So the X800XT kills the 6800U - Stats, Benchmarks etc.

So which body parts am I going to have to sell to get one of those bad boys?
 
Yeah, that's the bad part really. $499 is the estimated RRP, which is what, £300? Buggering heck, you'll need to lop off at least two appendages to afford that :hmph:
 
"The X800XT is a red single-slot single Molex connector AGP8X video card."

The more I read, the more I love this card. One molex connector, as opposed to the two needed for the 6800U. It also requires less power than the 9800XT, and therefore the 6800U as well.
 
Okay, concentrating on saying that nVidia needs to have a good trick up their sleeves - they're releasing the 6850U, basically an overclocked 6800U, to compensate with the unexpected performance of the X800XT. It'll run at "a 450MHz+ core and 1.1GHz+ memory clock speeds", with the X800XT's being a 520Mhz core and 1.2Ghz memory speeds. Will it be enough to beat the X800XT?
 
...so...*waits patiently for X880XT so he can go to nvidia and say "PWNED!!!"*
 
*waits patiently for an unbiased evaluation of final production cards running with production drivers. Then buys whichever is best.
 
Abom said:
Okay, concentrating on saying that nVidia needs to have a good trick up their sleeves - they're releasing the 6850U, basically an overclocked 6800U, to compensate with the unexpected performance of the X800XT. It'll run at "a 450MHz+ core and 1.1GHz+ memory clock speeds", with the X800XT's being a 520Mhz core and 1.2Ghz memory speeds. Will it be enough to beat the X800XT?
It will only lessen the beating or increase the lead on those games. I don't think the 6850U will add much to this race at all.

blahblahblah said:
I wonder if this is true.

http://theinquirer.net/?article=15659

The inquirer isn't the most accurate source, but they are dead on about most things.
Probably is pretty close. Inquirer is more often right than wrong.
I like reading it because even if things do change...you see how things evolve.

Here are some other links.

Here is your power consumption in watts.

Here are some reviews for you:
Beyond3D
Tech Report
Hexus
Driver Heaven
FiringSquad
Lost Circuits
Hardware Analysis

I liked HardOCP and Tech Report's reviews best.

THG were all Nvidia's "The way it's meant to be played" games benchmarked.
And FiringSquad's review was seriously a pay off with the intent to steal some thunder.

This is a pretty good summary posted on THG forums.
Cleeve said:
Which card is to be crowned KING?
Here's what I gather from the reviews:

SHADER STRENGTH:
The X800 is the new king of shader power. It slaughters the 6800 in Far Cry, and that's with the 6800 still using the FX's cheating path... unless PS 3.0 makes a huge difference in speed (I doubt it if it can't even handle 2.0 shaders as fast), the X800 will still be the gorilla.
ADVANTAGE: ATI

RAW SPEED:
This is a close one, but with the X800XT doing notably better at high resolutions with AA & AF, and the X800 PRO beating the 6800 Ultra in many tests, I'll give it to Ati
ADVANTAGE: ATI

IMAGE QUALITY:
Another close one. I do admire Nvidia's ability to turn off their Anistropic filtering optimizations in the driver, but Ati's Temporal AA and Nvidia's old tricks of butchering IQ for speed tips the balance to Ati in this round.
ADVANTAGE: ATI

FUTURE-PROOFNESS / FEATURES:
Nvidia has the advantage here, although you have to wonder... if the X800 has more raw shader power, then which wll be more usable in the future? But still, Nvidia can do things that the X800 series cannot with shaders, and the 6800 has the capability of doing them in 32 bit precision. The 6800 deserves the nod in this round.

As far as features, this is the first major Ati card release that didn't accompany a major feature list of video/rage theatre upgrades. More to come in the near future? Hopefully. But Nvidia had some improvements in the 6800 there, too.
ADVANTAGE: NVIDIA



OVERALL:
Looking at the individual categories you'd think that Ati has it in the bag, but I'm not so sure. Here's why:

Raw speed isn't really much of a factor in these cards because they ALL play uber-high resolutions with high image quality at very playable framerates. Image quality isn't really as much of a factor anymore either because they're more or less on par now. (although Temporal AA is nifty you have to wonder how long it will take Nvidia to implement their version)

That leaves SHADERS as the most important thing... especially when you consider future games in the equation. And here, we have no clear winner... yes, Ati has the brute strength, but until we see what speed/quality advantages PS 3.0 offers, we have no idea the impact it will have.
We need more DirectX 9 games in general, and more DirectX 9 games that use PS 3.0 specifically, to make this call IMHO.
But at this point, both the 6800 and X800 series look VERY attractive to me. I'd be very surprised if an owner of either was dissapointed in their hardware 6 months from now.
ADVANTAGE: TO BE DECIDED

But he forgot to take into account some other factors:
Heat
Power
Price
Features
Availability
 
Looking through those sites, I wouldn't have said that (what is predominately) the odd fps here or there would qualify as being 'pwned', at least in the same way as the 5900-series was.
 
That forum post Asus posted pretty much sums it up. It's good to see that the competition is so close now.

