| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
cubanlord
Joined: 08 Jul 2005
Location: In Japan!
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 6:02 am Post subject: EVGA Nvidia Geforce 6800GT with 512ram |
 |
|
| I should have it within 2 weeks. I bought this instead of the 7800GT with 256mb. Smart or not? Please list reasons... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wrench
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
7800 GT is much faster. Better performance.
512 mb doesn't really help since most games don't use that many textures. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cubanlord
Joined: 08 Jul 2005
Location: In Japan!
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
not that much faster. it's only 50mhz and .1 mhz. more. Look at the specs below:
NVIDIA GeForce 6 & 7 Product Lineup Specifications
Product Name # pixel processors # vertex processors Bus width Memory Type/Amount GPU Speed RAM Speed
GeForce 7800 GT 20 7 256-bit GDDR3/256MB 400MHz 1000MHz
GeForce 6800 GT 16 6 256-bit GDDR3/256MB 350MHz 1000MHz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wrench
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2006 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cubanlord wrote: |
not that much faster. it's only 50mhz and .1 mhz. more. Look at the specs below:
NVIDIA GeForce 6 & 7 Product Lineup Specifications
Product Name # pixel processors # vertex processors Bus width Memory Type/Amount GPU Speed RAM Speed
GeForce 7800 GT 20 7 256-bit GDDR3/256MB 400MHz 1000MHz
GeForce 6800 GT 16 6 256-bit GDDR3/256MB 350MHz 1000MHz |
MHZ means nothing I was refering to the architecture. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cubanlord
Joined: 08 Jul 2005
Location: In Japan!
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wrench wrote: |
| cubanlord wrote: |
not that much faster. it's only 50mhz and .1 mhz. more. Look at the specs below:
NVIDIA GeForce 6 & 7 Product Lineup Specifications
Product Name # pixel processors # vertex processors Bus width Memory Type/Amount GPU Speed RAM Speed
GeForce 7800 GT 20 7 256-bit GDDR3/256MB 400MHz 1000MHz
GeForce 6800 GT 16 6 256-bit GDDR3/256MB 350MHz 1000MHz |
MHZ means nothing I was refering to the architecture. |
No how can you sit there and say that MHZ means nothing. Going on your logic, one can say that 200MHZ can operate the same as 1000MHZ. Please elaborate on what you mean by architecture. I know that isn't what you meant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thunndarr
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cubanlord wrote: |
| Wrench wrote: |
| cubanlord wrote: |
not that much faster. it's only 50mhz and .1 mhz. more. Look at the specs below:
NVIDIA GeForce 6 & 7 Product Lineup Specifications
Product Name # pixel processors # vertex processors Bus width Memory Type/Amount GPU Speed RAM Speed
GeForce 7800 GT 20 7 256-bit GDDR3/256MB 400MHz 1000MHz
GeForce 6800 GT 16 6 256-bit GDDR3/256MB 350MHz 1000MHz |
MHZ means nothing I was refering to the architecture. |
No how can you sit there and say that MHZ means nothing. Going on your logic, one can say that 200MHZ can operate the same as 1000MHZ. Please elaborate on what you mean by architecture. I know that isn't what you meant. |
Just check out this link for pretty much all you need to know about the performance difference of various cards. And, as Wrench alluded, the performance difference between those two cards is a lot greater than the clock speed indicates.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/02/vga_charts_viii/index.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wrench
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 1:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Thunndarr wrote: |
| cubanlord wrote: |
| Wrench wrote: |
| cubanlord wrote: |
not that much faster. it's only 50mhz and .1 mhz. more. Look at the specs below:
NVIDIA GeForce 6 & 7 Product Lineup Specifications
Product Name # pixel processors # vertex processors Bus width Memory Type/Amount GPU Speed RAM Speed
GeForce 7800 GT 20 7 256-bit GDDR3/256MB 400MHz 1000MHz
GeForce 6800 GT 16 6 256-bit GDDR3/256MB 350MHz 1000MHz |
MHZ means nothing I was refering to the architecture. |
No how can you sit there and say that MHZ means nothing. Going on your logic, one can say that 200MHZ can operate the same as 1000MHZ. Please elaborate on what you mean by architecture. I know that isn't what you meant. |
Just check out this link for pretty much all you need to know about the performance difference of various cards. And, as Wrench alluded, the performance difference between those two cards is a lot greater than the clock speed indicates.
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/02/vga_charts_viii/index.html |
I didn't have time to actually post another reply. There is a huge difference. Toms is not the best source imo but it serves its purpose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
elric
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 3:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't even know why they have 512 ram for that card. WTF?
If you are cheap get the 6600GT it will run most things at decent settings. Otherwise pony-up and get the 7800.
Getting an inferior card with more ram is a waste. IE would you get a 6600GT with 1GB of RAM. No, you would just get the 7800GT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hanguker
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't know if you just came on here to argue/brag cubanlord, as you already seem to know all the specs...
The main diff between the 7800 and the 6800 are the number of shaders and pipelines. These are very important factors to consider over MHZ for upcoming games. I think you made the right choice with the 6800, though. 7800 is a pretty big price markup.
In my opinion you could have saved some money getting a 6600gt. Best bang for the buck right now. I have one and I can play every game...even F.E.A.R. (high settings), and it only has 128 MB of memory. However, 256MB is better for large scale games like Battlefield 2. 512 is overkill at this time. The 6800 will be outdated by the time games use that much video mem.
The 6800/7800 are going to be seen a small stepping stones between the landmark 6600 and... the next big thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cubanlord
Joined: 08 Jul 2005
Location: In Japan!
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hanguker wrote: |
I don't know if you just came on here to argue/brag cubanlord, as you already seem to know all the specs...
