HD 2900XT vs 8800GTS/GTX

Just get the GTX for $50 extra it owns all but the ultra, the 2900xt is great for dx9 only but not for future dx10 games. If you want to save money then getGTX should be good for a couple years. However seeing as how the 9800GTX will be here in a couple months you would be better off waiting as I am sure the 8800 will drop in price and the 9800 should be faster.

Just get the GTX for $50 extra it owns all but the ultra, the 2900xt is great for dx9 only but not for future dx10 games. If you want to save money then getGTX should be good for a couple years. However seeing as how the 9800GTX will be here in a couple months you would be better off waiting as I am sure the 8800 will drop in price and the 9800 should be faster.

BrooklynBomber

wrong. Hd2900XT will be as good as 8800GTX or 88000GTS at least in future games, that started to develop after it's release. Whit a known and optimised games for it as good as for nVidia cards aswell

Comparing games now in dx10 isn't very good, because nvidia fanboys (you too) compare tests which are testet with the newest nVidia drivers, whilst ATI fanboys compare tests when new drivers for ATI come out.

and to add my point of view is to buy 8800GTS 320mb, which is the best for the price in the dx10 graphics card selection. 8800GTX (don't need to add ultra which is fairly obivous), HD2900XT maybe and 8600GTS are just not worth the GREAT amount of money you spend on. Remember that!

[QUOTE="BrooklynBomber"]

Just get the GTX for $50 extra it owns all but the ultra, the 2900xt is great for dx9 only but not for future dx10 games. If you want to save money then getGTX should be good for a couple years. However seeing as how the 9800GTX will be here in a couple months you would be better off waiting as I am sure the 8800 will drop in price and the 9800 should be faster.

Shegevara

wrong. Hd2900XT will be as good as 8800GTX or 88000GTS at least in future games, that started to develop after it's release. Whit a known and optimised games for it as good as for nVidia cards aswell

Comparing games now in dx10 isn't very good, because nvidia fanboys (you too) compare tests which are testet with the newest nVidia drivers, whilst ATI fanboys compare tests when new drivers for ATI come out.

and to add my point of view is to buy 8800GTS 320mb, which is the best for the price in the dx10 graphics card selection. 8800GTX (don't need to add ultra which is fairly obivous), HD2900XT maybe and 8600GTS are just not worth the GREAT amount of money you spend on. Remember that!

I have seen test where even the 8800GTS 320mb has beat the 2900XT in dx10 game mode on xbit the least biased site out there. If your only playing in dx9 the the 2900XT is a great card like I said. I did not make the test or the gpu's so how can i be biased for presenting the facts??

Just get the GTX for $50 extra it owns all but the ultra, the 2900xt is great for dx9 only but not for future dx10 games. If you want to save money then getGTX should be good for a couple years. However seeing as how the 9800GTX will be here in a couple months you would be better off waiting as I am sure the 8800 will drop in price and the 9800 should be faster.

BrooklynBomber

Why is everyone assuming that a 9000 series card is coming out? nVidia will anounce it a while before its release. (unless they want everyone to waste their money on a 8800 card and a 9000 card only a few months later) I just think that there would be some real proof that the card exists if it was coming out soon.

[QUOTE="BrooklynBomber"]

Just get the GTX for $50 extra it owns all but the ultra, the 2900xt is great for dx9 only but not for future dx10 games. If you want to save money then getGTX should be good for a couple years. However seeing as how the 9800GTX will be here in a couple months you would be better off waiting as I am sure the 8800 will drop in price and the 9800 should be faster.

Shegevara

wrong. Hd2900XT will be as good as 8800GTX or 88000GTS at least in future games, that started to develop after it's release. Whit a known and optimised games for it as good as for nVidia cards aswell

Comparing games now in dx10 isn't very good, because nvidia fanboys (you too) compare tests which are testet with the newest nVidia drivers, whilst ATI fanboys compare tests when new drivers for ATI come out.

and to add my point of view is to buy 8800GTS 320mb, which is the best for the price in the dx10 graphics card selection. 8800GTX (don't need to add ultra which is fairly obivous), HD2900XT maybe and 8600GTS are just not worth the GREAT amount of money you spend on. Remember that!

