Should I go for a X1950XTX?

[mylok]

I run with a X2 4400 (2GB DDR) and a 1900XTX with Accelero X2 on dell 20.1 inch LCD 1600x1200 (stock clocks for everything) and in Oblivion (Max settings with HDR+AA) I run at 30-40FPS (it dips into the low 20's sometimes) so I think you would need something faster than the 1900XTX for the res. you play at.

I will tell you this I have owned both the 7900GTX and my 1900XTX and the ATI is the much better choice for Oblivion and IQ in general.

just wanted to add that 1900xtx runs about 5C warmer than the 7900GTX under load (in my system) and it does use more power so make sure you have a good pwr supply.

 

[mylok]

dukdukgoos,

all the review I have read show that the 1950XTX draws less power than the 1900XTX (not much of a difference but it is less)

 

[Jules]

Originally posted by: akshayt
with better drivers, 1950XTX will become a lot better.

lol.

 

[9nines]

Per reports (one on this site) GDDR4 uses 50% of the power of GDDR3, for the same bandwidth. The X1950XT has 1/3 more bandwidth, so it would use roughly 2/3 (50% of 1 and 1/3) the power of the X1900XT/X, as far as memory usage. Since they have the same processor, the X1950 would have to use less power, since its memory would need 1/3 less and processor about the same, no?

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: Nightmare225

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: akshayt
Techreport only tested dual cores. How do you compare a single core with that.

Most games are single threaded. I havent seen a multi threaded game. Just because its dual core doesnt mean some sort of a performance boost.

The only way i see Core2 Duo's having a performance boost would be due to the massive architectural efficeny of the Conroe architecture compared to the Athlon A64 X2.

But as i understand, Higher the res with AA/AF, it becomes GPU limited, not CPU limited.

Why not wait til the G80 hit around novmeber/december? If not, the X1950XTX is great as it has lower power draw and quiet cooler. Not to mention the upcoming games might not run HDR plus AA at playable fps. (Crysis etc)

Q4 is multithreaded. Not exactly common tho, multithreaded games...

Call of Duty 2 is also multi-threaded after patch.

But there is no performance increase. Especially not at the OP's native resolution.

Even Quake 4, the poster-boy for dual-core gaming, doesn't benefit from dual-core or a faster CPU at the OP's playing resolution.

 

[josh6079]

Sweet! Looks like my FX-62 is doing just fine. I can't wait to pair it with my X1900XT on the way.

 

[imported_Truenofan]

well what i would suggest, just go to the x1900xt, you'll notice a huge jump either way, they can be had for 250-320 on newegg. yeah the fx62 is still quite nice, i went c2d because i jumped from a s939 a64 3500 winny with a x800xl. i usualy upgrade once every year or year and a half, just because that seems the right time for everything to come out. if he's going to be playing games above 1600x1200 with max everything, then yeah, go for the 1950. but if thats not the case, go for the 1900's, they're still good enough for 99% of all games out there.

edit: correction, for the price. the 1900 from my pov, seems better for the price. im not sure about the 1900gt's.
edit 2: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814142063R

 

[TanisHalfElven]

Originally posted by: akshayt
with 1GB and single core AMD Athlon @ 2.25GHz you can't get all that. Get the CPU to 2.4-2.8GHz and yet games like Oblivion will get hudge benefits from a dual core specially core 2 duo. With this CPU at that res you will get severe lagging/stuttering.

You will need to restain to 12X10 or 16X10.

Get a 1900XT 512mb with a X2 3800. That would be the best option.

you have no ****** idea what your talking about.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: deadseasquirrel

Originally posted by: Nightmare225

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: akshayt
Techreport only tested dual cores. How do you compare a single core with that.

Most games are single threaded. I havent seen a multi threaded game. Just because its dual core doesnt mean some sort of a performance boost.

The only way i see Core2 Duo's having a performance boost would be due to the massive architectural efficeny of the Conroe architecture compared to the Athlon A64 X2.

But as i understand, Higher the res with AA/AF, it becomes GPU limited, not CPU limited.

Why not wait til the G80 hit around novmeber/december? If not, the X1950XTX is great as it has lower power draw and quiet cooler. Not to mention the upcoming games might not run HDR plus AA at playable fps. (Crysis etc)

Q4 is multithreaded. Not exactly common tho, multithreaded games...

Call of Duty 2 is also multi-threaded after patch.

But there is no performance increase. Especially not at the OP's native resolution.

Even Quake 4, the poster-boy for dual-core gaming, doesn't benefit from dual-core or a faster CPU at the OP's playing resolution.

As reinforcing what deadseasquirrel said, you cant expect performance increases with a "patch" that makes the game "multi threaded".

A game needs to be multi threaded from ground up to have some sort of a performance increase (something more than 1~3 fps increase). No game that i know of has been multi threaded. Maybe future games, but its the GPU that matters the most in 3d intensive Apps such as games.

 

[dukdukgoos]

I went ahead and got the 1950xtx. I let y'all know how it turns out...

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Originally posted by: dukdukgoos
I went ahead and got the 1950xtx. I let y'all know how it turns out...

Awesome, man. OC that sucker and tells us what frames you get.

 

[Paratus]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: akshayt
Techreport only tested dual cores. How do you compare a single core with that.

Most games are single threaded. I havent seen a multi threaded game. Just because its dual core doesnt mean some sort of a performance boost.

The only way i see Core2 Duo's having a performance boost would be due to the massive architectural efficeny of the Conroe architecture compared to the Athlon A64 X2.

But as i understand, Higher the res with AA/AF, it becomes GPU limited, not CPU limited.

Why not wait til the G80 hit around novmeber/december? If not, the X1950XTX is great as it has lower power draw and quiet cooler. Not to mention the upcoming games might not run HDR plus AA at playable fps. (Crysis etc)

FYI
Quake 4 was multithreaded. It was the only game where an HT enabled P4 beat the equivelent single core A64.

 

[akshayt]

Please give a mini review.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: Paratus

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: akshayt
Techreport only tested dual cores. How do you compare a single core with that.

Most games are single threaded. I havent seen a multi threaded game. Just because its dual core doesnt mean some sort of a performance boost.

The only way i see Core2 Duo's having a performance boost would be due to the massive architectural efficeny of the Conroe architecture compared to the Athlon A64 X2.

But as i understand, Higher the res with AA/AF, it becomes GPU limited, not CPU limited.

Why not wait til the G80 hit around novmeber/december? If not, the X1950XTX is great as it has lower power draw and quiet cooler. Not to mention the upcoming games might not run HDR plus AA at playable fps. (Crysis etc)

FYI
Quake 4 was multithreaded. It was the only game where an HT enabled P4 beat the equivelent single core A64.

Yes through a patch. But later they took it back down. Quake4 wasnt multi threaded to began with. It did give some performance increases but caused several issue.