radeon xt1950txt pro vs geforce 7900 gts

[DiebytheSword]

It's not apples and oranges, it would be if I compared DirectX 10 performance on the 8800GTX and DirectX 9 performance on the X1950XTX with each other.

Then it would be apples and oranges.

My point is still you shouldn't compare the two as the top offerings in the spirit of my argument. I made an ascertaition, you swept in, and attempted to squash that observation with one of your own. We do not agree, and this is apparently going no where.

Ehum, Geforce FX 5900Ultra vs Radeon 9800 Pro, the Radeon 9800 Pro was (semi)titanically faster in true DirectX 9. It happens.

Yes it does, and until the ATi equivalent card of this class shows up, you are comparing yesterday's GPU with todays, why you would even bother doing so is beyond me when YOU OUTRIGHT KNOW THAT THE ONE FROM TODAY IS BETTER. My comment was not about which you should buy, my comment was about relative video processing strength.

The counterpart(R600) you are refering to isnt here yet, so the direct counterpart would be effectively 2x X1950XTX until ATi's releases its new flagship the R600.

No freakin' duh, really? I'm saying that the ATi offering, when it arrives, would vindicate my position on "top offerings".

I did not say that. I said till the R600 isn't out, the X1950XTX is 8800GTX counterpart or metaphorical neighbour. It's about what you can buy NOW, not in the future.

No, it is its paltry competition, a far cry from it's equal. That, and says you. See how in the other DX10 thread people are waiting for the counter from ATi? This is not an imaginary class, this is one people are assigning the cards.

Couldn't agree more. So that's why I'm not saying anything about the R600, unlike you who is making statements; "Rest assured, when the R600 cores arrive, I will merrily laugh at your digital bravado, and not even bother being justified because I know already that I'm right.". If you dont mind, I'll rather wait until the actual videocard comes out before I will talk about its performance.

My point, for the umpteenth time, being that the R600 will be in the same class, and more suited for a discussion on power vs, power.

So because the 8800GTX and X1950XTX is different in specs/technology, you cant compare it? Rather redicolous.

Sure you can, just not in the scope of my comment, nor the scope of this thread, but you seem to have lost this point from the very beginning.

What makes you can fit thing into imaginary classes? Hell then the Geforce 6xxx serie never had competition until the X1 series, because the X serie didnt support SM2.0!(To make it clear, I'm being sarcastic)

Actually it did support SM2.0, both cards did. ATi's card didn't support SM2.0a, nVidia's cards didn't support SM2.0b. This was because of pallet bit depths, which the two companies refused to see eye to eye on. ATi supported 24 bit mode, where nVidia supported 32 bit mode. The other small differences barely merit notice other than a texture limitation in "B". The architecture of the software was unified in SM3.0.

As you can see, it doesnt work that way. You compare cards because of the price and then pick the one which gives more bang of its buck. Unless you have an infinite cash resources.(Share please)

Why would you take cards of about the same performance? Hey the X1900XT is almost as fast as a 7900GTX!

But you know well as I do, that isnt a fair comparison, because the X1900XT is ALOT cheaper.

In a discussion about power, your points about which card cost less are moot. I agree that in a real world scenario, money is king. Why are we having this portion of discussion, for the love of god, the comment was about relative class power, not price points and economics. I do not have infinite cash to spend, but others do, or are spending mommy and daddy's cash. You know as well as I do that these things would not be manufactured if people weren't buying them.

Furthermore Moore's law is about doubling transistors each 1 and a half year. Not about performance, gigaherzen or any of that. It's a popular misconception.

Which roughly translates into more power, unless a subsystem is seriously flawed, which I beleive I already stated. Do I have to explain this to you, or do you already know it? Double the transistors every 18 months, not one and a half year.

Who was the one who invoked fanboy in this topic? Who started name calling? Who started the "boy" calling? Who was it who directly transformed this part of the topic in a fanboy discussion?

Someone posted the DBZ powerlevel of a card, c'mon, if that didn't warrant "LOL, Kids", what does. Ignorance is a state of not knowing something, it is not a freaking insult. You returned fire with insults of your own immediately.

Now here is a suggestion. Let Smith/Zorg or other admin judge this topic. Let him decide objectively and precise who made the ice "thin". No offense but your judgement is impaired and highly subjective.