I have to agree with you. How can you beat the 8800GTS 320MB for only $280 on newegg?

Why is everyone assuming that a 9000 series card is coming out? nVidia will anounce it a while before its release. (unless they want everyone to waste their money on a 8800 card and a 9000 card only a few months later) I just think that there would be some real proof that the card exists if it was coming out soon.jed-at-war

One of the most reliable sources that I know on XS...

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2418433&postcount=62

The G92/G98 are being released Nov 12, the G90 IS on it's way whether you like it or not.

[QUOTE="jed-at-war"]Why is everyone assuming that a 9000 series card is coming out? nVidia will anounce it a while before its release. (unless they want everyone to waste their money on a 8800 card and a 9000 card only a few months later) I just think that there would be some real proof that the card exists if it was coming out soon.LordEC911

One of the most reliable sources that I know on XS...

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2418433&postcount=62

The G92/G98 are being released Nov 12, the G90 IS on it's way whether you like it or not.

That doesn't seem that reliable. Anyway, I am not against it coming out. I would like it to come out because other cards will drop in price. I am just not going to consider it as fact until a reliable source says it is coming out.

That doesn't seem that reliable. Anyway, I am not against it coming out. I would like it to come out because other cards will drop in price. I am just not going to consider it as fact until a reliable source says it is coming out.jed-at-war

No he may not seem reliable to him because you don't know him.
I guess I am also not reliable in your eyes, since you don't trust me enough.

Oh well, hope you have fun with your new card.

All the test I have seen say the 8800gtx is the card to own right now in dx10 (ultra not woth it imo) ant that's the future of pc gaming. You want to play dx10 with all the settings turned on then the 8800GTX is the card to own right now in a couple months the 9800GTX will be here and should be faster making the 8800GTX even cheaper.

I have seen test where even the 8800GTS 320mb has beat the 2900XT in dx10 game mode on xbit the least biased site out there. If your only playing in dx9 the the 2900XT is a great card like I said. I did not make the test or the gpu's so how can i be biased for presenting the facts??

BrooklynBomber

8800GTS was better in few tests due to instability issues of HD2900XT, which could be changed with new drivers.

Looking where your post goes, i presume you read only my first paragraph.

And to tell you the truth, 8800GTX isn't worth it also and not IMO.

The card that gives frames per second below 20 in a first person shooter at the resolution of 1280x1024, which is the preformance result of 8800GTX and mid-range cards having results even worse, i won't speak out loud that this is future of pc gaming

[QUOTE="jed-at-war"]Why is everyone assuming that a 9000 series card is coming out? nVidia will anounce it a while before its release. (unless they want everyone to waste their money on a 8800 card and a 9000 card only a few months later) I just think that there would be some real proof that the card exists if it was coming out soon.LordEC911

One of the most reliable sources that I know on XS...

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2418433&postcount=62

The G92/G98 are being released Nov 12, the G90 IS on it's way whether you like it or not.

Those are mid-range and lower end cards from what I understand. The 9800 GTX flagship card could be anwhere from 3-5 months away.

I assume you're buying a completely new computer? It might be best to hold out for PCIe 2.0 as I know you will be able to use 1.0 cards in a 2.0 slot but I'm not sure about the other way around.d-rtyboy

It will be the other way around, but it's definitely worth waiting another few weeks anyway.

Those are mid-range and lower end cards from what I understand. The 9800 GTX flagship card could be anwhere from 3-5 months away.shanelevy

Did you not read the link at all?
He has seen/been playing with an early G90 sample for awhile now.

Actually I was wondering.

Im considering buying a 8800 320 ($375 AUD), 8800 640 ($495 AUD), or 2900XT ($489 AUD), next week... Or in a few days.

The only problem is im not sure which one I should choose. Im aware of the bottlenecking of each card on my x4800 - but i intend on keeping the card for a few years, and move it to a quad core system in the near(ish) future, so overclocking is a strong selling point.

This article covers bottlenecking

This article covers 8800 vs 2900 (recent) - the 8800 wins.

