by: orangat
Yeah the 7800 generation is (relatively) weak. It doesn't offer 2x performance like the 6800GT-vs-9800pro of the 6800 generation.

You're kidding right? A single 7800GT will beat two 6800GTs in SLI in a number of applications, particularly at higher resolutions. Look here.

My own personal experience bears this out as I went from two ASUS EN6800GTs in SLI to my current 7800GT. Particularly in Battlefield 2, the 7800 GT gives better performance.

I wasn't talking about SLI. I was referring to performance normal playable resolutions with a single card like most gamers have.
benchies

Here are the driver versions we used:

* NVIDIA ForceWare 77.77

Slightly out of date on the drivers there...either way the 7800GT are more efficient, quieter, MUCH cooler, and a better bargain....overclocked they are nearly as fast a GTX 256MB and especially with the new drivers they really begin to run rings around the old 6800 series cards

 

[GOREGRINDER]

I'm just saying that the 7800GT does not offer 2x the performance of the 6800GT (like the 6800GT had over the 9800pro at normal _playable_ resolutions). So we can't expect the same phenomenal improvement like the OP stated.

and whats a normal resolution to you?

 

[orangat]

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: orangat
Yeah the 7800 generation is (relatively) weak. It doesn't offer 2x performance like the 6800GT-vs-9800pro of the 6800 generation.

Well considering the 7800 series didnt double the number of pipelines that would be expected....and that statement is kinda untrue and expecting too much...that being side the 7800 series definitely adds speed and playability on higher levels of res and AA/AF,

And last I checked my 7800GT overclocked kicks the living crap out of my old 6800GT @ Ultra speeds even if it 'only' adds 4 more pipes

Eh? Since when did the consumer set caps on fillrates and pipelines? Its Nvidia/ATIs responsiblity to do what they have to. If they don't and performance suffers accordingly then its their own problem.

I'm just saying that the 7800GT does not offer 2x the performance of the 6800GT (like the 6800GT had over the 9800pro at normal _playable_ resolutions). So we can't expect the same phenomenal improvement like the OP stated.

I suppose you'll also say you found the magic way to consistantly double performance with each new generation of graphics cards and you'll go sell that secret to nVidia and Ati so we can all reap the benefits.....:roll:

And about normal playable resolutions....that would be different for every single person! Try a 6800GT vs a 7800GT @ 1600x1200 w/ 4AA and 16AF....big big difference....

You cant expect them to double performance EVERY single time.....thats just not going to happen if it was we'd have 10Ghz CPUs by now....All I'm asking is for a dose of reality and before you say it, I understand at 1280x1024 there might not be a big difference until you turn on AA....and by the way have you heard of SSAA?? It's a wonderful thing my 7800 can do that my 6800 couldnt.

Look. I wasn't going to debate about whether Nvidia/ATI is at fault.
I was just saying that the 7800 generation wasn't the phenomenal leap the 6800 was. Just leave it at that.

If you want to play at 1600x1200 fine. FEAR would still pwn a single 7800GTX with AA/AF at that resolution.

 

[lopri]

Originally posted by: GOREGRINDER

Originally posted by: lopri
X2 @2.8GHz, GTX 512 SLI

that's hot ,..im needing a new cpu,which x2 you sporting?

4800+

Edit: If I were to buy a new chip right now I'd go with Opteron 175.

 

[TraumaRN]

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: orangat
Yeah the 7800 generation is (relatively) weak. It doesn't offer 2x performance like the 6800GT-vs-9800pro of the 6800 generation.

Well considering the 7800 series didnt double the number of pipelines that would be expected....and that statement is kinda untrue and expecting too much...that being side the 7800 series definitely adds speed and playability on higher levels of res and AA/AF,

And last I checked my 7800GT overclocked kicks the living crap out of my old 6800GT @ Ultra speeds even if it 'only' adds 4 more pipes

Eh? Since when did the consumer set caps on fillrates and pipelines? Its Nvidia/ATIs responsiblity to do what they have to. If they don't and performance suffers accordingly then its their own problem.

I'm just saying that the 7800GT does not offer 2x the performance of the 6800GT (like the 6800GT had over the 9800pro at normal _playable_ resolutions). So we can't expect the same phenomenal improvement like the OP stated.

I suppose you'll also say you found the magic way to consistantly double performance with each new generation of graphics cards and you'll go sell that secret to nVidia and Ati so we can all reap the benefits.....:roll:

And about normal playable resolutions....that would be different for every single person! Try a 6800GT vs a 7800GT @ 1600x1200 w/ 4AA and 16AF....big big difference....

You cant expect them to double performance EVERY single time.....thats just not going to happen if it was we'd have 10Ghz CPUs by now....All I'm asking is for a dose of reality and before you say it, I understand at 1280x1024 there might not be a big difference until you turn on AA....and by the way have you heard of SSAA?? It's a wonderful thing my 7800 can do that my 6800 couldnt.

