7900gt or x1800xt

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: beggerking


7900 extreme for $254

1900 is not better bang for buck.

The 7900GT has "1-2 weeks shipping", which usually is more. And its not $254. Its $254 + tax, and maybe shipping? Same for the X1900XT, its $342 plus those, however it has 24 hours shipping listed. Is this deal even still going, the FW post is well over a week old.

Good try though.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: beggerking


7900 extreme for $254

1900 is not better bang for buck.

The 7900GT has "1-2 weeks shipping", which usually is more. And its not $254. Its $254 + tax, and maybe shipping? Same for the X1900XT, its $342 plus those, however it has 24 hours shipping listed. Is this deal even still going, the FW post is well over a week old.

Good try though.

dell always has free shipping on accessories.
well, you can't get 1900xt for $380 now either.

Good try though.

 

[Ackmed]

I didnt say you could get the XT now. So that line is not going to work with me.

However, you claimed that you could get the GT for $254, which is far from the truth. You failed, miserably, as usual.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
I didnt say you could get the XT now. So that line is not going to work with me.

However, you claimed that you could get the GT for $254, which is far from the truth. You failed, miserably, as usual.

Ackmed:
Is this deal even still going, the FW post is well over a week old.

Neither is the $380 1900xt deal . it cost a lot more now.

b/w I did not "claim" the deal is still on, stop putting words into my mouth. I claimed "1900 is not better bang for buck"

Again, you failed miserably as usual. Please, learn to read, its not that hard.... try taking a reading comprehension class.

the thread title clearly said no fan boyz plz... maybe you shouldn't be in here.

 

[josh6079]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: Ackmed
I didnt say you could get the XT now. So that line is not going to work with me.

However, you claimed that you could get the GT for $254, which is far from the truth. You failed, miserably, as usual.

Ackmed:
Is this deal even still going, the FW post is well over a week old.

Neither is the $380 1900xt deal . it cost a lot more now.

b/w I did not "claim" the deal is still on, stop putting words into my mouth. I claimed "1900 is not better bang for buck"

Again, you failed miserably as usual. Please, learn to read, its not that hard.... try taking a reading comprehension class.

the thread title clearly said no fan boyz plz... maybe you shouldn't be in here.

Umm.....maybe you should look at the thread title then. It says "7900GT or X1800XT" No one should even be talking about the 7900GT vs. the X1900XT in here.....it's already being discussed in ST's thread, and on lots of other web pages. Besides, if you mean bang for the buck as something that can't do SM3 right, or has a mundane and bland AF, then you're right, the 7900GT is better buy.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: josh6079

Umm.....maybe you should look at the thread title then. It says "7900GT or X1800XT" No one should even be talking about the 7900GT vs. the X1900XT in here.....it's already being discussed in ST's thread, and on lots of other web pages. Besides, if you mean bang for the buck as something that can't do SM3 right, or has a mundane and bland AF, then you're right, the 7900GT is better buy.

my reply was referring to akugami's $380 x1900xt.. I pointed out that $380 not the market price. 7900 / 1800 are both better bang for buck.

NV doesn't do SM3 right? how?..

 

[josh6079]

HDR + AA= SM3 done right.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: josh6079
HDR + AA= SM3 done right.

NO. Not according to the specification.

its nice to have that ability, but its not "required" at all.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: josh6079
HDR + AA= SM3 done right.

NO. Not according to the specification.

its nice to have that ability, but its not "required" at all.

the ability to do AA at all is not defined in the sm3 spec (tho iirc it does require built in instructions allowing for oversampling of shaders to eliminate artifacts). as the name suggests, "shader model" has to do with shaders (length, precision, etc.).

still, adding those things while removing the ability to support other features can certainly be construed as "not doing it right"...

 

[beggerking]

removing other feature not related to Shader model 3.0 spec ....
this is a moot point.. there is nothing wrong with NV implementation of SM3.0

ATI's additional feature(HDR+AA) does compliment SM3.0 nicely.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: beggerking
removing other feature not related to Shader model 3.0 spec ....
this is a moot point.. there is nothing wrong with NV implementation of SM3.0

ATI's additional feature(HDR+AA) does compliment SM3.0 nicely.

not the point at all.

if nvidia implemented dx10/sm4 features in g80 (or ati w/ r600 - the "who" isn't the issue), but had to remove the ability to filter textures or apply anti-aliasing, would it be "sm4 done right"? i hardly think so.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: beggerking
removing other feature not related to Shader model 3.0 spec ....
this is a moot point.. there is nothing wrong with NV implementation of SM3.0

ATI's additional feature(HDR+AA) does compliment SM3.0 nicely.

not the point at all.

if nvidia implemented dx10/sm4 features in g80 (or ati w/ r600 - the "who" isn't the issue), but had to remove the ability to filter textures or apply anti-aliasing, would it be "sm4 done right"? i hardly think so.