I also know the 2900XT outperforms the 8800GTX in a few games, but under-performs in a few, and runs like a dog with AA and AF enabled - in comparison to the 8800 GTX/GTS which is stable in each benchmark.

Actually I was wondering.

Im considering buying a 8800 320 ($375 AUD), 8800 640 ($495 AUD), or 2900XT ($489 AUD), next week... Or in a few days.

The only problem is im not sure which one I should choose. Im aware of the bottlenecking of each card on my x4800 - but i intend on keeping the card for a few years, and move it to a quad core system in the near(ish) future, so overclocking is a strong selling point.

This article covers bottlenecking

This article covers 8800 vs 2900 (recent) - the 8800 wins.

I also know the 2900XT outperforms the 8800GTX in a few games, but under-performs in a few, and runs like a dog with AA and AF enabled - in comparison to the 8800 GTX/GTS which is stable in each benchmark.

skrat_01

you want my opinion? i actually have a 1GB HD2900 and i have now bought an XFX 8800 GTX XXX Edition. i can honestly say, im way more happy with the performance of the GTX. i've been ATI for the last 4-5 years. i finally decide to switch, just to change it up and i feel i've made a very wise move.

a lot of the new games coming out are Nvidia optimised aswell. if you were going multi-card setup, then yes get the HD2900 and Crossfire, coz Crossfire seems to work better than SLI, especially in benching. seems to be more stable and compatible. SLI just doesnt work right. oh by the way, im speaking from a Vista point of view, cant speak for Windows XP.

SLI wont be bad forever tho ;) and when its going, i rekon it will walk all over current ATI cards. just my opinion. beware the GTX is a loooooong card.

oh btw, i know its not a real accurate comparison, but just to give you an idea...

with my old E6420 @ 3.6ghz and my HD2900 1GB, i got 11903 in 3DMark06.

with my Q6600 G0 @ 2.7ghz and my 8800 GTX, i get 11946. and i havnt started overclocking the quad yet. i know u cant compare the CPU's, but the GTX gets over 5000 for each Shader Model score.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

Actually I was wondering.

Im considering buying a 8800 320 ($375 AUD), 8800 640 ($495 AUD), or 2900XT ($489 AUD), next week... Or in a few days.

The only problem is im not sure which one I should choose. Im aware of the bottlenecking of each card on my x4800 - but i intend on keeping the card for a few years, and move it to a quad core system in the near(ish) future, so overclocking is a strong selling point.

This article covers bottlenecking

This article covers 8800 vs 2900 (recent) - the 8800 wins.

I also know the 2900XT outperforms the 8800GTX in a few games, but under-performs in a few, and runs like a dog with AA and AF enabled - in comparison to the 8800 GTX/GTS which is stable in each benchmark.

crazycolt1234

Catalyst 7.9 just came out. We Need new benchies! As far as I'm concerened, the 2900xt is a good buy. It beats the 8800 gts in most games and come with the black box, which makes it a real good deal.crazycolt1234

If it does benchmark well than i'll consider it.

Hopefully its woeful WiC, and + AA, and AF performance improve.

If so I might buy a 2900 over an 8800 this upcomming monday.

[QUOTE="crazycolt1234"]Catalyst 7.9 just came out. We Need new benchies! As far as I'm concerened, the 2900xt is a good buy. It beats the 8800 gts in most games and come with the black box, which makes it a real good deal.skrat_01

If it does benchmark well than i'll consider it.

Hopefully its woeful WiC, and + AA, and AF performance improve.

If so I might buy a 2900 over an 8800 this upcomming monday.

on the 10th

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="crazycolt1234"]Catalyst 7.9 just came out. We Need new benchies! As far as I'm concerened, the 2900xt is a good buy. It beats the 8800 gts in most games and come with the black box, which makes it a real good deal.IQT786

If it does benchmark well than i'll consider it.

Hopefully its woeful WiC, and + AA, and AF performance improve.