Look. I wasn't going to debate about whether Nvidia/ATI is at fault.
I was just saying that the 7800 generation wasn't the phenomenal leap the 6800 was. Just leave it at that.

If you want to play at 1600x1200 fine. FEAR would still pwn a single 7800GTX with AA/AF at that resolution.

Yea FEAR pwns about any card on the market right now save a GTX512 but I insist that's a crappy game engine or something...I mean I know about pushing the envelope but that engine is to vid cards like BF2's engine is to 1GB ram....pwnage

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: orangat
Yeah the 7800 generation is (relatively) weak. It doesn't offer 2x performance like the 6800GT-vs-9800pro of the 6800 generation.

Well considering the 7800 series didnt double the number of pipelines that would be expected....and that statement is kinda untrue and expecting too much...that being side the 7800 series definitely adds speed and playability on higher levels of res and AA/AF,

And last I checked my 7800GT overclocked kicks the living crap out of my old 6800GT @ Ultra speeds even if it 'only' adds 4 more pipes

Eh? Since when did the consumer set caps on fillrates and pipelines? Its Nvidia/ATIs responsiblity to do what they have to. If they don't and performance suffers accordingly then its their own problem.

I'm just saying that the 7800GT does not offer 2x the performance of the 6800GT (like the 6800GT had over the 9800pro at normal _playable_ resolutions). So we can't expect the same phenomenal improvement like the OP stated.

I suppose you'll also say you found the magic way to consistantly double performance with each new generation of graphics cards and you'll go sell that secret to nVidia and Ati so we can all reap the benefits.....:roll:

And about normal playable resolutions....that would be different for every single person! Try a 6800GT vs a 7800GT @ 1600x1200 w/ 4AA and 16AF....big big difference....

You cant expect them to double performance EVERY single time.....thats just not going to happen if it was we'd have 10Ghz CPUs by now....All I'm asking is for a dose of reality and before you say it, I understand at 1280x1024 there might not be a big difference until you turn on AA....and by the way have you heard of SSAA?? It's a wonderful thing my 7800 can do that my 6800 couldnt.

Look. I wasn't going to debate about whether Nvidia/ATI is at fault.
I was just saying that the 7800 generation wasn't the phenomenal leap the 6800 was. Just leave it at that.

If you want to play at 1600x1200 fine. FEAR would still pwn a single 7800GTX with AA/AF at that resolution.

Yea FEAR pwns about any card on the market right now save a GTX512 but I insist that's a crappy game engine or something...I mean I know about pushing the envelope but that engine is to vid cards like BF2's engine is to 1GB ram....pwnage

The 7800GTX gets pwned, but a 6800ultra or a X850XT gets killed at those settings.

 

[lopri]

Originally posted by: DeathBUA
Yea FEAR pwns about any card on the market right now save a GTX512 but I insist that's a crappy game engine or something...I mean I know about pushing the envelope but that engine is to vid cards like BF2's engine is to 1GB ram....pwnage

Agreed. The better our hardware becomes, the lazier/incompetent the programmers are.. so it seems. Those games don't even give the polished feel like Blizzard games. What can we do from consumers' perspective? Developers are relying on super fast video cards and ironically that's one of the better marketing ways. Think about how much hype F.E.A.R. generated..

 

[TraumaRN]

Originally posted by: lopri

Originally posted by: DeathBUA
Yea FEAR pwns about any card on the market right now save a GTX512 but I insist that's a crappy game engine or something...I mean I know about pushing the envelope but that engine is to vid cards like BF2's engine is to 1GB ram....pwnage

Agreed. The better our hardware becomes, the lazier/incompetent the programmers are.. so it seems. Those games don't even give the polished feel like Blizzard games. What can we do from consumers' perspective? Developers are relying on super fast video cards and ironically that's one of the better marketing ways. Think about how much hype F.E.A.R. generated..

I actually refuse to get FEAR...it looks nothing new or impressive to me....my best friend was going to buy it for me for X-mas I told him no to get me Civ 4 or Warhammer 40K Winter Assault....sure they might not push my 7800GT but at least they are well polished games in my mind....

Arguably the FEAR engine doesnt look that much better than the Source engine or the Crytek engine(far cry) but thats a matter of opinion and a different topic

 

[AznAnarchy99]

Originally posted by: Exsomnis
Besides the fact that you're playing the games with the most bloated hardware requirements of all time, welcome to PC gaming in the 21st Century.

so true. developers work so hard on making everything look pretty and get out faster than actually taking time to make it run good.

