nVidia 6800GT vs X800Pro Benchies

[LilGator]

http://www.pcpop.com/article/2004/909/1.shtml

Here are some benches from ^

http://www.pcpop.com/popimages/2004-5-18-23-4-34-7349.gif
http://www.pcpop.com/popimages/2004-5-18-23-15-42-1408.gif
http://www.pcpop.com/popimages/2004-5-18-23-38-52-3606.gif
http://www.pcpop.com/popimages/2004-5-19-0-33-27-8114.gif
http://www.pcpop.com/popimages/2004-5-19-13-0-39-7381.gif

This is a 16-pipe 6800U clocked down to GT specs (GT is 16pipes as well)

[ant1]

Price?

[Kanavit]

The Geforce 6800 GT seems to be the winner from Nvidia, price wise it should fall in the $399 category, ultra is $499, and non-ultra should be around $299. All very appealing prices , not just for sheer performance, but futureproof for DX 9.0c too.

[Djuice]

by the loods of those scores, they are running those at pure speeds, excluding AA/AF... Therefore A 6800GT seems the way to go, but if AA/AF are used my guess would be that the X800PRO would win out.

[althes]

WEll lets see what happens when macci or opp get a 6800, the 6800 does look like a better card for games.

[Soulburner]

Originally posted by Djuice
by the loods of those scores, they are running those at pure speeds, excluding AA/AF... Therefore A 6800GT seems the way to go, but if AA/AF are used my guess would be that the X800PRO would win out.
No, read the descriptions again...one of them was 1600x1200 8xAF...

Anyway is it just me or do those screenshots show the 6800 having the best image? And why does it look like crap with the 9800XT?

[Djuice]

Sorry, i must be blind, but AA does take a hellva lot more strain on the GPU... So If AA was activated i would assume the scores would level more evenly between the two.

[blinky]

wait how did they manage 8757 on 3d03 on the x800pro, people get 10.3k on 2500 bartons

[Djuice]

lol, yeah i was wondering about taht too.

[Cow2kie]

just looks like some nvidia fanboy review to me.... :stick:

[TinTin]

The 6800GT is a overclocked verison, not stock.;)

[LilGator]

?

6800GT is an underclocked 6800U

[kromosto]

really strange review lol :D

[Soulburner]

Originally posted by blinky
wait how did they manage 8757 on 3d03 on the x800pro, people get 10.3k on 2500 bartons
Overclocked, but not stock...but it still is low.

And yes the 6800GT is a lower clocked cheaper version of the card.

[bh2k]

Nvidia still cheats probably.

[Soulburner]

Originally posted by bh2k
Nvidia still cheats probably.
:rolleyes:

[Djuice]

Now those benchmarks seems quite fishy, coz all the other benchmarks soon on the web about the X800PRO compared to the 6800U shows otherwise.... very fishy indeed!

[blinky]

Originally posted by Soulburner
Overclocked, but not stock...but it still is low.

And yes the 6800GT is a lower clocked cheaper version of the card. no i meant a barton @ 2500mhz

[zakelwe]

Originally posted by bh2k
Nvidia still cheats probably.

:rolleyes:

[Kanavit]

Nvidia still uses full 32-bit precesion shaders, while ATI only uses 24-bit atm. Plus Nvidia runs trilinear filtering with AF, while ATI only uses bilinear with AF enabled. Nvidia has digital vibrance 3.0 too.

[Djuice]

This benchmark was rigged...

[blinky]

Originally posted by Djuice
This benchmark was rigged... amen brotha

[althes]

lol

[Bundles]

Originally posted by bh2k
Nvidia still cheats probably.

:rolleyes:

[hrhrhrfoot]

why the bloody hell does the 6800 "beat" the x800 in 3dmark, but lose in games....

[Soulburner]

Originally posted by hrhrhrfoot
why the bloody hell does the 6800 "beat" the x800 in 3dmark, but lose in games....
We already answered this question before. 3DMark is run at 1024x768 and no other IQ features enabled :rolleyes:

[Murmlos]

When is the 6800GT available? And when will we see any benches :D I do must say that the GT seems to be a pretty good card for that pricing.. Looking forward to my trip 2 the US this summer, everything is soo much cheaper over there.. lucky bastards :P

/greets from sweden

[***Deimos***]

Both X800 and 6800 cards are pretty close in performance...
so I choose to evaluate which one is better based on another criteria: which one get down to $200 first.

and.....

GO
-------------------------------------------------------
these benchmark scores aren't rigged. 6800gt is 16x1. x800pro is 12x1. And 6800gt even has faster mem. The x800pro wins on other websites because of trylinear optimization fiasco, and reviewers disabling 6800 brilinear. But, in reality as I said initially, I don't think the differences are that big.

