Nvidia 7900GTX/GT Launch

ChemicalWarrior · 03-09-2006, 03:40 PM

Welp, Nvidia dropped this card today and the verdict is: Hahaha.

Okay, lets be serious for a second on what this card brings and what it doesnt bring.

The new 7900GTX is basically a 7800GTX 512MB but with a 100Mhz core increase and a 100Mhz memory DECREASE. This means they loss the all important memory bandwidth, but raises fill rate a lot. But most games these days lean towards bandwidth limitation. So what we end up seeing is a decent improvment over the old 7800GTX but no gain at all on ATi's X1900XT/XTX cards.

The 7900GTX/GT use less transistors than the 7800GTX, so they run cooler.

So if you're looking for a new card I really wouldnt consider the 7900GTX, its not as fast as the ATi X1900XTX/XT in most games, and will loose its gain as games get even more shader based, and it still has bad image quality compared to ATi.

Not much to point out as far as reviews go, I havent found a good one yet, waiting on the Beyond3D review.

Harbinger · 03-09-2006, 04:13 PM

Still better than my 9800 Pro

SMA11 · 03-09-2006, 06:59 PM

9800 pro 4 life

Mac · 03-09-2006, 07:08 PM

I'm starting to get bored with my 9800 pro... I want something with at least 2 gigs of memory on it

ChemicalWarrior · 03-09-2006, 07:13 PM

Yeah, that wont be happening for a good while.

The reason why the 7900GTX has slower memory is actually because of a memory shortage..... sorta. ATi actually did something pretty unusual to Nvidia. ATi bought up a HUGE shipment of very fast DDR3 graphics memory, the kind needed to reach the insane speeds on the current ATi and Nvidia flagship cards, meaning ATi had enough memory, Nvidia didnt. So Nvidia had to get the slower rated memory, therefore causing them to ship cards with slower memory.

The really funny part is ATi actuall doesnt even run the high rated memory at its full potential, instead they run it at 1.5Ghz instead of its rated maximum of 1.8Ghz.

Anyway, no sense in buying a really high end card right now, not with R600 and G80 coming out at the end of this year or early next, and those will be huge changes.

Harbinger · 03-09-2006, 07:41 PM

Thanks for the advice Chem. It looks like I'll be waiting a bit before building my next PC.

The really sad thing is my MacBook Pro (when the damn thing ships) will be my current gaming rig. With a 2.0GHz Intel Core Duo processor and a 256 MB ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 will most likely kick my current 2.4 GHz P4 with a 128 MB 9800 PRO's collective ***.

So, I'll have what? Doom 3 and Tetris to play until I upgrade my PC

Chem will this be a good gaming rig? What are the bottlenecks? . The hard drive is what stands out to me.

15.4-inch: 2.0GHz (MA464LL)

2.0GHz Intel Core Duo

2GB (single SODIMM) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-5300)

15.4-inch (diagonal), 1440 x 900 resolution, TFT widescreen

ATI Mobility Radeon X1600 with 256MB of GDDR3 SDRAM and dual-link DVI

Built-in iSight Camera, DVI, VGA (DVI to VGA adapter included)

Combined optical digital input/audio line in, combined optical digital output/headphone out, stereo speakers, microphone

100GB Serial ATA/100; 5400 rpm

SuperDrive (DVD±RW/CD-RW)

Built-in 10/100/1000BASE-T (Gigabit)

Built-in 54-Mbps AirPort Extreme (802.11g); built-in Bluetooth 2.0+EDR

Apple Remote; full-size, illuminated keyboard with ambient light sensor; Scrolling Trackpad

One FireWire 400, two USB 2.0 ports, and ExpressCard/34 slot

DVI to VGA adapter included (other adapters sold separately)

85W power adapter with MagSafe connector, AC wall plug, power cord, lithium-polymer battery

YES, I know gaming selection sucks on a MAC

But for the next 6 months or so I can live with it...

ChemicalWarrior · 03-09-2006, 07:48 PM

It'd play most current games fairly well, the X1600 isnt a huge upgrade speed wise over the 9800 Pro (maybe a 30% increase?). But has much more features.

Also, why dont you play CS:S with us? That's a game I know your PC can play! And we play it!!!

Harbinger · 03-09-2006, 07:52 PM

Thanks Chem

I know I should play cs:s with you guys and I may soon. I got bored with it though but hey maybe I should 1) reinstall and 2) play it

. Maybe this weekend I'll get around to it.

Mookie · 03-11-2006, 11:31 AM

the new macbook pros have decent specs but the problem is they just dont make use of the full power that they could, overall though still a nice laptop, my laptop runs games well with the following specs:
AMD Turion 64 ML-30 @ 1.6 GHz.
1.5GB DDR RAM
100GB 4200 RPM Hard drive
ATI Mobility Radeon x700 64MB
built in 802.11 b/g wireless LAN
10/100/1000 gigabit ethernet
6-1 card reader
15.4" WXGA TFT LCD display
DVD Super Drive(double layer burning)

works well for most things and it only cost me $1250

though i would like to replace the CPU with the new ML-44 which runs @ 2.4 GHz. same power consumption and pin number from what i read tho i dont know how easy it is to switch cpu chips on this particular laptop, knowing most laptops it wont even be possible.

i know im not the tech guy here, but just from personal experience any good gaming rig starts off with a good AMD processor, the AMD Athlon 64 3700+ is a great low price chip that i've used in a comp i built and it actually has a 1MB L2 cache unlike a lot of the other chips which have 512KB caches. when it comes to graphics cards i agree with chem, ATI is better.

ChemicalWarrior · 03-11-2006, 12:27 PM

ATi is better right now. To me graphics cards break down like this: Image quality > Performance.

The X1900XT and 7900GTX are very very close for the most part in performance right now. Though the X1900XT will move up higher because it has more available shader power, but right now they are equal.

The big down fall for Nvidia though is that they lack features compared to ATi, and they lack image quality compared to ATi. ATi offers better texture filtering, better AA, and they produce the image much more closer to the orginal rastier run.

So until Nvidia fixes their image quality issues ,I see no reason at all to go with an Nvidia card. Hopefully they fix this issue with G80.