[ZmaN]

Yep its out.....

look at anandtechs reviews and then look at tech reports reviews....

You can try firing squad if you want.....

[Fragrag]

Gah, the video card industry is going way to fast for me, I'm still thinking that 6800 is still the top and somehow I missed a whole generation 

[Scuddie]

And once again, nVidia has proved to us thru the 7600GT that they consider low end as 'mid-upper'.  I dont have enough to buy a 7900GT, and the 7600GT is too embarassing to be put into my new system.  I am honestly disgusted.

[CP5670]

eh, I'm rather disappointed with that 7900 GTX. It performs almost the same as the 7800 GTX 512MB and is really just a cheaper and more widely available version of that card. I thought it would at least be around 15% faster. At one point I was dead set on buying a 7900 GTX so I could get back on a single card, but this thing would be a downgrade in performance. Looks like I'll be passing up this refresh generation, as it's the same story with the X1900 XT/X.

The 7900 GT on the other hand looks very nice for the price, aside from that dinky cooler.

[edit] There are some beefed up 7900GTs with heavy factory overclocks selling for the same $300 price, putting their specs at about the same level as the 7800 GTX 512. That card is increasingly looking like a real winner.

[Nix]

Hopefully eVGA will have sorted out some of the problems I've seen with the 7800GT's.  Apparently, they're factory overclocked, and have pretty much the same specs as the 7800CO's.  From what I could see, it's a difference of 30-50 dollars and 20 MHZ on the cores.  Apparently, a lot of the eVGA 7800GT's have been either DOA or failing shortly after put into use.  Lets hope they don't make the same mistake...

[CP5670]

Those issues were sorted out quite a while ago with a BIOS update. I have had any problems with mine. The EVGA factory overclocks are quite large and their cards often cost no more than the reference speed cards.

You're basically looking at the performance of two 512 7800 GTXs for $660 with some of these cards.

I really wish I had bought my cards three days later than I did. My step up period just expired on Monday, but if it was still active I would have been able to upgrade to their 7900GTs (the 500mhz ones) for $5 each.

[Inquisitor]

I can't afford to keep up with Video cards. I think my Laptop has a 6800 in it. More and more I find myself in console land.

[Flipside]

My 6600 works ok for most things, I can't get uber-graphics at mega-high speeds, but I've always been of the opinion that such things shouldn't matter if the gameplay is good. Unfortunately, this is rarely the case in modern commercial games.

[ZmaN]

the 7900 series is really a let down....  even a DEFAULT FACTORY CLOCKED 7900GT performs a little better than a 7800 GTX 256 MB RAM.....(as seen here: http://firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_geforce_7900_gt_gtx_performance/page11.asp)

Im gunna stick to an ATI card....

[Scuddie]

the 7900 series is really a let down....  even a DEFAULT FACTORY CLOCKED 7900GT performs a little better than a 7800 GTX 256 MB RAM.....(as seen here: http://firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_geforce_7900_gt_gtx_performance/page11.asp)

Im gunna stick to an ATI card....

How is this a let down?  The 7900 is based off the 7800GTX, a tweaked version of it.  Were you expecting it to be worse than the GTX?  Or were you expecting it to be a generation ahead of the 7800GTX?  This series is a tweak, nothing more, just like the X1900.

[Nix]

Exactly, this card is just another marketing ploy to sell more cards at an expensive price IMO.  That, and if gives these "1337" gamers who treat thier computers like ricers treat thier Honda Civic's the excuse to say "I got the best." 

My point is though, even though the problem was fixed with the 7800GT's, is that they released a huge batch of bad cards.  I'm really torn between cards, wether to stick with ATI and it's fustrating software set, or go back and pay extra to get back into nVidia. 

[IceFire]

I can't afford to keep up with Video cards. I think my Laptop has a 6800 in it. More and more I find myself in console land.

Here's the thing...there is no reason to keep up at all.  I tend to do a full system rebuild every 4 or 5 years.  Thats about the lifespan of a console system except that the computer does more.  My current system is going to be 4 years old this summer.  I intend to build a new system and give this one to another family member.  This current one still plays the latest video games (even Battlefield 2 and Doom III and all that) and I've spent maybe $100 upgrading the RAM and another $50 for a dual layer DVD drive. So in total I've spent about $1700 on this system and its been completely worth it.

