Xbitlabs review

[Cookie Monster]

Link

Something to talk about for all those people looking to buy 7950GX2 or X1950XTX.
Its an ok read, and heres the conclusion:

Lots of HQ/AA settings, high res (19x12), IQ comparisions, HDR plus AA, loads of games with HQ on/off.

BEst quote from the review was:

"...and then just kept on using them without comparing the IQ head to head. But recently we have discovered that on our test settings Nvid..."

Discuss.

note - this should buy us time til the G80 hits.

 

[Kromis]

Lol, posted this right when it came out eh?

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: Kromis
Lol, posted this right when it came out eh?

I thought it was abit older. Nvm, but i found it at B3D. Thought it was interesting.

 

[apoppin]

first thing i read is the conclusion

To sum up, we have to conclude the following:

* Nvidia GeForce 7950 GX2 is faster than the Radeon X1950 XTX in the majority of cases;
* ATI Radeon X1950 XTX costs $449, whereas the GeForce 7950 GX2 is priced at $599 - $649;
* ATI Radeon X1950 XTX produces higher image quality under our settings due to high-quality anisotropic filtering;
* Nvidia GeForce 7950 GX2 could produce higher quality antialiasing modes than the Radeon X1950 XTX, but they are hardly useful for modern games;
* ATI Radeon X1950 XTX theoretically can enable FSAA with FP16 HDR, which is an advantage, however, it does not have the feature supported flawlessly at the moment and it may not provide sufficient performance;
* ATI Radeon X1950 XTX, unlike the GeForce 7950 GX2, works with every mainboard provided that the power supply is capable of feeding the board with 120W of power.

i thought we already knew all this
:Q

 

[LittleNemoNES]

On HDR+AA:

However, given all the difficulties with enabling the capability, gamers should really think twice before considering this feature seriously.

Difficult if you're retarded or... AHEM ... want it to be....

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: gersson

However, given all the difficulties with enabling the capability, gamers should really think twice before considering this feature seriously.

Difficult if you're retarded or... AHEM ... want it to be....

:laugh:

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: gersson

However, given all the difficulties with enabling the capability, gamers should really think twice before considering this feature seriously.

Difficult if you're retarded or... AHEM ... want it to be....

:laugh:

Didn't that seem like a strange thing to say? I mean, if you can update your drivers, then you're smart enough to use the feature. Sounds like BS to me

 

[Munky]

So, xbitlabs has finally discovered the difference between quality and "quality"? Good for them, I'll probably take their reviews a bit more seriously now. They did always have a wide selection of games and settings, but were missing this last piece.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: gersson

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: gersson

However, given all the difficulties with enabling the capability, gamers should really think twice before considering this feature seriously.

Difficult if you're retarded or... AHEM ... want it to be....

:laugh:

Didn't that seem like a strange thing to say? I mean, if you can update your drivers, then you're smart enough to use the feature. Sounds like BS to me

I agree, that was a strange thing to say. As was this: "Nvidia GeForce 7950 GX2 could produce higher quality antialiasing modes than the Radeon X1950 XTX, but they are hardly useful for modern games."

Do they mean SSAA? Or antialiasing in general? Meh, not really a big deal.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Originally posted by: gersson

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: gersson

However, given all the difficulties with enabling the capability, gamers should really think twice before considering this feature seriously.

Difficult if you're retarded or... AHEM ... want it to be....

:laugh:

Didn't that seem like a strange thing to say? I mean, if you can update your drivers, then you're smart enough to use the feature. Sounds like BS to me

Not to mention how they discovered this "recently"

 

[josh6079]

Those guys at Xbit...they're a little...slow.

It was a great review though considering they finally equaled all of the settings and then gave us the numbers. Across the board we can see one ATI GPU doing just about as well as two Nvidia ones. Amazing.

I also can't understand why they thought it would be so difficult to implement Oblivion's HDR+AA. gerrson found a "Chuck Switch" that ATI owners can use on the fly and the 6.10's are rumored to have it implemented in them (of course it will be another 8 months before Xbit catches that one )

Overall a good review I'd say. First one from them that I would deem informative in a long time.

 

[Wreckage]

7950GX2 = Faster
X1950 = Cheaper

Good review, but nothing too new.

Hopefully the G80 will arrive next month and we can start a new round of discussion.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: gersson

Originally posted by: Cookie Monster

Originally posted by: gersson

However, given all the difficulties with enabling the capability, gamers should really think twice before considering this feature seriously.

Difficult if you're retarded or... AHEM ... want it to be....

:laugh:

Didn't that seem like a strange thing to say? I mean, if you can update your drivers, then you're smart enough to use the feature. Sounds like BS to me

I agree, that was a strange thing to say. As was this: "Nvidia GeForce 7950 GX2 could produce higher quality antialiasing modes than the Radeon X1950 XTX, but they are hardly useful for modern games."

Do they mean SSAA? Or antialiasing in general? Meh, not really a big deal.

They are referring to the latest games using HDR and generally people run at higher resolutuions than in the past thanks to larger monitors. Thus enabling AA is such a performance hog (in general).

 

[Pete]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
I agree, that was a strange thing to say. As was this: "Nvidia GeForce 7950 GX2 could produce higher quality antialiasing modes than the Radeon X1950 XTX, but they are hardly useful for modern games."

Do they mean SSAA? Or antialiasing in general? Meh, not really a big deal.

They meant NV's 8x(S) and 16x AA modes look better overall than ATI's 6x, but they're too slow to be useful for brand new, eyeball-exploding games.

So, what cmdrdredd said.

As for the article, directly comparing a X1950XTX to a 7950GX2, HQ AF to HQ filtering, and ignoring AAA/TrAA completely are all more than a little strange. Meh. Still, I guess all those #s are more useful than not.