Shall we discuss ATI's lack of VTF?

 

[josh6079]

Originally posted by: beggerking
removing other feature not related to Shader model 3.0 spec ....
this is a moot point.. there is nothing wrong with NV implementation of SM3.0

ATI's additional feature(HDR+AA) does compliment SM3.0 nicely.

1) It's mute point, signifying that your words have no bearing and are just as good as silence (which his weren't).

2) You obviously don't own an ATI card. I've owned both the latest competitive side of Nvidia (7800GT SLI volt-moded to 535/1200) and ATI (X1900XTX currently at 672/790 for the moment). Once I saw the better IQ, which I think is more important for a graphics card, I was a little upset in how Nvidia has pretty good drivers, great companies like EVGA, and a more mature dual GPU innovation because they crapped out on the thing that matters the most--how the game looks. Don't get me wrong, if you've had an Nvida card and never experienced an X1800XT or X1900XTX then you might think it looks just fine. But I wasn't happy to know that my SLI rig lost in every way to a stock X1900XTX. I was skeptical when I first bought it, and didn't think I would see much of a differance. I was way wrong. Even if you think that HDR + AA is a feature instead of better implementation of SM3, that still doesn't change the fact that ATI also spent more research into developing a better AF. Put those two things together and you have more than something that "compliments SM3.0 nicely", you have the true version of SM3, not a watered down one that was rushed so that Nvidia could get sales.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: Wreckage

Shall we discuss ATI's lack of VTF?

certainly

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: josh6079

Originally posted by: beggerking
removing other feature not related to Shader model 3.0 spec ....
this is a moot point.. there is nothing wrong with NV implementation of SM3.0

ATI's additional feature(HDR+AA) does compliment SM3.0 nicely.

1) It's mute point, signifying that your words have no bearing and are just as good as silence (which his weren't).

2) You obviously don't own an ATI card. I've owned both the latest competitive side of Nvidia (7800GT SLI volt-moded to 535/1200) and ATI (X1900XTX currently at 672/790 for the moment). Once I saw the better IQ, which I think is more important for a graphics card, I was a little upset in how Nvidia has pretty good drivers, great companies like EVGA, and a more mature dual GPU innovation because they crapped out on the thing that matters the most--how the game looks. Don't get me wrong, if you've had an Nvida card and never experienced an X1800XT or X1900XTX then you might think it looks just fine. But I wasn't happy to know that my SLI rig lost in every way to a stock X1900XTX. I was skeptical when I first bought it, and didn't think I would see much of a differance. I was way wrong. Even if you think that HDR + AA is a feature instead of better implementation of SM3, that still doesn't change the fact that ATI also spent more research into developing a better AF. Put those two things together and you have more than something that "compliments SM3.0 nicely", you have the true version of SM3, not a watered down one that was rushed so that Nvidia could get sales.

1. so...what is your pt <----do I have to spell out "point" for you to understand?
2. I am using 9600xt . Your bias is obviously gotten over your head that you have to accuse anyone who don't agree with you as being on "the other side".

so "compliment SM3.0 nicely" is not a good enough compliment for ATI? do you expect everyone bow down and praise ATI ? talk about fanboism..

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: beggerking
removing other feature not related to Shader model 3.0 spec ....
this is a moot point.. there is nothing wrong with NV implementation of SM3.0

ATI's additional feature(HDR+AA) does compliment SM3.0 nicely.

not the point at all.

if nvidia implemented dx10/sm4 features in g80 (or ati w/ r600 - the "who" isn't the issue), but had to remove the ability to filter textures or apply anti-aliasing, would it be "sm4 done right"? i hardly think so.