The main diff between the 7800 and the 6800 are the number of shaders and pipelines. These are very important factors to consider over MHZ for upcoming games. I think you made the right choice with the 6800, though. 7800 is a pretty big price markup.
In my opinion you could have saved some money getting a 6600gt. Best bang for the buck right now. I have one and I can play every game...even F.E.A.R. (high settings), and it only has 128 MB of memory. However, 256MB is better for large scale games like Battlefield 2. 512 is overkill at this time. The 6800 will be outdated by the time games use that much video mem.
The 6800/7800 are going to be seen a small stepping stones between the landmark 6600 and... the next big thing. |
I will say this: I am not one of these "I have nothing better to do than go on Dave's ESL and pick a fight with others or make myself feel good by 'bragging' about what I bought" people. I see from previous posts that many different people have many different opinions on products. I like to learn their opinions because it gives me a chance to learn more than what I know. In total, your remark about me wanting to brag is completely unfounded. I, one of few, actually think a lot of people that have posted in my topics are pretty smart (a lot smarter than me) when it comes to these things. I value their opinion. If you want to contribute something new to the post then go for it. Just don't waste our time with lacious remarks like, "oh he's bragging, etc.". Honestly it's a waste space.
Regarding your remark about 512 ram, see....that's worth posting. I know it's hard for some people to ...RESIST....the urge to flame or berate someone with slanderous remarks on this website. I am sure, to some of you, if feels sooooooooooooooo good to pick a fight over the web where your anonimity saves your behind. Just don't bring that crap here. Contribute...or STFU.
On that note, thanks for the info. about 512ram.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
elric
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hanguker wrote: |
| The 6800/7800 are going to be seen a small stepping stones between the landmark 6600 and... the next big thing. |
I think the 7800GTX is the new ATI9700. Its so much faster than anything else and you can SLI it so you probably wouldn't have to sell a 7800GTX for a couple of years and still have very good performance. If Sony is putting a 7800GTX in every PS3 this thing is going to have a long shelf life regardless of how good it is.
That said the next big thing will probably be an ATI card. NVIDIA has been winning the last cycle big time, so its time for ATI to put out their next big card line or stay in second for the next cycle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cubanlord
Joined: 08 Jul 2005
Location: In Japan!
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| elric wrote: |
| hanguker wrote: |
| The 6800/7800 are going to be seen a small stepping stones between the landmark 6600 and... the next big thing. |
I think the 7800GTX is the new ATI9700. Its so much faster than anything else and you can SLI it so you probably wouldn't have to sell a 7800GTX for a couple of years and still have very good performance. If Sony is putting a 7800GTX in every PS3 this thing is going to have a long shelf life regardless of how good it is.
That said the next big thing will probably be an ATI card. NVIDIA has been winning the last cycle big time, so its time for ATI to put out their next big card line or stay in second for the next cycle. |
from what i have read, Nvidia usually tends to outperform ATI. Is this true? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cubanlord wrote: |
| from what i have read, Nvidia usually tends to outperform ATI. Is this true? |
Historically, ATI has generally carried a faster product line but this has not been true for the second half of 2005 as their new product line (X1300, X1600, and X1800+) were heavily delayed in coming to market (originally anticipated in June, they didn't hit in volume until December). So they were running with older products against nVidea's newer cards.
Their next card, the X1900, begins chip production next week and once available is generally expected to be the top card on the market at a price just as demanding.
As an economy card, I like the X1600XT with a 600mHz core which can be found for under $200US. Though I wouldn't look down on anyone who went with a different card. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
muggie2dammit
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Location: Ilsan, Korea
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 4:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cubanlord wrote: |
| hanguker wrote: |
The 6800/7800 are going to be seen a small stepping stones between the landmark 6600 and... the next big thing. |
Regarding your remark about 512 ram, see....that's worth posting. On that note, thanks for the info. about 512ram. |
The 7800GT isn't a lot more expensive than the 6800GT. The number of pipelines it has gives it a significant edge over the 6800GT; on the other hand, the 512MB memory will come in useful for doing graphics intensive manipulation programs and some games. Just because games don't use 512MB now doesn't mean they won't in the future. Any games which use large maps, or significant texture manipulation, will be coded to take advantage of the maximum amount of memory very soon - such as BF2.
Where the 7800GT is better is in the work it can do vs the work that the 6800GT can do. It has more power, because it can process more at a time. Still, with SLI, even the older cards can do well for a considerable lenth of time, by allowing two of them to work together. And in this respect, with the 6800GT being cheaper, you can afford to get another one when the 6800GT no longer cuts it, and the two together will keep your system going happily for another year or two.
In any case, you've made a purchase to upgrade your system, and it will do well. Congratulations!
Muggie2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
muggie2dammit
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Location: Ilsan, Korea
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 4:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="cubanlord]from what i have read, Nvidia usually tends to outperform ATI. Is this true?[/quote]
No.
The Radeon 8500 outperformed the Nvidia alternative, later the 9500Pro/9700Pro/9800Pro seriously outperformed the Nvidia equivalents.
Right now, the top end X1800XTs are around the performance of the equivalent Nvidia cards, and the (to be released next week) X1900XT will outperform any cards in Nvidia's lineup.
generally, Nvidia has been better slightly more than half of the time, and ATi slightly less than half the time.
One of the differences is in the processing depth. 24bit vs 32bit. If you process at 24bit the image quality can be a fraction worse but the speed will be quite a bit faster, whereas 32bit will be the reverse. Some games are coded for 24bit, others for 32bit. That's why there are games that run better on Nvidia hardware, and others on ATi hardware.
Basically check out the games you want to play, and the programs you want to use, and see which card will give the best performance in the bulk of those, and that's probably the best choice.
Muggie2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
