Originally posted by: Oreo
Yea, I think it's worth it. The GT is not 30% faster than the 9800 Pro, more like 75% in a best case scenario. That would mean that the regular 6800 is atleast 50% faster in a good scenario (meaning that you aren't CPU limited but GPU limited).
Yes, it is true, and I don't have to ask somebody else since I know for a fact myself that it is. Just check out some of the benchmarks in this review from Anandtech. The 6800 is over 50% in best case scenario and the 6800GT is more than 100% faster in a best case scenario. To get the score of a 9800 Pro just add like 10-15% to the 9700 Pro score.Originally posted by: Mik3y
Originally posted by: Oreo
Yea, I think it's worth it. The GT is not 30% faster than the 9800 Pro, more like 75% in a best case scenario. That would mean that the regular 6800 is atleast 50% faster in a good scenario (meaning that you aren't CPU limited but GPU limited).
not true. ask them in the video topic. the gt is only 30% faster, according to benchmarks.
Originally posted by: Oreo
Yes, it is true, and I don't have to ask somebody else since I know for a fact myself that it is. Just check out some of the benchmarks in this review from Anandtech. The 6800 is over 50% in best case scenario and the 6800GT is more than 100% faster in a best case scenario. To get the score of a 9800 Pro just add like 10-15% to the 9700 Pro score.Originally posted by: Mik3y
Originally posted by: Oreo
Yea, I think it's worth it. The GT is not 30% faster than the 9800 Pro, more like 75% in a best case scenario. That would mean that the regular 6800 is atleast 50% faster in a good scenario (meaning that you aren't CPU limited but GPU limited).
not true. ask them in the video topic. the gt is only 30% faster, according to benchmarks.
When the game is GPU limited is when you really see how fast the graphicscard is. This occurs when you play with high resolution and or with AA. These are some numbers from the review showing this:
Far Cry, 1600*1200 no AA/AF
ATi 9700 Pro 32.6 fps
ATi 9800 Pro ~ 37.5 fps
nVidia 6800 59.3 fps
nVidia 6800GT 78.1 fps
6800 = 58% faster
6800GT = 108% faster
Halo, 1600*1200 no AA/8x AF
ATi 9700 Pro 19.9 fps
ATi 9800 Pro ~ 22.8 fps
nVidia 6800 35.1 fps
nVidia 6800GT 47.7 fps
6800 = 54% faster
6800GT = 109% faster
Jedi Knight, 1600*1200 no AA/AF
ATi 9700 Pro 42.5 fps
ATi 9800 Pro 48.9 fps
nVidia 6800 77.7 fps
nVidia 6800GT 96.0 fps
6800 = 59% faster
6800GT = 96% faster
Originally posted by: caz67
I would go with the 6800 over the 9800Pro.
Originally posted by: beach2nd1
Also I didn't mention that I will also be upgrading to an A64 3200+ at the same time, so I don't know if this would change anyone's answer who based it off of the older system in my sig. Thanks.
CPU scaling article at HardOCP. Doesn't seem like that big of a difference unless I'm reading those graphs wrong.Originally posted by: Sideswipe001
Originally posted by: beach2nd1
Also I didn't mention that I will also be upgrading to an A64 3200+ at the same time, so I don't know if this would change anyone's answer who based it off of the older system in my sig. Thanks.
It does make a difference. Get the 6800; it will do much better with a higher end CPU.
One of the guys with a 6800 in video is e-mailing eVGA for clarification on their benchmarking performance chart.the GeForce 6800 . . . it runs at least a full 12% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5950 Ultra or the ATI 9800XT
No, these are not idiotic settings, these are settings that really show how much faster the actual graphicscard is when the rest of the system isn't a bottleneck. That is the best way you measure how fast the graphicscard is in the most scientific way. Like or lump it.Originally posted by: DeathByDuke
Originally posted by: Oreo
Yes, it is true, and I don't have to ask somebody else since I know for a fact myself that it is. Just check out some of the benchmarks in this review from Anandtech. The 6800 is over 50% in best case scenario and the 6800GT is more than 100% faster in a best case scenario. To get the score of a 9800 Pro just add like 10-15% to the 9700 Pro score.Originally posted by: Mik3y
Originally posted by: Oreo
Yea, I think it's worth it. The GT is not 30% faster than the 9800 Pro, more like 75% in a best case scenario. That would mean that the regular 6800 is atleast 50% faster in a good scenario (meaning that you aren't CPU limited but GPU limited).
not true. ask them in the video topic. the gt is only 30% faster, according to benchmarks.
When the game is GPU limited is when you really see how fast the graphicscard is. This occurs when you play with high resolution and or with AA. These are some numbers from the review showing this:
Far Cry, 1600*1200 no AA/AF
ATi 9700 Pro 32.6 fps
ATi 9800 Pro ~ 37.5 fps
nVidia 6800 59.3 fps
nVidia 6800GT 78.1 fps
6800 = 58% faster
6800GT = 108% faster
Halo, 1600*1200 no AA/8x AF
ATi 9700 Pro 19.9 fps
ATi 9800 Pro ~ 22.8 fps
nVidia 6800 35.1 fps
nVidia 6800GT 47.7 fps
6800 = 54% faster
6800GT = 109% faster
Jedi Knight, 1600*1200 no AA/AF
ATi 9700 Pro 42.5 fps
ATi 9800 Pro 48.9 fps
nVidia 6800 77.7 fps
nVidia 6800GT 96.0 fps
6800 = 59% faster
6800GT = 96% faster
but... thats super idiotic settings. not everyone has 4 bajillion Ghz PCs and 58" monitors.
dont forget, youre CPU tied with the 6800's until AMD 64 3000+/P4 3.2 so it wouldnt matter with a 9800 or 6800 until you hit such high resolutions in most games (unless its doom 3 or far cry). I myself wouldnt consider a X800 or 6800 until I wasn't cpu tied. (I currently use a XP 1800+, planning to go to a 64 3200+) true the 12 pipes and extra memory beef will help with FSAA (especially above 1280x1024) the fact remains though, 9800 pros are still great performers for a) the price and b) the games