7900gt

C

ChrisUlrich

Active Member
I am looking at some benchmarks for this card and i'm a bit confused?

1024 x 768 it would lose post identical scores to 1600 x 1200 for some games

Other games it would fall off horribly comparing the two.

I am so confused on how to figure out on what resolution to run for optimum performance if you're using max settings.

Other games it's neck and neck with the XFX 7800 GTX 256 MB card... but in Fear it's getting hammered 13-16fps 92-79 and 57-41!

I am pretty much seeing a pattern that the 7900GT x16 PCI Express 256mb card is lthe 3-4 best card on the market. But still a little confused on which resolutions to run the game at.

My monitors optimal resolution is 1280 x 1024 and it's a 19" Mistubishi Diamondtron.
 
Well the higher the resolution, the lower the framerates. So if you want the best framerates, you should use the resolution 640x480. However it is virtually unplayable, since the images would be very large, and especially text. If your using a 15-17" CRT, i would use the resolution of 1024x768. If your using a 17-19" LCD< i would recommend using 1280x1024.

The higher the resolution the better the quality is overall, however performance is reduced.
 
Yea I get that but it seems that it performs great in both resolutions, awesome in others, and crappy the rest.

I know that some graphics are more intense then others but in the list of 8 or whatever it is it went up against it was going from 5th to 2nd place or vice versa. That really confused me.

Some games it performs with absolutely no performance reduction while other cards are losing significant performance.

I am probably overthinking all this but I am trying to figure out if some cards with similar frame rates on the same system but different games have different optimal resolutions?
 
well... it works (in a way) kind of like a dual core CPU... a 7900gt has i believe 8 vertex shader processors and 24 pixel pipelines... at 16x12 you're using more of those processors than at 1024x768... but say you want to compare quake 4 at 1024x768 vs. quake 4 at 16x12... it would perform much better at the first one.. whereas if you tried the same test with say... unreal tournament 2004, it wouldnt utilize the whole thing and would therefore have a minimal increase in fps since either way its not using 100% of the gpu...
then there are things to consider such as how much memory is integrated on the card, and how fast the memory is.

so, just like the 4600+ you asked about, it depends on what you plan on doing with the thing... or in the case of a video card... what you plan on playing.
but a 7900gt paired with the right amount of system memory (preferably 1-2gb) should play all of todays games on the highest settings.
i know my 7800gt did at least lol
 
i played and beat frear with the 7900gt and my lcd's native is 1280x1024 so i was in the same boat as you, and fear doesnt support that resolution normally you actually have to go into the config and make it! but anyway yeah i had no problems playing it that way, there was only minor stutters at big open areas but even they wernt bad
 
2GB DDR2 PC-6400 SDRAM at 800MHz - 2 x 1024MB

That's my ram along with a AMD Athlon™ 64 X2 4600+ Processor w/ HyperTransport and Dual Core Tech.

Thats what will be going into the system.
 
I am already hearing that my system won't be able to run the game "Crysis!" Damn it!

So I guess i'm trying to figure out how long this gaming system will last until I have to turn settings down or buy a 2nd 7900GT! Damn it!
 
I think it will run Crysis actually, since the version they showed and played for an audience at E3 was using DirectX 9. Some people say it's gonna be a Vista only game but I've also heard it's gonna be for DirectX 9, but then again they might have meant DX9L which is the Vista version of DX9.
 
haha... a 6600 will probably run crysis.
i think what you mean to say is "at the highest settings"
yes we all strive to get the highest quality picture...
the best way to do that in my opinion is 512mb or 1gb of video memory... and more processing power.
how much money are you willing to drop on this system?
lol more video memory and a dual video card setup is what im suggesting.
two 7900gt's with 512mb (each, because SLI doesnt add memory together) would have almost no disadvantage to two 7900gtx's besides pure clock frequency... just because it has the same structure as the 7900gtx... ya know 24 pixel pipelines and yet still keeps a nice high clock.. a stable one.

the best setup you can get nowadays would probably be something like this:
FX-62 @ 2.8ghz
dual 7900gtx 512mb (unless theres a way for anyone but like alienware and dell to put two 7950gx2's in SLI)
dual channel ... 2x1gb
OCZ gameXstream 700watt psu
an X-Fi chipset sound card

if you get an AMD i highly suggest you get something with 1mb cache per core... unless you cant find anything like that for AM2 i think i recall there being some trouble with that...
 
Last edited:
the good thing about having you monitors nav at 1280x1024 is that you really don't need any anti aliasing above 2x since its such a high resolution, and we all know how much of a video card slayer AA can be....*shutters*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top