Funny, it's served me well all these years. My judgement is just fine, and only subjective because you took ignorant to be an insult. They can all read this section just fine, and my PM box remains empty. Feel free however to drag one of them in here.

Moore's law has nothing to do with this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law

See above ascertation. Of course, it could just be that you don't understand the weight of what doubling transistors does to a microproccessor.

Furthermore, we are talking about DirectX 9(.c) performance. The advantage of 8800GTX of DirectX 10 has no affected to it.

Again Moore's law has nothing to do with it.

Which is again, not my problem. I'm talking about classes, percieved or not, which DO exist. People put things in classes, they don't get mysteriously born into them.

Yes the Xbox360 vs PS2 is a PERFECT comparison. For someone with not infinite cash amount, its perfectly to analyse which console give more value for your money. Xbox 360, more powerfull/better graphics, great online future and expensive compared to the PS2. PS2 getting outdated, less good looking graphics, incredible amount of games and great games.(Last one is a bit subjective though)

All is fine and ducky there, but my comment was about relative power between the two top offerings in the same class. Your's is again economical, I see your point, I have from the beginning. It's not this I have a problem with, it's that this position has no damn bearing on my observation at all.

[/quote]But then again each comparison is subjective, because some people are willing to pay the 200 euro extra and some dont.[/quote]

Agreed, but that is not the scope of my argument.

[/quote]First of all, dont make assumptions that the R600 will defintely is faster. As it looks to be faster on paper, we all know the Geforce FX event.[/quote]

It will be faster than the R500 cores, and it will be in the G80 class. I will compare these two cards for muscle in the scope of my argument.

Furthermore for all we know nVidia could release G81 until then.

This is quite possible, and if it happens we will have a no-comparison fight in that class . . . again.

But besides all that, we are talking about now. Now the 8800GTX is faster and cheaper then 2x X1950XTX.

Agreed. There is no comparison, the x1950xt is a dated card. Comparing them is quite rediculous, especially in the scope of my argument.

Why exactly, because it debunks your caterogy theory?

Hardly, my original comment included only Nvidia and ATi, but thanks for throwing extra companies into it, when that too wasn't the scope of my original argument.

It makes no freaking sense to make caterogies and then compare existing cards to non-existing cards. Certainly based on technology is utter stupid, because then we couldnt compare Geforce 6 vs ATi X or Geforce FX vs ATi 9

No, it is not stupid. The differences between SM2.0a and SM2.0b are a joke. You have to be kidding me. There are two missing functions in SM2.0b, a different number of temp registers,and one dependant texture limit that aren't in the "a" revision.

First of all they could BOTH be tested with SM2.0, not SM3.0. But I'll assume that's a typo.

It was a retorical question, illustrating the illogic of your post. We both agree, and english is clearly your second language, so I'm not going to harp on this.

If you read more carefully you could clearly see I was sarcastic.(Hence the !)

Sarcasm translates poorly on the net, and an exlamation point is to transmit an idea of importance as such, not to denote sarcasm.

This is turning into a massive waste of my time. You do not see my point, and I contend that your point concerning mine is pointless.

At that, we are both massively derailing this thread.

So it ends here, for better or for worse (If you feel you need to have the last word, your next post on the subject is the last one, there will be no punitive action for it) and I will no longer be responding to this thread.

 

[Devion]

My point is still you shouldn't compare the two as the top offerings in the spirit of my argument. I made an ascertaition, you swept in, and attempted to squash that observation with one of your own. We do not agree, and this is apparently going no where.

Yes it does, and until the ATi equivalent card of this class shows up, you are comparing yesterday's GPU with todays, why you would even bother doing so is beyond me when YOU OUTRIGHT KNOW THAT THE ONE FROM TODAY IS BETTER. My comment was not about which you should buy, my comment was about relative video processing strength.

I though my Ti 4600 and 9700 Pro was clear enough. To your logic the Ti 4600 would be a far cry from the past. Still everybody compared to each other. You know why? Because nVidia Ti 4600 was the only card that was out.

This situation is the same, only now ATi's behind.

No, it is its paltry competition, a far cry from it's equal. That, and says you. See how in the other DX10 thread people are waiting for the counter from ATi? This is not an imaginary class, this is one people are assigning the cards.

And yes we should also wait for nVidia G81 and after that we should wait for ATi's R680. To your logic you can wait for eternity.