Vertex Texture Fetch = missing in ATI
according to you, that would be "sm3 not done right"
:frown:

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

Originally posted by: beggerking
removing other feature not related to Shader model 3.0 spec ....
this is a moot point.. there is nothing wrong with NV implementation of SM3.0

ATI's additional feature(HDR+AA) does compliment SM3.0 nicely.

not the point at all.

if nvidia implemented dx10/sm4 features in g80 (or ati w/ r600 - the "who" isn't the issue), but had to remove the ability to filter textures or apply anti-aliasing, would it be "sm4 done right"? i hardly think so.

Vertex Texture Fetch = missing in ATI
according to you, that would be "sm3 not done right"
:frown:

it's missing in r520; r580 (current generation) is capable

afaik current gen nv products don't support hdr & concurrent aa

i would however welcome any examples of how vtf missing from r520 is detrimental to consumers - a relevant situation those of us with r520 might encounter where we might say, "damn, why doesn't this card support vertex fetch!?!". i've yet to find such a circumstance, but perhaps you could enlighten me?

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM
it's missing in r520; r580 (current generation) is capable

afaik current gen nv products don't support hdr & concurrent aa

i would however welcome any examples of how vtf missing from r520 is detrimental to consumers - a relevant situation those of us with r520 might encounter where we might say, "damn, why doesn't this card support vertex fetch!?!". i've yet to find such a circumstance, but perhaps you could enlighten me?

You are sounding more and more like the ATI rep who talked about how SM3 is unimportant in Nvidia before ATI actually implemented it in the x1000 series.

article on 3dmark test
"RADON X1800 and X1900 are not quite SM3 cards according to this test. What's the matter? The reason may be in the lack of vertex texture fetch, which is necessary for SM3 (from the point of view of all manufacturers but ATI). Or there may be a different reason (vertex shader compilation error, no necessary support for branching in vertex shaders from ATI, no pixel texture fetch, or others). It's hard to tell. But that's certainly alarming. "

I believe ATI has a software patch, but its very slow.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: beggerking
You are sounding more and more like the ATI rep who talked about how SM3 is unimportant in Nvidia before ATI actually implemented it in the x1000 series.

that's irrelevant and nothing more than you trying to toss in a smokescreen to deflect the actual issue.

also, i was one of the first on these forums to have both x800 and 6800 (quite a few discussions regarding those products on this forum), and kept the 6800 due to comparable performance and additional features.

preferring the card with the most features w/o giving up performance in this generation is not different than what swayed me to nvidia last generation.

Originally posted by: beggerking
article on 3dmark test
"RADON X1800 and X1900 are not quite SM3 cards according to this test. What's the matter? The reason may be in the lack of vertex texture fetch, which is necessary for SM3 (from the point of view of all manufacturers but ATI). Or there may be a different reason (vertex shader compilation error, no necessary support for branching in vertex shaders from ATI, no pixel texture fetch, or others). It's hard to tell. But that's certainly alarming. "
I believe ATI has a software patch, but its very slow.

"The reason may be...", "Or there may be..", and "It's hard to tell.." are hardly definitive points.

also, i should correct my earlier statement a bit. r580 did not add "vertex texture fetch", but rather something they call "Fetch4" (i believe this is what you were referring to, however it is supported in hardware instructions, not software as you stated), which allows the gpu to access four different values of adjacent texture addresses if only the value of a single parameter is needed (as is the case in most soft shadow rendering techniques).

this differs slightly from a standard texture fetch which still grabs four components, but the components correspond to the rgb and alpha values of a single address.

either way, it's largely irrelevant as there haven't been any developers out there willing to give either a try (the single exception being pacific fighters).

this is why i asked you to let us know if we're actually missing something - which since you have failed to find any examples of how we're suffering due to the lack of it, means we are not, and that the argument your are trying to make is absolutely worthless.

people benefit from not having to give up AA if they want HDR effects. no one cares whether their hardware supports "vertex texture fetch" or not, except perhaps as ammunition for arguing a worthless point.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: CaiNaM

still, adding those things while removing the ability to support other features can certainly be construed as "not doing it right"...

ok.. lets backup..

thats the whole point of this discussion. Not whether AA+HDR is more/less usefull than vtf etc etc.

we were discussing whether NV "did SM3 right"
and I just proved to you that ATI didn't do SM3 right either.

so if you gonna comment on NV didn't do SM3 correctly, then you should comment on both ATI and NV don't do it correctly. Else, you can comment on both do SM3 correctly.

unless you "Fanvor" one over the other....

