ATI x800 XT vs Nvidia 6800 Ultra Poll

[Enoch2001]

Originally posted by: Shamrock
LOL, I wished it were that way, but the forums are littered with ATI fanboys, yes, I mean littered...as about 5 ATI guys came on the server and spouted nonsense, and was banned, even threatened violence :\

As for MikeC's credibility, he tells like it is, whether it favors ATI or NV, he doesn't let it go unnoticed. SO, NVNews is not biased in the forums, all they do is tell news. It USED to be NV news only, but it has grown so popular it is now news about everything.

You're coming off like an nVidia fonbois.. anyway, check my point with OCP's review.

Cheers,

EnochLight

 

[ChkSix]

I really wouldn't consider OCP's review that valuable. However, you might want to take a look at Anandtechs for better results, as well as Xbit and Hardware Analysis. Arguably, HardOCP has been known to be a very biased site. Not only are their results very odd, but very different than many other respectable sites.

You shouldn't quote one site and ignore the rest, considering that besides OCP, 99% of the other reviews have the cards pretty much in a dead heat.

 

[Enoch2001]

That's a good point, ChkSix, and summarizes my whole point. Either one works fine - the differences are negligable. Not sure if OCP is no more biased than any other site, but you can't ignore the results that were shown with default TF and AF rendering. Or you can. As I've said before, whatever works for everyone!

The only reason I'm leaning towards the X800XT is the single slot, lower power (single molex) requirements. No doubt nVidia will be able to eek out more performance over their new chipset over time. I just find all of this fanboy stuff humorous..

Cheers,

EnochLight

 

[JackBurton]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER

Originally posted by: ShoooterMcGavin
I don't like the fact that some people can't change.

Shooter

Yeah....well....I don't like the fact you eat pieces of sh*t for breakfast Shooter :laugh:

"You eat pieces of sh!t for breakfast?" Man, that was hillarious!! :laugh:

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Enoch2001

Originally posted by: Shamrock
LOL, I wished it were that way, but the forums are littered with ATI fanboys, yes, I mean littered...as about 5 ATI guys came on the server and spouted nonsense, and was banned, even threatened violence :\

As for MikeC's credibility, he tells like it is, whether it favors ATI or NV, he doesn't let it go unnoticed. SO, NVNews is not biased in the forums, all they do is tell news. It USED to be NV news only, but it has grown so popular it is now news about everything.

You're coming off like an nVidia fonbois.. anyway, check my point with OCP's review.

Cheers,

EnochLight

Hard OCP has been doing reviews to specifically bash NV all year... Look at their effort to smash PS3.0 before ATis official release. WHEN EVEN THEY DONT KNOW the speed differences.

And it was a great idea for them to do IQ comparisons in far cry, since the release notes for the drivers speciffically say FROM NVIDIA that there are 6 IQ and performance bugs.

 

[Enoch2001]

Originally posted by: Acanthus
Hard OCP has been doing reviews to specifically bash NV all year... Look at their effort to smash PS3.0 before ATis official release. WHEN EVEN THEY DONT KNOW the speed differences.

And it was a great idea for them to do IQ comparisons in far cry, since the release notes for the drivers speciffically say FROM NVIDIA that there are 6 IQ and performance bugs.

The IQ comparisons I am talkng about were default AF and TF screens; not the Far Cry ones. That said, OCP is not the only site reluctant to praise PS3.0; most have mentioned that PS2.0 is only *now* starting to show its power. Don't sell your customers on what you can have; sell me on what I can use now.

I'll say it once more: this discussion is moot; use whatever floats your boat. The differences are negligable.

 

[ChkSix]

I agree Enoch, the differences are negligable and it all comes down to whatever the consumer wants. Both are great cards, and both will be able to do well in anything thrown at them for the time being. That may change when and if ps3.0 and 3dc are incorporated into future titles, but that still remains to be seen.

Mike

 

[StuckMojo]

I'd go with the nvidia, because i run linux on the desktop and ATI's drivers suck moose cork.
plus the performance is quite close, particularly in OGL games, which are those that run on linux.

 

[sparkyclarky]

I need dual DVI for my LCDs, I prefer nVidia's dual monitor setup, I prefer nVidia's driver setup overall, I could definitely see using the video encoder eventually (depending on howit is implemented), I think the PS3 support is a nice bonus that you might as well have if you're paying $500, and I think the small performance differences between the two cards will even out once nVidia finishes optimizing their drivers (because this is an entirely new architecture, unlike ATI's which is heavily based upon their old design) - thus I'd take the 6800U

 

[sheltem]

For those who are interested in the differences between Hydravision and Nview, check out this article. After reading it, I just might get the Geforce 6800 instead of ATI's X800.

 

[MDE]

Neither, probably a 6800GT.

 

[fsstrike]

Id go for the X800 XT. It has much better performance overall. The 6800 is only better on old and crappy engines such as the Q3 engine. Its ironic how the 6800 performs well on old engines, when you would think it would be the perform the opposite considering it has all those futuristic features. And dont forget that ATI completely dominates nvidia on new games such as Far Cry.

X800 XT > 6800 Ultra