Noob on video cards

J

JP4LSU

Geek Trainee
Hi,
I am on the verge of putting together my first system. Just waiting on my income tax check. Anyway I have a couple of other threads on mobos and RAM in hardware forum if you want to check those out and give me some advice.

I've been out of the loop for a bit and have only recently been getting up to speed on the PCI express cards.

I've looked some benchmarks at Tom's Hardware looking for a good mid to upper mid range card. I'm considering ATI 800XL or a 6600GT.
Tom's Hardware tests

However, the 800XL is about $100 more. Is it worth it?

I'm not willing to spend $400 on a card and will be hard pressed to pay the 800XL money. I read a review from December about the 800XL and the article said it was to sell for $200 but that didn't happen did it?

Currently I'm leaning too 6600GT.

What are some opinions on these or do you have other recommendations?
Thanks,
JP
 
I would go for the GeForce 6600GT, simply because in most games it will have enough power to render without any lags problems on medium/high settings. The X800XL isn't meant to compete with the GF6600GT so you can spend more for the extra in framerates. Otherwise its the 6600GT.
 
I'd go with the 800XL myself, it's got twice the memory (256MB), twice the pipelines (16, not 8 like the GT), and it's got a 256-bit interface (compaired to the 128-bit interface of the GT). The 6600GT is a very nice card but I'd say the 800XL is easily better, it's not really cheap but this is a very nice deal for what you get mate:Look here
 
Exactly The One,
the 800XL was to compete with the GF6800GT but the framerates on some of the benchmarks, the 800XL isn't a great deal better. It seems that the games without the complex shading and rendering such as Call of Duty the 6600GT does very well. But once you get into the Doom3 and turn the graphics up the 800XL is superior. I guess I'll have to decide if it is worth the extra $100.

For the money I think the 6600GT is nice. Now I have to decide if I would want to somewhat go further into the future with a better card like the 800XL. It too seems to be a decent deal.

Is there more to consider than Framerates when comparing?

It seems that more memory with a slower clock speed is better than less memory with higher clock speed.
 
It can depend on the actual game itself.
Also remember that nVidia 6series has Shader Model 3.0 (SM3) enabled, while the ATi cards don't.
 
So the shaders in ATI cards aren't as good as the GeF's 6000's series?

I haven't thought of looking into that. I've only focused on the clock speeds and memory when doing comparisons.
 
the 6600GT works better but still Nvidia has some problems sometimes with its drivers since they aren't microsoft approved, therefore don't expect installation to go so smooth, it kinda evens out at the point if you want to play half life 2 or doom 3 haha

6600GT-awesome in gaming, cheap, yet sometimes faulty drivers, shader model 3.0

X800XL-advanced graphics processor architecture, 16 pixel pipelines, 256mb, and believe me that does change performance (good way)

If i was to go with an X800 id go with a pro cuz you can unlock some features to make it perform like a platinum. but if your looking for budget and performance get the 6600GT and save money for an upgrade in a year or 2.

btw- if you get a 6600GT get the certain version by eVGA that has open gl 2.0, they just advanced from open gl 1.5. good luck

and if youd plan to get a new mobo l8ter you can get an sli and then buy another card and have better performance than a 6800 ultra, thats jus how powerful sli is, i hav 2 6800GTs on sli.

remember raw clock speed doesn't mean anything, tho the 6600GT is extremely overclockable
 
Yes it has shader model 3 but by the time it becomes utilized in a wide array of games the 6600GT will be too old to perform well. I wouldn't say the shaders of ATI's cards are inferior to the those of the 6xxx league, just not as much of a future maybe.
It's not so much just the framerates were concidering alone, it's how many options you can turn on and remain at an impressive fps. Also the # of frames you get now is a good way of judging the headroom you'll have in the future too dude.

2 6600GT's are more powerful than a single Ultra? Got a link mate?
 
idk about links, but i have a couple magazines that prove that on most things it is more powerful, lets see, computer power user, pcworld i think, and maximum pc.

but u kno me and ill always find a link,

toms hardware provides alot of graphs, 2 6600GTs seem to have better performing 3D mark 2005 but suffer 10 fps in doom 3 max quality with 4xAA and 8xAF to 32.5 so its kinda biased, but when you compare 300$ to 600$ you sure do get your money's worth. i kno my systems performin at the same level as dual ultras, but then again haha i oc'ed my vid cards to resemble dual ultras. haha enjoy

http://www20.graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20041222/index.html

also their drivers are a bit cruddy, id get omega drivers for the vid cards and overclock them like mine.
 
Thanks bud, I'd go with the framerate tests with actual games rather than 3D mark myself but it's still pretty impressive when you think about the money you save.
You oc'ed them (shakes head...), ah man you've got such a sweet rig dude.
 
haha thx man, ill try to get a link cuz some guy oc his FX-55 to 3.4 i think even tho in amd raw mhz don't count its pretty awesome to get it up to 3.4 from 2.6. im not even bothering to oc my processor cuz i have the stock fan (budget ran a bit short)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top