If so I might buy a 2900 over an 8800 this upcomming monday.

on the 10th

[QUOTE="BrooklynBomber"]

All the test I have seen say the 8800gtx is the card to own right now in dx10 (ultra not woth it imo) ant that's the future of pc gaming. You want to play dx10 with all the settings turned on then the 8800GTX is the card to own right now in a couple months the 9800GTX will be here and should be faster making the 8800GTX even cheaper.

I have seen test where even the 8800GTS 320mb has beat the 2900XT in dx10 game mode on xbit the least biased site out there. If your only playing in dx9 the the 2900XT is a great card like I said. I did not make the test or the gpu's so how can i be biased for presenting the facts??

Shegevara

8800GTS was better in few tests due to instability issues of HD2900XT, which could be changed with new drivers.

Looking where your post goes, i presume you read only my first paragraph.

And to tell you the truth, 8800GTX isn't worth it also and not IMO.

The card that gives frames per second below 20 in a first person shooter at the resolution of 1280x1024, which is the preformance result of 8800GTX and mid-range cards having results even worse, i won't speak out loud that this is future of pc gaming

Where 8800 GTX give you less then 20FPS in 1280x1024??? Which game?? I always had more then 20FPS. The lowest was around 23 i belive when i was running oblivion at 16xAA, 16xAF, Supersampling AA, High Quality filtrering in 1280x1024.

[QUOTE="Shegevara"][QUOTE="BrooklynBomber"]

All the test I have seen say the 8800gtx is the card to own right now in dx10 (ultra not woth it imo) ant that's the future of pc gaming. You want to play dx10 with all the settings turned on then the 8800GTX is the card to own right now in a couple months the 9800GTX will be here and should be faster making the 8800GTX even cheaper.

I have seen test where even the 8800GTS 320mb has beat the 2900XT in dx10 game mode on xbit the least biased site out there. If your only playing in dx9 the the 2900XT is a great card like I said. I did not make the test or the gpu's so how can i be biased for presenting the facts??

domke13

8800GTS was better in few tests due to instability issues of HD2900XT, which could be changed with new drivers.

Looking where your post goes, i presume you read only my first paragraph.

And to tell you the truth, 8800GTX isn't worth it also and not IMO.

The card that gives frames per second below 20 in a first person shooter at the resolution of 1280x1024, which is the preformance result of 8800GTX and mid-range cards having results even worse, i won't speak out loud that this is future of pc gaming

Where 8800 GTX give you less then 20FPS in 1280x1024??? Which game?? I always had more then 20FPS. The lowest was around 23 i belive when i was running oblivion at 16xAA, 16xAF, Supersampling AA, High Quality filtrering in 1280x1024.

the last scene of dx10 in this game.. bench (in blue)

--> http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/diamond-viper-hd2900xt-1024mb_9.html#sect1

Im still a skeptic.

I'll have to see the new 7.9 driver benchmarks in comparison to 8800 benchmarks to be convinced.

As for the Black Box bundle - I honestly want to buy the orangle box retail.

Im still on the path of a 8800 GTS right now.

I'd recomend to anyone the 8800 gts 320mb... It's the greatest card for its value... I just bought one for 280 dollars at circuit city... It's easy to overcloack too. And with such a cheap card, you won't feel bad about upgrading in a year, or year and half...

I suppose the 2900 beating the 8800 640mb GTS in bioshock isn't enough evidence for you. Well Why dont you wait until the crysis demo comes out, by then all sorts of benchmarks will come out like the next day or so and then you'll be completly informed on what to buy. filmography

sooner or later nvidia fanboy will come to bash your post with false benchmarks from random biased sites. No use i tell you.

Sometimes HD 2900XT is better than 8800GTX (Most of time GTX beats 2900XT) but sometimes worst than 8800GTS.

Personally I don't have a GTX. I have a GTS 640MB & I'm happy with it. If you have enough money to buy a 8800GTX, just buy it. Belive me you won't regret it.

[QUOTE="filmography"]I suppose the 2900 beating the 8800 640mb GTS in bioshock isn't enough evidence for you. Well Why dont you wait until the crysis demo comes out, by then all sorts of benchmarks will come out like the next day or so and then you'll be completly informed on what to buy. Shegevara

sooner or later nvidia fanboy will come to bash your post with false benchmarks from random biased sites. No use i tell you.