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: munky
So, xbitlabs has finally discovered the difference between quality and "quality"? Good for them, I'll probably take their reviews a bit more seriously now. They did always have a wide selection of games and settings, but were missing this last piece.

100% agree. I used to quote numbers from Xbit a lot but have recently stopped due to their ignorance of driver quality settings. I hope they continue this trend as I really like Xbit besides that.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: apoppin
first thing i read is the conclusion

To sum up, we have to conclude the following:

* Nvidia GeForce 7950 GX2 is faster than the Radeon X1950 XTX in the majority of cases;
* ATI Radeon X1950 XTX costs $449, whereas the GeForce 7950 GX2 is priced at $599 - $649;
* ATI Radeon X1950 XTX produces higher image quality under our settings due to high-quality anisotropic filtering;
* Nvidia GeForce 7950 GX2 could produce higher quality antialiasing modes than the Radeon X1950 XTX, but they are hardly useful for modern games;
* ATI Radeon X1950 XTX theoretically can enable FSAA with FP16 HDR, which is an advantage, however, it does not have the feature supported flawlessly at the moment and it may not provide sufficient performance;
* ATI Radeon X1950 XTX, unlike the GeForce 7950 GX2, works with every mainboard provided that the power supply is capable of feeding the board with 120W of power.

i thought we already knew all this
:Q

Some of us did, some didnt want to accept it. As I have said, ATi has better IQ. And 8x+ AA from NV is hardly playable in current games. Even with a GX2. I got flamed for saying it, its nice to have a review say the same. Even if its x-bit.

 

[Matt2]

The price defecit between the two cards is no where near $449 vs. $599-$650.

It's more like $435 vs. $519.

I think at this stage in the game, X1950XTX is a waste.

Smartest thing to do is buy an EVGA 7950GX2 now, enjoy the high FPS, endure the retna scorching IQ and endless threads about how NVidia IQ needs work, step-up to G80 and make fun of those with X1900 series cards.

 

[Ackmed]

Yes, sadly most go by "MSRP" prices.

Smart thing to do? Do you remember the horrible problems eVGA had with the 7800 512MB and 7900 step ups? While I like the options to step up, it hasnt been going very smoothly lately. If you want to talk smart, I consider waiting right now, if you've got a half way decent card.

 

[Nightmare225]

Originally posted by: josh6079
It was a great review though considering they finally equaled all of the settings and then gave us the numbers. Across the board we can see one ATI GPU doing just about as well as two Nvidia ones. Amazing.
.

And yet, the GPUs manage to suck down less power then ATI's one, so it's not a win-win situation.

 

[Ackmed]

It is if you've got a manly enough PSU to run any card.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Yes, sadly most go by "MSRP" prices.

Smart thing to do? Do you remember the horrible problems eVGA had with the 7800 512MB and 7900 step ups? While I like the options to step up, it hasnt been going very smoothly lately. If you want to talk smart, I consider waiting right now, if you've got a half way decent card.

I personally went through the step up process from 7800 ====> 7900 and it wasn't THAT bad.

Yeah, I waited a while as did everyone else, but everyone got their cards. And its not like they make you send your card in as soon as you enter the step-up queue and u have to wait for your new card with no computer.

If you buy a EVGA 7950GX2:

1. You're getting the fastest single card solution on the market.
2. You get to use the card for 3 months or more (more if u have to wait in the queue)
3. You get to return the card for the exact price you paid, even if you overclock the shite outta it and change the cooler.
4. You get the newest top of the line card for between $100-$150.

Seems like a no brainer to me.

But of course you do speak the language of logic Ackmed. What I have said above, only goes for people who are pulling the trigger NOW.

If what you have is doing the job for you and you're willing to wait until after the New Year for significant price drops, then sit on what you have.

 

[Wreckage]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Some of us did, some didnt want to accept it. As I have said, ATi has better IQ. And 8x+ AA from NV is hardly playable in current games. Even with a GX2. I got flamed for saying it, its nice to have a review say the same. Even if its x-bit.

They also stated that NVIDIA's AA was better, the GX2 was faster and HDR+AA is poorly implemented. I know you have your red filter enabled. :roll:

 

[Zebo]

It's really painful to read xbitlabs (russian to english problem)... I usually just look at the excellent pictures which tell the story, but I did read it this time.

They had to set NV's to high quality to even get close to ATI's non shimmering levels, also NVs Trilinear Filtering optimizations also have to be disabled, dramatically slowing performance as much as 30-40%. Perfetly legit, cards should look good while competing not cheat to win. ATI is cearly the more honest broker here. I only wish they included more cards.. ones commoners use like 7900GT's GTX's x1900' and such. Anyway it's clear one x1950xtx = GX2 at more or less equal settings. Combined with cheaper, GX2 shotty SLI upgradabilty and this folding deal anandtec talked about the XTX is a better value, unless you play pure speed.

 

[Matt2]

Where are you guys getting X1950XTX=7950GX2 ????????

Every benchmark I am looking at in that review in non-CPU limited situations has the GX2 walloping the X1950XTX, EVEN WITH HIGHEST QUALITY . And I'm not talking about 54 vs 52fps, these are sizeable differences. More sizable than say a 7900GTX vs X1900XTX.

We're talking 30% in GRAW for example.

Besides, setting the LOD to clamp fixes the shimmering situation much more effectively than going from "Quality" to "High Quality" in the NV CP.

 

[Zebo]

Keep reading after that. I said more or less.

After turning off enough NV "optimizations" indeed the GX2 is still faster overall, Xbitsays so but with worse and still uncorrectable AF, but 70% of the games it's so close to be within margin of error at 19x12 and 80% at 16x12 they are equal as well.

You better not read HARDOCP they declare an XTX , not just equal but faster than GX2 when making them look the same.