 

[thilanliyan]

Originally posted by: beggerking
"Fanvor"

Oh my god that's so clever.:roll:

But seriously, ATI and NV both didn't do it right...BUT...I would rather have the HDR+AA rather than the VTF since there aren't really any well documented cases of the lack of VTF being a huge drawback to ATI cards.

When it came time to upgrade, I chose ATI this time around since it had the features I wanted and the X1800XL cards were usually cheaper than the 7800GT cards.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: beggerking
Neither is the $380 1900xt deal . it cost a lot more now.

b/w I did not "claim" the deal is still on, stop putting words into my mouth. I claimed "1900 is not better bang for buck"

Again, you failed miserably as usual. Please, learn to read, its not that hard.... try taking a reading comprehension class.

the thread title clearly said no fan boyz plz... maybe you shouldn't be in here.

I didnt imply the X1900 deal was, as you did for the GT. Here is your reply to someone about pricing;

Originally posted by: beggerking

7900 extreme for $254

1900 is not better bang for buck.

As you can see, you sure implied that the GT was still had for $254. Yet you didnt even mention the tax cost, imagine that. Anything to help you agenda. You've failed yet again in this thread, why even come back here.

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: josh6079
HDR + AA= SM3 done right.

NO. Not according to the specification.

ATi is 100% in DX9 spec. Dont try to spread FUD again. Until you can proce that VTF has a negative impact on gaming, ATi has every right to say SM3 done right. They can do things NV cannot, that do impact IQ, in a positive way. Not to mention faster generally.

 

[josh6079]

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: josh6079

Originally posted by: beggerking
removing other feature not related to Shader model 3.0 spec ....
this is a moot point.. there is nothing wrong with NV implementation of SM3.0

ATI's additional feature(HDR+AA) does compliment SM3.0 nicely.

1) It's mute point, signifying that your words have no bearing and are just as good as silence (which his weren't).

2) You obviously don't own an ATI card. I've owned both the latest competitive side of Nvidia (7800GT SLI volt-moded to 535/1200) and ATI (X1900XTX currently at 672/790 for the moment). Once I saw the better IQ, which I think is more important for a graphics card, I was a little upset in how Nvidia has pretty good drivers, great companies like EVGA, and a more mature dual GPU innovation because they crapped out on the thing that matters the most--how the game looks. Don't get me wrong, if you've had an Nvida card and never experienced an X1800XT or X1900XTX then you might think it looks just fine. But I wasn't happy to know that my SLI rig lost in every way to a stock X1900XTX. I was skeptical when I first bought it, and didn't think I would see much of a differance. I was way wrong. Even if you think that HDR + AA is a feature instead of better implementation of SM3, that still doesn't change the fact that ATI also spent more research into developing a better AF. Put those two things together and you have more than something that "compliments SM3.0 nicely", you have the true version of SM3, not a watered down one that was rushed so that Nvidia could get sales.

1. so...what is your pt <----do I have to spell out "point" for you to understand?
2. I am using 9600xt . Your bias is obviously gotten over your head that you have to accuse anyone who don't agree with you as being on "the other side".

so "compliment SM3.0 nicely" is not a good enough compliment for ATI? do you expect everyone bow down and praise ATI ? talk about fanboism..

Oh my God, so you do have an ATI card!! I'm so thrilled, I'll just stop arguing with you just because you own one too!!

Not so much. Dude, your card probably cant even run BF2 that well with good AA/AF settings, why are you going on and on about features you've never even seen or played with. If your experience with these features only extend as far as screen shots and other's opinions, then all you are really doing here is being a troll. I don't think those who don't agree with me are on "the other side" (when did Nvidia become "the other side"? Its not exactly a secret when you say it. Just say Nvidia), I just think that those who can't see ATI's implementation of SM3 as the right way are either A) unable to run HDR + AA or B) absolutely huge fans of Pacific Fighters and the one feature in it known as vtf. I completely agree with CaiNaM here as such a large capability like HDR + AA overrules VTF.

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: beggerking
Neither is the $380 1900xt deal . it cost a lot more now.

b/w I did not "claim" the deal is still on, stop putting words into my mouth. I claimed "1900 is not better bang for buck"

Again, you failed miserably as usual. Please, learn to read, its not that hard.... try taking a reading comprehension class.

the thread title clearly said no fan boyz plz... maybe you shouldn't be in here.