Besides that, why do you think review sites compare the 8800GTX vs X1950XTX. The X1950XTX is the only card that is out. For all we know R600 may never come out, although unlikely.

My point, for the umpteenth time, being that the R600 will be in the same class, and more suited for a discussion on power vs, power.

The R600 will be in the same class if its priced equally.(Hence my 7900GTX vs X1900XT comparison in previous post)

Sure you can, just not in the scope of my comment, nor the scope of this thread, but you seem to have lost this point from the very beginning.

Or maybe you never paid attention to what I said?

Actually it did support SM2.0, both cards did. ATi's card didn't support SM2.0a, nVidia's cards didn't support SM2.0b. This was because of pallet bit depths, which the two companies refused to see eye to eye on. ATi supported 24 bit mode, where nVidia supported 32 bit mode. The other small differences barely merit notice other than a texture limitation in "B". The architecture of the software was unified in SM3.0.

I made a typo.....As you have read in my previous posts were I was talking about the 6800Ultra and X850XT. Unless you already forgot my previous arguments, which then you really aren't paying attention.

In a discussion about power, your points about which card cost less are moot. I agree that in a real world scenario, money is king. Why are we having this portion of discussion, for the love of god, the comment was about relative class power, not price points and economics. I do not have infinite cash to spend, but others do, or are spending mommy and daddy's cash. You know as well as I do that these things would not be manufactured if people weren't buying them.

You began with;

For the most part, Nvidia is what you want for a two card solution, and ATi is what you want for a single card. Nvidia and ATi's top offerings are literally milliseconds behind eachother, and I promise you won't notice a difference. LOL, kids.

Top offerings being the key word in, later you added on in the same category. Well guess? The X1950XTX is in the same category. Beside the price issue, its ATi's top offering.

With your logic you could say that R600 real "neighbour" would be G81, which will be released just after R600.

Which roughly translates into more power, unless a subsystem is seriously flawed, which I beleive I already stated. Do I have to explain this to you, or do you already know it? Double the transistors every 18 months, not one and a half year.

18 months = one and a half year.

1 year = 12 months
Half year = 6 months

Makes?
18 months.

Transitors DO NOT translate in power at all. Drivers, architecture, type of game are way more important then the number of transitors you put on a GPU.

Someone posted the DBZ powerlevel of a card, c'mon, if that didn't warrant "LOL, Kids", what does. Ignorance is a state of not knowing something, it is not a freaking insult. You returned fire with insults of your own immediately.

Saying that someone is ignorant and that you are right basicly is an insult.

You didn't read my arguments the first time clearly.

Funny, it's served me well all these years. My judgement is just fine, and only subjective because you took ignorant to be an insult. They can all read this section just fine, and my PM box remains empty. Feel free however to drag one of them in here.

Respect

First and foremost, we do not tolerate any kind of disrespect to other users. Do not flame, spam, racially or religiously slur, attack, or swear on the forums, or it will result in disciplinary action being taken against you. This is our golden rule, if all else fails, respect the other users. Under this category, is criticism . . . There is a huge world of difference and a fine line between constructive criticism and flaming. If you have a criticism that will help the user in question, by all means, criticize. There is no error bad enough to warrant a post like: "Dude, that blows . . . (insert criticism here)". Present the criticism nicely, or it will be treated as a flame.

Do not abuse the PM and Email features, as you will be disciplined for that as well.

You may not delete what a moderator has written in your posts, though you may delete your content. Moderators are expected to behave while editing. No back-talking in threads to authorities is now, or was ever allowed. If you do so, it will be treated as flaming. Moderators are expected to follow similar conduct, and not flame or disrespect users themselves.

I could have understanded if I being wrong, time after time after time called being ignorant. There is a difference between someone being wrong or ignorant.

But instead, your first reaction was that I was ignorant and a fanboy.
You set the tone of the discussion. I merely replied that the 8800GTX is a hell lot faster then a X1950XTX.

See above ascertation. Of course, it could just be that you don't understand the weight of what doubling transistors does to a microproccessor.

Really dude, you are hilarious. Transistor isn't equal to raw power. It's like saying that horsepower equals speed.

Which is again, not my problem. I'm talking about classes, percieved or not, which DO exist. People put things in classes, they don't get mysteriously born into them.