And yes the UT3 engine is tested - its where the 2900XT exels the most.

But the 8800 comes out on top overall.

Here is the conclusion:

The bad news is that while these two very new games really liked the Radeon HD 2900XT, not all new games do, as evident when playing the new RTS title 'World in Conflict', which played very poorly on the Radeon. This is where the GeForce 8800 GTS really does stand out as being the better product, as there really are no games that it sucks at. Sure there are games that are not quite as good on the GTS, but all games tested were still very playable on the GTS using maximum in game visual settings. Sadly this cannot be said about the Radeon HD 2900XT, which did slip up in more than one game.

After roughly 4 months and numerous driver releases we are now confident this is just the way things are. While the Radeon HD 2900XT can, and in most cases does, deliver excellent performance for a $400 US graphics card, it is still quite flaky in other areas. The GeForce 8800 GTS is more of a well rounded graphics card, delivering acceptable performance in all gaming titles. Then for another $100-$150 US the GeForce 8800 GTX is still an absolute beast, delivering amazing performance in newer games such as Bioshock and World in Conflict.

Clearly the biggest advantage the GeForce 8800 GTS has over the Radeon HD 2900XT is that for roughly the same performance, it uses much less power and is far less demanding on the system. It is almost possible to run SLI GeForce 8800 GTS graphics cards and consume about the same amount of power that you would running a single Radeon HD 2900XT. The GeForce 8800 GTS is also much cooler and quieter for the very same reason, making it a more practical option as well.

So while we have been undecided between the Radeon HD 2900XT and the GeForce 8800 GTS for some time now, we have to say that the GTS is a better buy. Of course there is very little difference between the two products, as we have shown you in this article, but as I just said, overall the 8800 GTS is a little more polished when compared to the Radeon HD 2900XT, which seems to be a bit rougher around the edges. Then finally there really is no comparison between the GeForce 8800 GTX and the Radeon HD 2900XT despite the Radeon getting up and defeating the GTX in a few select tests.

------------------

Now ive been using ATI cards since I switched from my GeForce 2MX 32mb, so no brand bias opinion from me. I just want bank for my buck - and the 8800gts and 2900xt are $6 AUD the difference.

[QUOTE="Shegevara"]

[QUOTE="filmography"]I suppose the 2900 beating the 8800 640mb GTS in bioshock isn't enough evidence for you. Well Why dont you wait until the crysis demo comes out, by then all sorts of benchmarks will come out like the next day or so and then you'll be completly informed on what to buy. skrat_01

sooner or later nvidia fanboy will come to bash your post with false benchmarks from random biased sites. No use i tell you.

And yes the UT3 engine is tested - its where the 2900XT exels the most.

But the 8800 comes out on top overall.

Here is the conclusion:

The bad news is that while these two very new games really liked the Radeon HD 2900XT, not all new games do, as evident when playing the new RTS title 'World in Conflict', which played very poorly on the Radeon. This is where the GeForce 8800 GTS really does stand out as being the better product, as there really are no games that it sucks at. Sure there are games that are not quite as good on the GTS, but all games tested were still very playable on the GTS using maximum in game visual settings. Sadly this cannot be said about the Radeon HD 2900XT, which did slip up in more than one game.

After roughly 4 months and numerous driver releases we are now confident this is just the way things are. While the Radeon HD 2900XT can, and in most cases does, deliver excellent performance for a $400 US graphics card, it is still quite flaky in other areas. The GeForce 8800 GTS is more of a well rounded graphics card, delivering acceptable performance in all gaming titles. Then for another $100-$150 US the GeForce 8800 GTX is still an absolute beast, delivering amazing performance in newer games such as Bioshock and World in Conflict.

Clearly the biggest advantage the GeForce 8800 GTS has over the Radeon HD 2900XT is that for roughly the same performance, it uses much less power and is far less demanding on the system. It is almost possible to run SLI GeForce 8800 GTS graphics cards and consume about the same amount of power that you would running a single Radeon HD 2900XT. The GeForce 8800 GTS is also much cooler and quieter for the very same reason, making it a more practical option as well.