I'm still waiting for some Half Life 2 and Doom3 benchmarks, of course. I expect that ATI will win in HL2 and NVidia will win in Doom3, but I wonder how large the margins will be.
 
I think Nvidia will slaughter ATI in Doom3 just because Doom3 uses OpenGL. It happens to be that one of Nvidia's strong points is OpenGL games.
 
It's pretty close really, performance and IQ wise but ATI is still the best in those areas and it will probably be cheaper as well. The fact it's small and only needs one molex is a bonus too, it's probably quiter as well.

Quite frankly I don't think I could fit a 6800 in my case or provide enough cooling for it. If i bought a x800 it would be just like haveing my old 9800 sitting in my case but twice as fast, if I bought the 6800 I would have to take a PCI card out, find some way of cooling my case down, buy a new power supply and put up with more noise.
 
jonbob said:
*waits patiently for an unbiased evaluation of final production cards running with production drivers. Then buys whichever is best.


The Ati cards are the real deal.

wow...i wasnt expecting nvidia to get beatin so badly...i guess they really have lost it.
 
Arno said:
That forum post Asus posted pretty much sums it up. It's good to see that the competition is so close now.

I'm still waiting for some Half Life 2 and Doom3 benchmarks, of course. I expect that ATI will win in HL2 and NVidia will win in Doom3, but I wonder how large the margins will be.
Yeah, it isn't killed, it's close :)

Anyway, thats good news for us, since both companies will be pushing prices down, and trying to wow us with the next new card.
 
ComradeBadger said:
Yeah, it isn't killed, it's close :)

Anyway, thats good news for us, since both companies will be pushing prices down, and trying to wow us with the next new card.


close my ass...... :rolleyes: :angel:

Im going through review after review that show there is a noticable performance differance.
 
That's true. I personally want to see how they perform in next-next-generation games, that is assuming that people actually use PS3.0 some time down the line.
 
the best way to sum all of this up is a quote from an AT commenter

Ok, so let's review. with the x800XT having better image quality, better framerates, only taking up one slot for cooling and STILL being cooler, and only needing one molex connecter (uses less power than the 9800 XT, actually), who in their right mind would choose a 6800u over this x800XT? I mean, seriously, NVIDIA is scrambling to release a 6850u now which is exactly identical to a 6800u, it's just overclocked (which means more power and higher temperatures). This is ridiculous. ATI is king.

nvidia has been [edit:slightly] raped again. now no one can laugh at my premonitions :D
 
Wow... i'll have a more organized post later... but almost all of you who are knocking on nvidia here are saying that the duel/single slot is a factor that matters to you.


If any of you read the 6800u previews closly, you might remember that they all said that nvida promised that the retial card will be a single slot solution..... and that people rna it fine on a 300w psu...
 
From the ATI website, the x800 "PRO" costs $449....
 
The thing I like better about the ATI is the power consumption. You need a 500+W PS just to run the NVIDIA card where ATI is about the same as the 9800's. Last time I checked a good name brand 500+ PS isn't cheap. So you buy a PS for $100.00 or more plus a new NVIDIA card that's $500.00; that's $600.00 you’re spending on a gfx card. No thank you. I'll stick with ATI.



Note: I made a post about this in the off topic forums. I always thought this forum was for troubleshooting Hardware & Software. Heh, stupid me.
 
i saw a couple of places say that the x800 pro will be 399.00 and it out today. ive been checking sites and havnt found any for sale, yet. ill be ditching that 9800xt i wanted and going with this x800 pro now.
 
SidewinderX143 said:
Wow... i'll have a more organized post later... but almost all of you who are knocking on nvidia here are saying that the duel/single slot is a factor that matters to you.


If any of you read the 6800u previews closly, you might remember that they all said that nvida promised that the retial card will be a single slot solution..... and that people rna it fine on a 300w psu...


It is a factor for me yes. I didnt notice that the final product was supposed to be single slot though.
 
There's no doubting that R420 is fast, but frankly I'm disappointed. It's just a tweaked R3xx core, with the only new features being normal map compression and a bump up to ps_2_b support. Forgive me for not dancing in the streets... ATi's OpenGL driver is still way behind, and nVidia leads with Linux support as well.

Still, if I had the cash to drop on one of these, I'd go with the ATi beast. Fast texture filtering in D3D, fast PS 2.0 implementation, and, well, you can look at the feature set as practical rathter than sparse, I guess.
 
Abom said:
Okay, concentrating on saying that nVidia needs to have a good trick up their sleeves - they're releasing the 6850U, basically an overclocked 6800U, to compensate with the unexpected performance of the X800XT. It'll run at "a 450MHz+ core and 1.1GHz+ memory clock speeds", with the X800XT's being a 520Mhz core and 1.2Ghz memory speeds. Will it be enough to beat the X800XT?

doubtfull, the gap as showen by quite a few review sites (don't go by toms or anyother known review site that has favoured Nvidia in the past)

show the x800xt with a "LARGE" lead over the 6800ultra, espically when you kick it in with High res and AA/AF = :naughty:

Now if all they do is a simple clock speed bump (much like the 5950Ultra was made for to compete with the 9800xt) it won't cut it.
 