It is time to upgrade but I haven't changed the video card since the 9700Pro I bought.  Thats quite a few years and the card is still going strong.  What you have to do is buy as smart as possible with as much anticipating for the future technologies while still maintaining the best possible price.  As I see it, if you get the right card to start off with, there is no need to keep buying the very latest card.  Stick your head out of the sand ever 3 to 5 years and that will do to be on the cutting edge of gaming technology so long as it doesn't bother you that you don't have the super fastest card all the time.

[IceFire]

Exactly, this card is just another marketing ploy to sell more cards at an expensive price IMO.  That, and if gives these "1337" gamers who treat thier computers like ricers treat thier Honda Civic's the excuse to say "I got the best." 

My point is though, even though the problem was fixed with the 7800GT's, is that they released a huge batch of bad cards.  I'm really torn between cards, wether to stick with ATI and it's fustrating software set, or go back and pay extra to get back into nVidia. 

nVidia is tending to be the cheaper option right now.  The ATI cards are either equal or a bit more pricey as things currently stand.  I understand the frustration with the software set.  I couldn't be more disappointed with the CCC.  I'm using ATI Tray Tools at the moment as a replacement but its just another step that I'd rather not take if I didn't have to.

The nVidia drivers are definately less fancy while offering generally more features and customizations.

[Nix]

What I miss in the Detonators that the CCC doesnt have is the ability to do stuff to your destkop windows on the fly.  For example, making any window stay Always On Top. Very handy for sorting out the filesystem and you have to open multiple windows, but hate having to play tetris with them.  Plus, you don't need to use the .NET framework for them.  Once ATI stopped producing the classic drivers, I've not felt the need to upgrade to the latest and greatest.  Besides, I have a 9800Pro, I doubt the latest drivers are going to help ME out any, unless I'm playing something brand spankin new.  (I havent bought anything new since FEAR and Quake4) The CCC has gotten better, but it's still a far cry from what nvidia has, which is smaller to download, offers the same, if not better functionality than the CCC, and doesn't force you to install anything extra to get into your drivers! 

[CP5670]

How is this a let down?  The 7900 is based off the 7800GTX, a tweaked version of it.  Were you expecting it to be worse than the GTX?  Or were you expecting it to be a generation ahead of the 7800GTX?  This series is a tweak, nothing more, just like the X1900.

The 7900 GT is a great card. Those 550/800mhz versions provide some serious bang for the buck. It's the 7900 GTX that is a letdown, about 5% faster on average than the 7800 GTX 512. That's pretty lame even for a refresh product. The only good thing I can see about that card is it has retained that exceptional cooler, both quiet and powerful.

My point is though, even though the problem was fixed with the 7800GT's, is that they released a huge batch of bad cards.  I'm really torn between cards, wether to stick with ATI and it's fustrating software set, or go back and pay extra to get back into nVidia.

I don't see it as a big deal. The bad cards have probably long since been sold out by now, as EVGA is easily the most popular Nvidia brand these days, and in case there are any problems, EVGA's tech support and replacement system is considered to be among the best out there.

Of course, there is no reason to buy a 7800 GT now at the current prices. Don't tell that to the fools on ebay though.

What I miss in the Detonators that the CCC doesnt have is the ability to do stuff to your destkop windows on the fly.  For example, making any window stay Always On Top. Very handy for sorting out the filesystem and you have to open multiple windows, but hate having to play tetris with them.  Plus, you don't need to use the .NET framework for them.  Once ATI stopped producing the classic drivers, I've not felt the need to upgrade to the latest and greatest.  Besides, I have a 9800Pro, I doubt the latest drivers are going to help ME out any, unless I'm playing something brand spankin new.  (I havent bought anything new since FEAR and Quake4) The CCC has gotten better, but it's still a far cry from what nvidia has, which is smaller to download, offers the same, if not better functionality than the CCC, and doesn't force you to install anything extra to get into your drivers!

The Nvidia drivers are generally nice in that they offer lots of features and are resource-efficient, but their control panel leaves something to be desired. It has many features disabled by default; the coolbits registry hack is an absolute must, and you still don't get the supersampling AA modes. The game profile section also has a very clumsy interface and is a pain to use. I actually haven't opened the Nvidia control panel in months. The nHancer/Rivatuner combination can do everything the control panel does, but far better.