[Mini]

Originally posted by Kanavit
Nvidia still uses full 32-bit precesion shaders, while ATI only uses 24-bit atm. Plus Nvidia runs trilinear filtering with AF, while ATI only uses bilinear with AF enabled. Nvidia has digital vibrance 3.0 too.

Hmm... Follow up dude... Nvidia in far cry runs 16 bit(Still hasnt been fixed)... Havnt you seen the reviews???

Nvidia runs trillenear too... But have you seen the performance loss??? The only games playable with it on max is serious sam and quake3... Old games usually running 300 FPS anyway...

But X800pro will fall in price... Isnt it only 429$ in the US??? Thats like 30$ from 6800gt... And GT first out in a month...

All i learned from test up till now is that if you want to play games in 1024x768 with no AA/AF then buy a NV40 card... But if you want details(DUUUH isnt that why we buy a highend card) then buy ATI...

Nvidia can make a better IQ... But its just unplayable... Saw a test on farcry when u forced max Q from driver settings NV40 was running 7-8 FPS...

Unreal3 demo from NV40 launch, the rumours say that it ran faster on ATI cards...

The NV40 has a HELL of alot GREAT features... But its just to fu**in slow to run them :D

Nvidias :smileysex again...

[Soulburner]

Originally posted by Mini
Nvidia can make a better IQ... But its just unplayable... Saw a test on farcry when u forced max Q from driver settings NV40 was running 7-8 FPS...
Show me the link for that? Sounds like more anti-NV bs to me...and please, don't show me the same 8xAA NV vs 6xAA ATI in Far Cry that i've seen a dozen times.

Anandtech ran Far Cry with max settings and 2048 resolution and it still actually played somewhere around 20-30fps (can't remember the exact number).

[***Deimos***]

Mini ... wrong wrong and wrong.

What you learned from previous benchmarks that didn't yet know about ATI's trilinear optimizations is that ATI AA+AF with trilinear opt (btw: cant disable), is faster than nVidia with tri opt off.. and only a bit faster with it on for both cards.

"max Q from driver settings NV40 was running 7-8 FPS..." - that would be 8XAA which we all know is useless and there is no point in comparing... and btw: I still dont know how some reviewers have the audacity to compare nVidia 8XAA to ATI 6XAA... 8 and 6 aren't even the same numbers! And being payed off by ATI, you know they are doing it on purpose because any dimwit would know that the SuperSampling part will effectively make it perform like 16xAA (aka superslow).

Regardless, I would still get the ATI X800 because it is the only one available, and will likely be cheaper than the 6800s by the time they come out. You can compare paper/preview specs till you are blue in the face, but if you can't get in your local store, than whats the point? (rhetorical question)

edit - NV40 seems to have higher instruction/cycle than x800 and if "great features but slow" you mean SM3.0 dynamic branching, then fyi: dynamic branching will always take more clock cycles than static branching.. (yes even on R500). Its slow for AthlonXP and even slower for P4. But it's there to make shader programming easier - and considering how few shaders are being made for games.. I'm sure it will be appreciated.

[***Deimos***]

Soulburner

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=2044&p=11

only 1600x1200... and btw: this is obviously on "low" IQ settings (aka low quality textures, low quality shaders etc). This means 0.00000% PS2.0 stuff. NV40 not only manages to produce poor image quality because it's using NV3x path but also low performance. And there was also pretty stupid discussion on www.rage3d.com about benchmarks showing how 6800 scores much lower if you change the deviceID to that of a X800. Ofcourse they never tried changing the deviceID of the X800 to that of a TNT2 or Voodoo1 for that matter...

-------------
There are lies, damn lies and then there are statistics (aka benchamrks). Using this:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=2044&p=18
I could prove that X800 is better without AA+AF, and that 6800U is better with 4AA+8AF.

BOTTOM LINE: No landslide difference in performance either way. However only X800 is available.. and who knows when 6800GT will be here.

[Soulburner]

I was talking about this actually:

Even more impressive is the fact that we were able to run the GeForce 6800 Ultra at playable frame rates at 2048x1536 with 16xAF (it didn't like enabling even 2xAA - this could either be a hardware or driver limitation, but we just won't know until the driver is more refined). Our demo we used ran between 30 and 40 fps and averaged 34. The game was very playable and very beautiful. It not only seems like we need a new power supply to run the card, but a new monitor to display the ultra high resolutions the card can render playable.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.html?i=2023&p=17

BTW you don't even need AA at 2048x1536 ;)