I didnt imply the X1900 deal was, as you did for the GT. Here is your reply to someone about pricing;

Originally posted by: beggerking

7900 extreme for $254

1900 is not better bang for buck.

As you can see, you sure implied that the GT was still had for $254. Yet you didnt even mention the tax cost, imagine that. Anything to help you agenda. You've failed yet again in this thread, why even come back here.

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: josh6079
HDR + AA= SM3 done right.

NO. Not according to the specification.

ATi is 100% in DX9 spec. Dont try to spread FUD again. Until you can proce that VTF has a negative impact on gaming, ATi has every right to say SM3 done right. They can do things NV cannot, that do impact IQ, in a positive way. Not to mention faster generally.

1. If you actually click on the link, you'll notice its a fw deal thread for both x1900xt and 7900. The link is to show that when x1900xt was sold for $380, 7900gt was sold for $255, therefore, x1900xt isn't a better bang for the buck.

2. God! do you even read before you post your usual fanatic FUD/troll?? or are you specializing in putting words into other people's mouth?

its a reply to josh6079 who claimed 7900's SM3 isn't done correctly.

Originally posted by: josh6079

Umm.....maybe you should look at the thread title then. It says "7900GT or X1800XT" No one should even be talking about the 7900GT vs. the X1900XT in here.....it's already being discussed in ST's thread, and on lots of other web pages. Besides, if you mean bang for the buck as something that can't do SM3 right, or has a mundane and bland AF, then you're right, the 7900GT is better buy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[beggerking]

Originally posted by: josh6079

Originally posted by: beggerking

Originally posted by: josh6079

Originally posted by: beggerking
removing other feature not related to Shader model 3.0 spec ....
this is a moot point.. there is nothing wrong with NV implementation of SM3.0

ATI's additional feature(HDR+AA) does compliment SM3.0 nicely.

1) It's mute point, signifying that your words have no bearing and are just as good as silence (which his weren't).

2) You obviously don't own an ATI card. I've owned both the latest competitive side of Nvidia (7800GT SLI volt-moded to 535/1200) and ATI (X1900XTX currently at 672/790 for the moment). Once I saw the better IQ, which I think is more important for a graphics card, I was a little upset in how Nvidia has pretty good drivers, great companies like EVGA, and a more mature dual GPU innovation because they crapped out on the thing that matters the most--how the game looks. Don't get me wrong, if you've had an Nvida card and never experienced an X1800XT or X1900XTX then you might think it looks just fine. But I wasn't happy to know that my SLI rig lost in every way to a stock X1900XTX. I was skeptical when I first bought it, and didn't think I would see much of a differance. I was way wrong. Even if you think that HDR + AA is a feature instead of better implementation of SM3, that still doesn't change the fact that ATI also spent more research into developing a better AF. Put those two things together and you have more than something that "compliments SM3.0 nicely", you have the true version of SM3, not a watered down one that was rushed so that Nvidia could get sales.

1. so...what is your pt <----do I have to spell out "point" for you to understand?
2. I am using 9600xt . Your bias is obviously gotten over your head that you have to accuse anyone who don't agree with you as being on "the other side".

so "compliment SM3.0 nicely" is not a good enough compliment for ATI? do you expect everyone bow down and praise ATI ? talk about fanboism..

Oh my God, so you do have an ATI card!! I'm so thrilled, I'll just stop arguing with you just because you own one too!!

Not so much. Dude, your card probably cant even run BF2 that well with good AA/AF settings, why are you going on and on about features you've never even seen or played with. If your experience with these features only extend as far as screen shots and other's opinions, then all you are really doing here is being a troll. I don't think those who don't agree with me are on "the other side" (when did Nvidia become "the other side"? Its not exactly a secret when you say it. Just say Nvidia), I just think that those who can't see ATI's implementation of SM3 as the right way are either A) unable to run HDR + AA or B) absolutely huge fans of Pacific Fighters and the one feature in it known as vtf. I completely agree with CaiNaM here as such a large capability like HDR + AA overrules VTF.

Typical FanATIc, resort to personal attack when you got nothing to say. I have friends who has the rig so I've seen them, so don't give me bs about what I've seen or not!

Josh6079:

I just think that those who can't see ATI's implementation of SM3 as the right way

umm.....you think? and the same people who "think" like you argued that SM3 wasn't needed in the x800 era.