So while we have been undecided between the Radeon HD 2900XT and the GeForce 8800 GTS for some time now, we have to say that the GTS is a better buy. Of course there is very little difference between the two products, as we have shown you in this article, but as I just said, overall the 8800 GTS is a little more polished when compared to the Radeon HD 2900XT, which seems to be a bit rougher around the edges. Then finally there really is no comparison between the GeForce 8800 GTX and the Radeon HD 2900XT despite the Radeon getting up and defeating the GTX in a few select tests.

------------------

Now ive been using ATI cards since I switched from my GeForce 2MX 32mb, so no brand bias opinion from me. I just want bank for my buck - and the 8800gts and 2900xt are $6 AUD the difference.

I suppose the 2900 beating the 8800 640mb GTS in bioshock isn't enough evidence for you. Well Why dont you wait until the crysis demo comes out, by then all sorts of benchmarks will come out like the next day or so and then you'll be completly informed on what to buy. filmography

Please show DX10 (DX10 is what those cards are all about) benchmarks where 2900XT beats 8800 GTS.

well those were 7.8 drivers, the 7.9 ones made a very good fps improvment. usually if a game performs not as good as supposed to be ati releases a hotfix to make things better, like with 7.9 and giving huge fps % increases. anyways its your money and you should do what makes you feel comfortable, but it would really be a good idea just to wait 12 days until concrete benchs come through. filmography

Show me benchmark where 7.9 deliveres "huge fps % increase.

[QUOTE="filmography"]well those were 7.8 drivers, the 7.9 ones made a very good fps improvment. usually if a game performs not as good as supposed to be ati releases a hotfix to make things better, like with 7.9 and giving huge fps % increases. anyways its your money and you should do what makes you feel comfortable, but it would really be a good idea just to wait 12 days until concrete benchs come through. domke13

Show me benchmark where 7.9 deliveres "huge fps % increase.

[QUOTE="Shegevara"]

[QUOTE="filmography"]I suppose the 2900 beating the 8800 640mb GTS in bioshock isn't enough evidence for you. Well Why dont you wait until the crysis demo comes out, by then all sorts of benchmarks will come out like the next day or so and then you'll be completly informed on what to buy. skrat_01

sooner or later nvidia fanboy will come to bash your post with false benchmarks from random biased sites. No use i tell you.

------------------

Now ive been using ATI cards since I switched from my GeForce 2MX 32mb, so no brand bias opinion from me. I just want bank for my buck - and the 8800gts and 2900xt are $6 AUD the difference.

they weren't using 7.9 drivers as they should. in the tests i was surprised they didn't test the Lost planet, where nvidias sure have an advantage. They did however test X3 reunion dunno why, and wtf old prey, where I don't get it. Who else gives a damn in comparison of cards which mark over 100fps. Now i understand that somehow people can see a difference between 25 and 50 frames per second, and if the tests show all results far over 100fps for the game it seems useless, coz no one would see a difference. There is a crucial comparison, when cards mark between 15-35fps which is a clear sign if card is running smoothly or not.

overall, i do admit 8800GTS 640mb would be a better buy if you get it somehow cheaper than HD2900XT, because it is fairly close to HD2900XT in most games, and where HD2900XT is better, you wouldn't see any difference in playability on the same settings. But 8800GTX, with it's results, i wouldn't give more than 400-450$ for it at the moment. It's just like Ultra. To smurf around and brag and to serve as a bigger e-dick.

[QUOTE="domke13"]

[QUOTE="filmography"]well those were 7.8 drivers, the 7.9 ones made a very good fps improvment. usually if a game performs not as good as supposed to be ati releases a hotfix to make things better, like with 7.9 and giving huge fps % increases. anyways its your money and you should do what makes you feel comfortable, but it would really be a good idea just to wait 12 days until concrete benchs come through. lettuceman44

Show me benchmark where 7.9 deliveres "huge fps % increase.

