Originally posted by: x80064
Looks like the XT 256 version is $20 less than the 512 version. Is the extra 256 worth the extra $20 ?
Originally posted by: munky
For $20 more, I'd take the 512mb version of the xt. You can see the benefits of the extra memory here:
http://www.behardware.com/articles/599-...800-gtx-512-mb-the-new-king-of-3d.html
Originally posted by: x80064
I totally understand what you all mean when you say to go with the XT. But then a few of you say that SLI is better than Crossfire. I will be going dual cards within 3-4 months. If I get the XT now....I won't and will not upgrade again until DX10. If I get the 7900 GT now....I could send a little over a $100 with it to step up to the GTX in a month or two....and then not upgrade till DX10. So....that being said....is a XT better till DX10 ? Or get the Gt now.....in 1-2 months step to GTX and then wait till DX10. Extra money to step up isnt a problem. Which is the better choice to get me by till DX10 ? What would you do ?
why is that?Originally posted by: Gamer X
X1800XT if you aren't overclocking, 7900gt if you are.
Originally posted by: Gamer X
X1800 XT is faster at stock and has better image quality and superior AA/AF performance
besides the advantage of 512mb memory over 256mb. The 7900gt, however, can do massive overclocks which the X1800 XT cannot achieve.
Originally posted by: x80064
I totally understand what you all mean when you say to go with the XT. But then a few of you say that SLI is better than Crossfire. I will be going dual cards within 3-4 months. If I get the XT now....I won't and will not upgrade again until DX10. If I get the 7900 GT now....I could send a little over a $100 with it to step up to the GTX in a month or two....and then not upgrade till DX10. So....that being said....is a XT better till DX10 ? Or get the Gt now.....in 1-2 months step to GTX and then wait till DX10. Extra money to step up isnt a problem. Which is the better choice to get me by till DX10 ? What would you do ?
Originally posted by: CaiNaM
Originally posted by: Gamer X
X1800 XT is faster at stock and has better image quality and superior AA/AF performance
besides the advantage of 512mb memory over 256mb. The 7900gt, however, can do massive overclocks which the X1800 XT cannot achieve.
and what clocks are you talking about? most ppl who volt mod the GT are only attaining core speeds in the 600's...
i can show you a review where a GT at 550mhz still is only comparable to a 625mhz x1800xt. are there some comparison which show, say a 600mhz or higher GT outperforming an 700mhz or higher 1800xt? and even then, as you say the XT still has better image quality and superior AA/AF performance, besided the advantage of 512mb memory over 256.
Originally posted by: Gamer X
Originally posted by: CaiNaM
Originally posted by: Gamer X
X1800 XT is faster at stock and has better image quality and superior AA/AF performance
besides the advantage of 512mb memory over 256mb. The 7900gt, however, can do massive overclocks which the X1800 XT cannot achieve.
and what clocks are you talking about? most ppl who volt mod the GT are only attaining core speeds in the 600's...
i can show you a review where a GT at 550mhz still is only comparable to a 625mhz x1800xt. are there some comparison which show, say a 600mhz or higher GT outperforming an 700mhz or higher 1800xt? and even then, as you say the XT still has better image quality and superior AA/AF performance, besided the advantage of 512mb memory over 256.
I'm talking about what VR-Zone did here. They hit 745 MHz which increased the performance dramatically.
Originally posted by: CaiNaM
and what clocks are you talking about? most ppl who volt mod the GT are only attaining core speeds in the 600's...
Originally posted by: ST
Originally posted by: CaiNaM
and what clocks are you talking about? most ppl who volt mod the GT are only attaining core speeds in the 600's...
wow, just wow... everytime i read one of your posts, it less and less credible...so volt moded GT's are in the "600s", does this mean it ranges from 601-699 then? I guess my 685 core is just "adequate" then, although it is higher than a 7900gtx stock clock. wait, does this mean then that a x1800xt will also outperform a 7900gtx now? next thing you'll know, even a 850xt will outperform any G70/G71 based cores.../rolleyes