7950GT 512MB or X1900XT 256MB

[twjr]

I can get either for the same price where I'm from, which of the two is a better performing card?

 

[moonboy403]

x1900xt 256mb hands down

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: moonboy403
x1900xt 256mb hands down

 

[twjr]

Cheers i have seen some benches and from what i saw the x1900xt was beating the 7950gt in most of them. just wondering if the extra ram would make a difference for future games?

 

[Kromis]

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug

Originally posted by: moonboy403
x1900xt 256mb hands down

 

[Dainas]

Doubt it, unless you don't mind "writing" in a overclock on the 7950GT, the X1900XT 256mb will be the faster solution....Most likely in the forseeable future too since developers tend to prefer DX tricks more so than decent resolution textures as time passes.

 

[StrangerGuy]

X1900XT of course. The 7950GT has:

Large framerate swings compared to X1900XT
Greater performance hit with AA
Texture filtering issues in Quality mode AF, can be minimized by selecting HQ mode AF but incurs a slight performance hit
Noisy nvidia reference cooler.
No HQ AF support.
And the killer, no HDR+AA support.

 

[CaiNaM]

Originally posted by: StrangerGuy
X1900XT of course. The 7950GT has:

Large framerate swings compared to X1900XT
Greater performance hit with AA
Texture filtering issues in Quality mode AF, can be minimized by selecting HQ mode AF but incurs a slight performance hit
Noisy nvidia reference cooler.
No HQ AF support.
And the killer, no HDR+AA support.

i would generally agree, but one thing is that it's not like the XT's cooler is quiet by any stretch of the imagination... the GT's "noisy" ref cooler is still prolly a little quieter.

as for the 512mb question, for whatever reason the nv cards do not benefit from it as much as ati's. i doubt it would too much of a difference in upcoming games in the near future, and by the time it does there will be better options available anyway.

 

[BFG10K]

I'd personally go with the 7950 GT - better drivers, full screen super-sampling anti-aliasing, TrAA is vastly better than AAA, and a passively cooled version is available.

 

[josh6079]

...which of the two is a better performing card?

X1900XT 256MB.

 

[jiffylube1024]

Originally posted by: moonboy403
x1900xt 256mb hands down

 

[twjr]

Sweet so fairly unanimously the X1900 is the way to go then. Thanks for all the help.

 

[YoungGun21]

Originally posted by: twjr
Sweet so fairly unanimously the X1900 is the way to go then. Thanks for all the help.

Good luck finding one in stock!

 

[twjr]

I live in New Zealand they are in stock everywhere here. Around what price are they going for in the US though?

 

[noni]

Around $250

 

[Ibiza]

How many games support HDR+AA?

Thanks.

 

[yacoub]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
I'd personally go with the 7950 GT - better drivers, full screen super-sampling anti-aliasing, TrAA is vastly better than AAA, and a passively cooled version is available.

Not to mention twice the RAM count. 512MB is nice to have.

I'm sticking with my 7900GT 256MB for now but if I was trying to decide b/w X1900XT and 7950GT, I'd get the eVGA 7950GT KO.

 

[Yanagi]

Anybody have any benchmarks of a 1900XT VS NVIDIA 7950GT?

 

[lopri]

You should really get an X1900XT 512MB. Kill two birds with one stone.

 

[lopri]

On a side note, most of the games I played this year (F.E.A.R., BF2, Company of Heroes, Quack 4, etc.) were able to utilize 350+MB of frame buffer. (Open RivaTuner monitoring) Granted I play @1920x1200, but these cards are meant for high-res/AA anyway. Once I saw the ammount of memory these modern games could chew up, I wouldn't buy/recommend a 256MB for high-end setup.

 

[dug777]

Well, a quick look at staticice here in Aus shows the 512mb x1900xt is not that price competitive with the other two cards, but yeah the other two are about the same price, and as the rational majority in this thread have suggested, i concur on the x1900xt 256mb over the 7950GT 512mb...

As for a review with both, this should do ya

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2858

 

[dug777]

Well, a quick look at staticice here in Aus shows the 512mb x1900xt is not that price competitive with the other two cards, but yeah the other two are about the same price, and as the rational majority in this thread have suggested, i concur on the x1900xt 256mb over the 7950GT 512mb...

As for a review with both, this should do ya

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2858

 

[dug777]

Well, a quick look at staticice here in Aus shows the 512mb x1900xt is not that price competitive with the other two cards, but yeah the other two are about the same price, and as the rational majority in this thread have suggested, i concur on the x1900xt 256mb over the 7950GT 512mb...

As for a review with both, this should do ya

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2858

 

[BFG10K]

On a side note, most of the games I played this year (F.E.A.R., BF2, Company of Heroes, Quack 4, etc.) were able to utilize 350+MB of frame buffer

This is a good point. Fear really does love 512 MB cards.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

On a side note, most of the games I played this year (F.E.A.R., BF2, Company of Heroes, Quack 4, etc.) were able to utilize 350+MB of frame buffer

This is a good point. Fear really does love 512 MB cards.

not enough to save the 7950GT vs the x1900xt 256mb:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2858&p=8

and at q4 the xt kills the 7950...and in bf2 once you turn on AA the xt pulls away nicely...

I'd be happy to see more specific benchmarks tho