Thats why i like valve. They dont care about how much people complain about delays. "It will be out when its ready"

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: AznAnarchy99

Originally posted by: Exsomnis
Besides the fact that you're playing the games with the most bloated hardware requirements of all time, welcome to PC gaming in the 21st Century.

so true. developers work so hard on making everything look pretty and get out faster than actually taking time to make it run good.

Thats why i like valve. They dont care about how much people complain about delays. "It will be out when its ready"

Isnt that what Id says? Atleast Doom3 runs and looks good(all things considered) on all hardware. Even vodoo2s. Just a shame they took many things out inorder for doom3 to run that much better on low end cards.

 

[blckgrffn]

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: orangat

Originally posted by: DeathBUA

Originally posted by: orangat
Yeah the 7800 generation is (relatively) weak. It doesn't offer 2x performance like the 6800GT-vs-9800pro of the 6800 generation.

Well considering the 7800 series didnt double the number of pipelines that would be expected....and that statement is kinda untrue and expecting too much...that being side the 7800 series definitely adds speed and playability on higher levels of res and AA/AF,

And last I checked my 7800GT overclocked kicks the living crap out of my old 6800GT @ Ultra speeds even if it 'only' adds 4 more pipes

Eh? Since when did the consumer set caps on fillrates and pipelines? Its Nvidia/ATIs responsiblity to do what they have to. If they don't and performance suffers accordingly then its their own problem.

I'm just saying that the 7800GT does not offer 2x the performance of the 6800GT (like the 6800GT had over the 9800pro at normal _playable_ resolutions). So we can't expect the same phenomenal improvement like the OP stated.

I suppose you'll also say you found the magic way to consistantly double performance with each new generation of graphics cards and you'll go sell that secret to nVidia and Ati so we can all reap the benefits.....:roll:

And about normal playable resolutions....that would be different for every single person! Try a 6800GT vs a 7800GT @ 1600x1200 w/ 4AA and 16AF....big big difference....

You cant expect them to double performance EVERY single time.....thats just not going to happen if it was we'd have 10Ghz CPUs by now....All I'm asking is for a dose of reality and before you say it, I understand at 1280x1024 there might not be a big difference until you turn on AA....and by the way have you heard of SSAA?? It's a wonderful thing my 7800 can do that my 6800 couldnt.

Look. I wasn't going to debate about whether Nvidia/ATI is at fault.
I was just saying that the 7800 generation wasn't the phenomenal leap the 6800 was. Just leave it at that.

If you want to play at 1600x1200 fine. FEAR would still pwn a single 7800GTX with AA/AF at that resolution.

You must have missed my post FEAR can be fine at those settings, if you play with the config long enough.

Nat

 

[GOREGRINDER]

Thats why i like valve. They dont care about how much people complain about delays. "It will be out when its ready"

Isnt that what Id says? Atleast Doom3 runs and looks good(all things considered) on all hardware. Even vodoo2s. Just a shame they took many things out inorder for doom3 to run that much better on low end cards.[/quote]

yep thats always been id's policy,..however valve picked it up from them after using the Quake1 engine for half life1(half lfie2 looks gorgeous but is overated imo,....game feels like your rolling forward on a skateboard when you walk forward)

 

[T101]

I agree on that Half-life looks about equally good as Fear at maximum settings. Fear has a slight advantage, but considering its requirements, it is not worth it. I believe we have reached the point where we will see increasingly higher hardware requirements yeilding less and less improvements in graphics. It will only end when it reaches such a point that gamers do not buy new graphics cards just to play the latest games.
But then they of course can start developing physics processing units etc....

First, I do not mean this as a flame bait, so do not answer like it is one. Second I used both ATI and nVidia in the past, and will use either in the future as well (depending on the best price/performance ratio at the point when I upgrade). That said, I went from an x800XL to a 7800GT, and all I can say is that the games I play on the 7800GT feels more responsive even if the framerate is only about 33% (a very rough estimate) in most cases. The point I have is that even small changes can greatly affect the gameplay, even if the card is not twice as powerful.

 

[Acanthus]

Again, the FEAR engine is more complex than any other engine on the market. Hence its low performance. Very heavy physics, lighting and shadows, and Parralax mapping everywhere, on top of very good AI, complex scenes, and high rez textures, bring the experience up that little notch that puts the game above others.

You can argue until youre blue in the face about inefficiency, but when Unreal Engine 3 hits and is proclaimed "the best engine of all time" by the unreal fanbois, lets see how it performs on 6800s and X800s. Its not sloppy code, its progress.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

hang on a sec

what are u using to see your FPS? FRAPS? if so FRAPS has or did have a couple of problems in games. i remember using FRAPS and splintercell...the frame rate was around 20fps....soon as i quit fraps the game was soo much smoother

 

[T101]

CoD2 has an inbuilt function to show the FPS, available from the console. Fear has its own benchmark built in.