But the R600 vs G80 isnt a class yet, that's the whole fricken point. Why? Because the R600 isnt out. And we were talking about DirectX 9(.c) performance. So the argument of a DirectX 10 class is non existant. Hell there aren't even benchmarks/games for DirectX 10 out. How many times do I have to repeat myself?

All is fine and ducky there, but my comment was about relative power between the two top offerings in the same class. Your's is again economical, I see your point, I have from the beginning. It's not this I have a problem with, it's that this position has no damn bearing on my observation at all.

As I said before that that logic is flawed.(2nd post ftw!) If you compare two videocards of equal/relative power, it's useless. What do you want to compare? G80 vs R600? You cant say that yet. Maybe to your logic the R600 is in a class of it's own. Maybe the equal/relative comparison for nVidia will be the G81?

Furthermore, the only thing you can compare is quality and then you would automatically ask the economical question. Which gives more bang for its buck?

It will be faster than the R500 cores, and it will be in the G80 class. I will compare these two cards for muscle in the scope of my argument.

How do you know it will be faster then the R500? Seen benches? To go back to the rather becoming cliche example of the Geforce FX serie. The Geforce FX serie was barely faster then it's previous generation.

And for all we know R600 could be in its own league or nVidia will throw the G81 in when the R600 comes out.

Agreed. There is no comparison, the x1950xt is a dated card. Comparing them is quite rediculous, especially in the scope of my argument.

Read above.

Hardly, my original comment included only Nvidia and ATi, but thanks for throwing extra companies into it, when that too wasn't the scope of my original argument.

Your scope was first was relative power, then technology. Sorry if I lost track. But then again the argument stays, you dont compare the XGI of because you want to see its relative power. You want to see it perform relative to other videocard with keeping in mind which will give you more bang for the money.

Removing the "bang for the money", would make the comparison rather useless.

No, it is not stupid. The differences between SM2.0a and SM2.0b are a joke. You have to be kidding me. There are two missing functions in SM2.0b, a different number of temp registers,and one dependant texture limit that aren't in the "a" revision.

It's a joke? Then what is this?

And the reason both cards couldn't be tested with SM2.0? Oh wait, you just proved my point. Don't compare DX10 cards to DX9 cards. Oh yeah, I forgot use DX9 . . . wait a tic, I'm right again. Your final point supports my original argument, are we done now?

Assuming you meant SM3.0 or your post would make no sense at all.

It was a retorical question, illustrating the illogic of your post. We both agree, and english is clearly your second language, so I'm not going to harp on this.

I wasn't done, you were.

Sarcasm translates poorly on the net, and an exlamation point is to transmit an idea of importance as such, not to denote sarcasm.

This is turning into a massive waste of my time. You do not see my point, and I contend that your point concerning mine is pointless.

At that, we are both massively derailing this thread.

So it ends here, for better or for worse (If you feel you need to have the last word, your next post on the subject is the last one, there will be no punitive action for it) and I will no longer be responding to this thread.

Then what was this discussion all about?
This topic wasnt going nowhere anyhow.

I would you like to respond how you explain your own behaviour, by assuming and thus namecalling like fanboy and using terms like ignorant.

 

[Smith]

Bah, I hate you both. Do you think I'm going to read this novel of a thread? All I know is that it served its purpose pretty well:

The GeForce 7900 has a powerlevel of 3,000,000,000!

Closed.

 

[Almighty_Gir]

being called ignorant, is not an insult. although it could be deemed derogatory, for the most part, it is just stating that people need to use their heads a little.

if he called someone stupid, that would be different.

and for the record, you are the one with flawed logic regarding the sale of "like spec" cards. especially saying "lets compare two cards of the same price". i will use televisions as an example: pioneer 42" plasma = ?1999, samsung 42" plasma = ?1299.

they both have the same spec, same pixel resolution, etc. etc. why does the pioneer sell better? because it is more reliable, and because it gives a better picture, regardless of their spec's being the same.

its down to quality i guess, and although i am currently using an Nvidia card, i have NEVER had a problem with ATI cards. i've always been able to tweak them, overclock them, and get them doing exactly what i want, with minimum fuss. i've also found that if i went for the ATI equivilent of my card (as my neighbor has in his machine, which other than GPU is identical), i would have gotten better results, for the same price.