ATI 2900XT better than the 8800 640 mb card

Some of the 2900s see a 512mb memory inteface over the 385mhz seen on 8800 models. It also depends on the brand of card as well. MSI and Asus seem to see more performance value over even EVGA and BFG with those also being good brands to consider.

I run Fear, Prey, Half Life 2 and EP1 all at high settings in XP and Vista with the MSI HD 2600XT card with the Catalyst 7.10 now on. That sees some early bugs fixed with the ATI drivers. For comparison with the X1950 to the 8800 in one review on Call of Duty 2 the older Radeon passed the 8800 in XP while the 8800 saw the gain in Vista.
 
That review was simply comparing the older model with both versions of Windows. As far as the DX10 games those may still take some time yet since Vista is the version just out. The current releases of new games are still DX9 compatible for use on XP. That means the new stuff will be XP/Vista dropping support for 2000 and certainly ME at this point. A few years from now Vista/Vienna and what next after.
 
Depends on how you define "better". Certain games one card is better than the other, Ut3 is one of those games the XT excels in.
 
>_>.
it's not that difficult people. the 2900xt is DEFINITIVELY better than the 8800gts, 320 or 640mb versions, (well benchmarks say so at least, dx10 is another thing), and the 8800gtx blows them all out of the water.
price = performance in this case
8800gts 640mb = $320 (well back in july when i got it)
2900xt goes around $400+
8800gtx comes to around $450-500+

happy?
 
It boils down to just what you expect out of card along with what money you can throw at any particular card. I didn't have to spend $300-$700 here to run various games at the highest settings once good drivers were on. For a totally maxed out performance machine then your talking the big $$$ for one or two cards.
 
You can not judge video card by just looking at one gaming benchmark.

AnandTech only did benchmark for Unreal Tournament 3 and I think everyone here know that ATI video cards performs very well in unreal engine 3.0
 
When the full version of UT3 comes out it will be DX10 compatible. Right now it is just a beta demo and I believe that DX10 was disabled for the beta. The real demo should be out in a couple of weeks, with the full game out by the end of November.

I have been getting frame rates of around 30fps with full settings on the demo with an ati 2600pro agp and a AMD 64 x2 4200 CPU with 2 gigs ram at 1680 x 1050 screen res.

Not bad for an older machine running one of the newest games out.
 
paratwa said:
When the full version of UT3 comes out it will be DX10 compatible. Right now it is just a beta demo and I believe that DX10 was disabled for the beta. The real demo should be out in a couple of weeks, with the full game out by the end of November.

I have been getting frame rates of around 30fps with full settings on the demo with an ati 2600pro agp and a AMD 64 x2 4200 CPU with 2 gigs ram at 1680 x 1050 screen res.

Not bad for an older machine running one of the newest games out.
Click to expand...


my computer has a 2.2 ghz amd,1,500 mb ram,stock video card and running at 50 fps.the video card is intergrateted nvidia 6100.not bad right and the game is css with 40 players in it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top