Which Graphics Card will perform better?

[Choobin]

MSI Radeon X1950PRO 256MB GDDR3 PCIE Dual DVI VIVO
or
NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GS 256MB DDR3 PCI-E DVI

The Radeon is about £20 more than the 7900GS so i was wondering what would be the best card to buy. I'm thinking of adding to a systm with Core 2 Duo E6400, 2GB DDR2-667 RAM, 160GB Hard Drive.

Also would i be better off having a motherboard with SLI or Crossfire for either of them incase i go that route if i have the cash at some time. I ask bcos i'm not all that sure on whats the better system here.

Lastly what kind of power supply should i be looking for, 400W, 500W etc. for this system?

Thanks

[vikrant]

7900 GS
but put little bit further to get 7900GT]
but i must warn u iam biased towards nvidia :tooth:

[Freddie]

MSI Radeon X1950PRO 256MB GDDR3 PCIE Dual DVI VIVO
or
NVIDIA GeForce 7900 GS 256MB DDR3 PCI-E DVI

The Radeon is about £20 more than the 7900GS so i was wondering what would be the best card to buy. I'm thinking of adding to a systm with Core 2 Duo E6400, 2GB DDR2-667 RAM, 160GB Hard Drive.

Also would i be better off having a motherboard with SLI or Crossfire for either of them incase i go that route if i have the cash at some time. I ask bcos i'm not all that sure on whats the better system here.

Lastly what kind of power supply should i be looking for, 400W, 500W etc. for this system?

Thanks

I would get 500 Watt's more if you plan to XFire or SLI. As far the X1950 Vs 7900GS debate goes I found this a X-bit Labs

If we were to compare the available $199 graphics cards in terms of performance, the new ATI Radeon X1950 Pro is not just better than the Nvidia GeForce 7900 GS but can successfully compete with the more expensive Nvidia GeForce 7900 GT that belongs to the $259 category. Also important is that the Radeon X1950 Pro offers you the option of enabling high-quality anisotropic filtering that surpasses everything Nvidia’s solutions can offer as of today. In other words, the ATI Radeon X1950 Pro is overall the best graphics card in the $199 price category

Considering X1950 Pro is faster than the 7900 GS and supports simultaneous full precision HDR and FSAA, there is no doubt in my mind that I would choose the X1950 Pro over any 7900 GS.

[Choobin]

Thanks that's a lot of help. ATM i'm thinking from what i've been looking at that the x1950PRO looks like it's the better one so i'll probably aim to get that.

The only thing that i'm not sure about is whether the ATI can be used for crossfire or not cos i couldn't find any info as to whether it can or not. I've probably looked at and just not noticed but all help is appreciated!

[SPARTAN VI]

The only thing that i'm not sure about is whether the ATI can be used for crossfire or not cos i couldn't find any info as to whether it can or not. I've probably looked at and just not noticed but all help is appreciated!

You seem a little confused.. The term "Crossfire" is for ATi's dual card interface like "SLI" is to nvidia's. At the moment, it would seem that you're looking for a single card, which would make Crossfire/SLI capabilities irrelevant.

If I mistaken your uncertainty with confusion, then ignore this post.

[Choobin]

sorry about how i worded that post . What i should have probably said is that i'm looking at buying the one card ATM but also wanted to know if i could use crossfire if i later bought another x1950PRO card. Now all i have to do is find some money

[SPARTAN VI]

sorry about how i worded that post . What i should have probably said is that i'm looking at buying the one card ATM but also wanted to know if i could use crossfire if i later bought another x1950PRO card. Now all i have to do is find some money

Gotcha, most people go into upgrades like this thinking "I'll buy one, and then later buy another to go SLI/Crossfire!" Sounds easy, but people typically don't follow through with that idea. You'll need to change to a Crossfire compliant motherboard at the same time you buy the second card. If you already have a Crossfire motherboard, then you're that much closer to fulfilling that dream.

[NobleNick]

Here's a data point for you, from "Tom's Hardware" site: Oblivion run at 1280x1024, 32-bit, no AA, etc.

Radeon X1950 Pro, 594MHz/1390MHz, 256MB = 15.1 frames per second
GeForce 7900 GS, 450MHz/1320MHz, 256MB = 8.8 frames per second

[Edmonton]

Yes it's crossfire at least it says on my box top of it
(owner of X1950PRO)

[rayzzz]

yep, X1950pro is a sure win. The powercolor ones have better coolers i think. you might want to check it out.

[DukeofSerbia]

If you can find buy HIS X1950 Pro IceQ 3 Turbo. HIS IceQ 3 models are the best ATI based graphics crads because of cooling.