I'm sure another user and skullhair actually took no notice of what that mod said....and tbh another user i'd sooner trust ATI's prices.

For the difference of a few fps the nvidia is better....if the pro will retail at $450 then the XT will retail at like $600+ going of prices between the 9800pro/XT...it has no ps3.0 support, ATI have by far the most problems in any games and lack of support even after catalyst drivers, both cards are one slot both cards can run on a 300w PSU both cards are extremely fast in any game except nvidia exceed in openGL, the ATI is clocked to ****...the memory has been clocked to max, the nvidia has room for o/c.
 
What I've gathered from the reviews so far:

Advantages of the X800 XT:
  • relatively low power consumption
  • uses only a single molex
  • small size
  • wins most of the DirectX9 benchmarks
  • supports 6xAA, which is actually playable on the newer games
  • supports 3Dc compression (actual advantage remains to be seen)

Advantages of the 6800 Ultra
  • wins every OpenGL benchmark hands down
  • supports 8xAA, which gives the best IQ ever, but is only playable in older games (Q3A and such)
  • overclocks better
  • supports ShaderModel 3.0 (actual advantage remains to be seen)

So far it seems the ATI card has a slight upper hand. The only true weakness I see in the X800 XT is the fact that it gets beaten pretty badly in every OpenGL benchmark, which could pose a problem in all future games based on the Doom3 engine. But you gotta give credit to ATI for creating a card that manages to pull ahead of the NV40 in PS1.1/2.0 performance. :cheers:

Personally, I'll wait for the arrival of Half Life 2 and Doom3. By that time the X800SE and 6800GT seem like good options for my budget.
 
Anyone knows when these card will be available ?And at what price ?

For now ATi.com only sets the x800pro at 449$.
 
Skullhair said:
The thing I like better about the ATI is the power consumption. You need a 500+W PS just to run the NVIDIA card where ATI is about the same as the 9800's. Last time I checked a good name brand 500+ PS isn't cheap. So you buy a PS for $100.00 or more plus a new NVIDIA card that's $500.00; that's $600.00 you’re spending on a gfx card. No thank you. I'll stick with ATI.
sorry to be harsh, but you shouldn't post if you're ignorant. nVidia reccomends a 480watt psu for thier card. almost all the sites test it on machines with 300w or 350w PSUs, and it ran perfectly fine. so, no, you don't need a 500+w psu.


also, it's a single slot solution, so that's not an issue.

another thing is that the x800 was a retail board, while the 6800u wasn't.

i'm not saying that will make all the difference in the world, but it might make some.
 
supports 3Dc compression (actual advantage remains to be seen)
The advantage is that normal maps (which are getting more and more popular ... almost a requirement in new engines) can have up to four times the data with the same memory bandwidth needs (which has been the biggest problem with hi-res normal maps) or you could use the same amount of data... just compressed to a fourth of the size.

The best thing about 3Dc is that it is an open technology... meaning anyone (including nVidia, though they won't be able to support it in the 6800 series) can use it without paying ATi royalties.

If it is supported in Doom 3 it might either close the gap in performance between ATi and nVidia or make the ATi version look better than the nVidia version... but I don't think id Software is going to do that when nVidia is paying them good money.

The only problem is getting widespread support... but since normal maps take up so much more space than regular textures, it is an open standard, and it only takes two lines in a shader to implement it shouldn't be long before people start to support it.
 
SidewinderX143 said:
sorry to be harsh, but you shouldn't post if you're ignorant. nVidia reccomends a 480watt psu for thier card. almost all the sites test it on machines with 300w or 350w PSUs, and it ran perfectly fine. so, no, you don't need a 500+w psu.


also, it's a single slot solution, so that's not an issue.

another thing is that the x800 was a retail board, while the 6800u wasn't.

i'm not saying that will make all the difference in the world, but it might make some.

ive got something that will make a difference.

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/radeon x800 pro xt_05040480526/2122.png

edit: though its important to note i will be looking more at price and physical features
 
well...I'm glad it's close...wish it were a little closer, or that NVidia barely won (I LOVE ATI, but competition makes tech advance)

oh well..I'm skipping this entire generation, and saving up for NEXT year, when I'll upgrade to 64bit procc, PCI Express, new mobo so I can handle that, new PSU for it all, and better RAM.

(So prolly like, 600$ all told....owi. )
 
gh0st said:
ive got something that will make a difference.

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/radeon x800 pro xt_05040480526/2122.png

edit: though its important to note i will be looking more at price and physical features

I've got something that will make a difference.

You can't show that because this contradicts exactly what your posting.

http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040504/ati-x800-30.html

Thats outdoor and indoor with no aa/af at 1024 ress and it doesnt even come close (the X800XT) to the 1280x1024 pic they have up on anandtech...so obviously someone is talking crap and i would say anandtech is.
 
durr durr durr you cant post that because it contradicts what youre saying.

"ATi's X800 Pulls Off Another Coup in the Graphics Performance War" THATS what toms has to say about it.
 
Back
Top