Who said there is no difference. 55FPS is different then 54FPS. But its not "huge fps % increase".

http://xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/diamond-viper-hd2900xt-1024mb_8.html#sect1

Ignore the 1GB card; it's a waste of money.

http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2007/08/30/bioshock_gameplay_graphics_and_performance/8

Also, for the extra money ($10), the 2900 XT comes with Valve's Black Box.

I really don't see the issue here...

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="Shegevara"]

[QUOTE="filmography"]I suppose the 2900 beating the 8800 640mb GTS in bioshock isn't enough evidence for you. Well Why dont you wait until the crysis demo comes out, by then all sorts of benchmarks will come out like the next day or so and then you'll be completly informed on what to buy. Shegevara

sooner or later nvidia fanboy will come to bash your post with false benchmarks from random biased sites. No use i tell you.

------------------

Now ive been using ATI cards since I switched from my GeForce 2MX 32mb, so no brand bias opinion from me. I just want bank for my buck - and the 8800gts and 2900xt are $6 AUD the difference.

they weren't using 7.9 drivers as they should. in the tests i was surprised they didn't test the Lost planet, where nvidias sure have an advantage. They did however test X3 reunion dunno why, and wtf old prey, where I don't get it. Who else gives a damn in comparison of cards which mark over 100fps. Now i understand that somehow people can see a difference between 25 and 50 frames per second, and if the tests show all results far over 100fps for the game it seems useless, coz no one would see a difference. There is a crucial comparison, when cards mark between 15-35fps which is a clear sign if card is running smoothly or not.

overall, i do admit 8800GTS 640mb would be a better buy if you get it somehow cheaper than HD2900XT, because it is fairly close to HD2900XT in most games, and where HD2900XT is better, you wouldn't see any difference in playability on the same settings. But 8800GTX, with it's results, i wouldn't give more than 400-450$ for it at the moment. It's just like Ultra. To smurf around and brag and to serve as a bigger e-dick.

Im still a bit perplexed as what to buy.

The 8800 really is a good all rounder while, the 2900 is a bit of a mixed bag.

The 8800 GTX is $200 more so its out of the question.

http://xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/diamond-viper-hd2900xt-1024mb_8.html#sect1

Ignore the 1GB card; it's a waste of money.

http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/2007/08/30/bioshock_gameplay_graphics_and_performance/8

Also, for the extra money ($10), the 2900 XT comes with Valve's Black Box.

I really don't see the issue here...

Wesker776

Nobody does. 8800 GTS is better in very small amount of tests and 2900XT is definatly better buy ATM. But not fo vista (atm). 2900XT even beats 8800 GTX in 1 test, in some they are same, and in most 8800 GTX wins. 2900XT is still very good for its price. But IMO 8800 GTS 320MB is just better for price.

Well at last, we made to an fair end.

And the person who is deciding for HD2900XT and 8800GTS, when the HD2900XT comes cheaper for him.. i can without doubt say, he should buy the radeon, although 8800GTS 320mb seems to really be the best price\preformance dx10 card

one of the selling poitns to me was the fact it does have valves black box in it... means i can knock 30$ or so off the price as it saves me buying it.... so in theory after rebates and the black box 390-30 MIR - 30 BB = 330$ which is really good value imo.

a few games have shown better fps performance, http://downloads.guru3dcom/download.php?det=1732

and come on, dx10 still has kinks to be worked out, crytek themselves has said that hence not to many demo's of dx10. in dx9 windows xp were the drivers are more stable ati kills the 8800 gts, hell it beats the gtx. oh and I didn't say there is a huge performance increase just that there is a decent increase.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/bioshock_directx10_performance/page6.asp

and for effect the conclusion

"With DX9 properly enabled in BioShock, the Radeon HD 2900 XT turns into a screamer, outperforming the GeForce 8800 GTS and GeForce 8800 GTX and giving the GeForce 8800 Ultra a run for its money. This indicates that AMD has got a lot of work to do to get their DX10 driver up to the level of DX9 in this game. If you crave performance, we recommend Radeon HD 2900 XT owners run the game in DX9 mode, the only downside is you will lose DX10 water ripples."

It will take time, and considering how long it took for the 8800's to get stable drivers the 2900 is beating them in that regard. IN time the performance will get better as that hotfix shows.