Although I would certainly prefer this to the things I have heard about CCC and memory hogging. Unlike ATI's other cards, CCC is still needed for a few things with the X1900 cards, which apparently aren't yet fully supported by Tray Tools.

It's worth having the drivers up to date though. Nvidia released new drivers just today that give major (30%) boosts in FEAR. ATI did the same thing for Doom 3 and Quake 4 a few months ago, which seem to improve performance even on older cards.

[Sandwich]

It is time to upgrade but I haven't changed the video card since the 9700Pro I bought.

When you upgrade (or decide what you'll upgrade to), let me know what to. My 9800 Pro is decent, esp. since I've only been playing older games lately (like Battlezone 2, Ground Control 2, SW Battlefront, etc), but it's having a hard time pushing pixels on my new screen in anything modern.

[deftonesmx17]

Am I the only one who is unhappy with the current trend set by ATI and Nvidia? A new "generation" within 6 months, which isnt even that faster. This is how the GPU industry has been as of late. What the hell is going on with the prices also? When the 9700 Pro was released, it was the king of the crop, there was nothing better and it sold for $300-400. You want the best right now (x1900 or 7900), its more like $550-650. That is insane for a consumer level GPU that wont even push your games faster than an avg of 60fps when in higher resolutions like 1280x1024/1600x1200, which are what most people run at now. Lets not forget that if you want the super high framerates, like when you first got your 9700 pro, you need to run SLI or crossfire making your GPU price over $1000. No wonder the console market is taking over the PC market when it comes to games

[Kosh]

A new "generation" within 6 months, which isnt even that faster.

Exactly. Except for trying to squeeze more money out of the customer, there really isn't much of a point to doing that. Not even Intel or AMD do that. At least when they call something a "new generation", they mean it.

[CP5670]

Am I the only one who is unhappy with the current trend set by ATI and Nvidia? A new "generation" within 6 months, which isnt even that faster. This is how the GPU industry has been as of late. What the hell is going on with the prices also? When the 9700 Pro was released, it was the king of the crop, there was nothing better and it sold for $300-400. You want the best right now (x1900 or 7900), its more like $550-650. That is insane for a consumer level GPU that wont even push your games faster than an avg of 60fps when in higher resolutions like 1280x1024/1600x1200, which are what most people run at now. Lets not forget that if you want the super high framerates, like when you first got your 9700 pro, you need to run SLI or crossfire making your GPU price over $1000. No wonder the console market is taking over the PC market when it comes to games

I don't know what you're talking about. A new video card generation comes out once a year. This is just a mid-generation refresh, a slight speed bump, and is always referred to as such. And you can certainly get 60fps average out of these cards in any current game. I get 60fps minimum in most games at 2048x1536 with no AA on slightly older cards (everything except FEAR and SCCT).

The performance is very good; the real problem with modern cards is the subpar image quality, particularly with respect to AF. This really shouldn't be an issue at all at these prices, but it is.

I agree about the prices, which have been steadily increasing over the last several years. The high end card prices have actually come down quite a bit in the last few months though. You used to have the X1900 XTX and 7800 GTX 512 going for at least $650 and $800 respectively, while the XTX can now be found for $500 and the new 7900 GTX is about the same price. Hopefully that trend will continue in the future. Although in any case, two midrange cards are a better option than either of these high end cards for a similar price.

[deftonesmx17]

I don't know what you're talking about. A new video card generation comes out once a year. This is just a mid-generation refresh, a slight speed bump, and is always referred to as such.

I take it you didnt quite grasp why i put generation in quotation marks...................

And you can certainly get 60fps average out of these cards in any current game. I get 60fps minimum in most games at 2048x1536 with no AA on slightly older cards (everything except FEAR and SCCT).

AA at this point in time, has become a normally used GPU function esp. 4xAA.

Serious Sam 2 @ 1600x1200 4xAA and 16xAF only has an avg of 67fps
Need for speed most wanted @ 1600x1200 4xAA and 16xAF has an avg of 49fps
Call of duty 2 @ 1600x1200 4xAA and 16xAF has an avg of 37
BF2 with saem settings as above games, avg fps is 70
Sims 2 with the same settings, avg of 29fps
FEAR @ 1600x1200 2xAA and 16xAF, avg of 53fps
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTAwMSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

That said, its not just FEAR