Help me choose a good video card

[Conspirate]

Well, i've heard that although the cards are nearly identical, ATI has better picture quality than nVidia. However, even if you were to view two images right next to one another, you would not be able to tell the difference. I would get the 7900 just because Nvidia has been on a roll recently, and ATI has been preoccupied with the 360.

 

[Half Evil]

Tell a difference in a picture no. But.. Running two FEAR games side by side, and you would. Because ATI has the faster FPS. Much better.

 

[badninja3]

Tell a difference in a picture no. But.. Running two FEAR games side by side, and you would. Because ATI has the faster FPS. Much better.

lucky me... i have bad vision, so any more fps than ~50 is unseen by me.

 

[Half Evil]

But that doesnt matter. Lol the X1900XTX is cheaper too..

And just to let you know.. the human eye cant see above 45 FPS. The only reason you need so high is to unpack the textures as fast as possible.

 

[badninja3]

oh. well, now that we've established that ati has the best card out. who has the best price/performance card in the mid-pricerange, like in the ~$150 range.

 

[Half Evil]

ATI!!!!


Check this sucka out. Sure.. A bit more then 150. But eh.. I mean this is a nice freaking card..

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814161165

Oh yeah!

 

[HRHunteRHR]

But that doesnt matter. Lol the X1900XTX is cheaper too..

And just to let you know.. the human eye cant see above 45 FPS. The only reason you need so high is to unpack the textures as fast as possible.

The problem with that statement is that games use such different fps measures. Open up any Counter-Strike game and type in fps_max 45 in console and you'll see what I mean. Same with Quake 4 and pretty much every game I have ever played. For me it takes about 65.

 

[Half Evil]

I ment Average Male. My bad.. I was just making a general statement. Anyways.. The general/average male eye can only see up too 45. I mean hell.. Im at about 77. Because I can see the refresh on my moniter at 75.

 

[SSE5]

If money's no object, then it's always a tough choice. http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTAwMSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==
If memory serves me, the 7900 beat out the X1900XTX in all the games due to the bump in core frequency it received from the die shrink - which makes it an excellent card for your money, but ATI's innovation and improved ALU count for the X1900XTX was good to say the least, and the two are in very close competition. Neither are a bad choice - but I'd go with whichever is cheapest.

I'd recommend a 7900 as of this moment because of the increased performance it provided over previous models thanks to the die shrink (Which lowered temperatures, power consumption, and allowed them to raise the frequency. Which resulted in identical power usage/heat but provided us with increased performance, which gave NVIDIA the performance crown back) but the two are in such rigorous competition right now, that I can't choose one over the other, although I would be tempted to place my likings on ATI.

 

[badninja3]

ATI!!!!

Check this sucka out. Sure.. A bit more then 150. But eh.. I mean this is a nice freaking card..

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814161165

Oh yeah!

wow. that is freaking awesome. but how does it compare to the 7600gt? i mean, i kno this x800 has 256bit memory, which is faster than the 128bit in the 7600gt. but the 7600 has about ~500mhz higher memory clock speed. and does this x800xl have the same technologies(shadermodel 4, etc) as the 7600?