[Shaun]

The X1950pro, get that, as Freddie pointed out it can do FSAA (anti aliasing) and HDR(high dynamic range) at the same time. Although at ultra high resolutions that the 7900GT/X1900XT and above can handle FSAA isnt needed, at the mid-high resolutions that the 7900GS/X1950pro will play at (with max settings) AA is a little more important. If you go to 1024x768 AA is a must.

[UnderdawgIV]

It seems all that needed to be said has been already said.

Yes, in the $199.99 Video Card price bracket, the X1950 Pro is a steal. I realize you are in Europe but I just wanted to mention the X1950's were going for $170 a little while ago at Newegg!!!!!

[Edmonton]

It seems all that needed to be said has been already said. Yes, in the $199.99 Video Card price bracket, the X1950 Pro is a steal. I realize you are in Europe but I just wanted to mention the X1950's were going for $170 a little while ago at Newegg!!!!!

Or man it costs 400$ in Sweden.

[Incinerate_IV]

Make sure you have a crossfire compatible motherboard before you decide to go crossfire.

And like what everyone is saying, the X1950Pro is far superior than the 7900GS. It's about even with a 7900GT.

[Rush Limbaugh]

According to this you can overclock the 7900 and it then beats an overclocked 1950 handily.

heres the link as for some reason none of my contros work here anymore

http://www.techspot.com/review/28-ra...eforce-7900gs/

[Oldgamer]

Part of the problem here is understanding your system, and how all of the components interact.

For example, probably everyone checks "Vertical Synch" as a matter of course, believing that they need it. However, I found out ... on my system ... that Synch wasn't needed, because I have a flat screen monitor. Refresh rates on the CRT are not an issue. But using Synch causes the game to stop with each and every frame, and wait for a signal that the monitor has refreshed, causing enormous lag.

I have a Pentium 4 (no hyperthreading, and about 4 years old) running at 1.6ghz, 1 gig of RAM, Soundblaster Audigy, and nVidia's Geforce 6600 GT (with 128 megs), and a 250gig internal harddrive. I use bilinear filtering, no antialiasing, and no Synch. Everything else, including Textures, is set to its highest levels. The game hasn't taken a single hit in performance, and the graphics are truly outstanding. Even city battles don't lag, anymore.

Understand your system before you invest in that sexy new graphics card, or buy a new computer.

[Oldgamer]

Part of the problem here is understanding your system, and how all of the components interact.

For example, probably everyone checks "Vertical Synch" as a matter of course, believing that they need it. However, I found out ... on my system ... that Synch wasn't needed, because I have a flat screen monitor. Refresh rates on the CRT are not an issue. But using Synch causes the game to stop with each and every frame, and wait for a signal that the monitor has refreshed, causing enormous lag.

I have a Pentium 4 (no hyperthreading, and about 4 years old) running at 1.6ghz, 1 gig of RAM, Soundblaster Audigy, and nVidia's Geforce 6600 GT (with 128 megs), and a 250gig internal harddrive. I use bilinear filtering, no antialiasing, and no Synch. Everything else, including Textures, is set to its highest levels. The game hasn't taken a single hit in performance, and the graphics are truly outstanding. Even city battles don't lag, anymore.

Understand your system before you invest in that sexy new graphics card, or buy a new computer.

[Oldgamer]

Part of the problem here is understanding your system, and how all of the components interact.

For example, probably everyone checks "Vertical Synch" as a matter of course, believing that they need it. However, I found out ... on my system ... that Synch wasn't needed, because I have a flat screen monitor. Refresh rates on the CRT are not an issue. But using Synch causes the game to stop with each and every frame, and wait for a signal that the monitor has refreshed, causing enormous lag.

I have a Pentium 4 (no hyperthreading, and about 4 years old) running at 1.6ghz, 1 gig of RAM, Soundblaster Audigy, and nVidia's Geforce 6600 GT (with 128 megs), and a 250gig internal harddrive. I use bilinear filtering, no antialiasing, and no Synch. Everything else, including Textures, is set to its highest levels. The game hasn't taken a single hit in performance, and the graphics are truly outstanding. Even city battles don't lag, anymore.

Understand your system before you invest in that sexy new graphics card, or buy a new computer.

[SPARTAN VI]

Part of the problem here is understanding your system, and how all of the components interact.

For example, probably everyone checks "Vertical Synch" as a matter of course, believing that they need it. However, I found out ... on my system ... that Synch wasn't needed, because I have a flat screen monitor. Refresh rates on the CRT are not an issue. But using Synch causes the game to stop with each and every frame, and wait for a signal that the monitor has refreshed, causing enormous lag.

V-sync isn't "needed" at all. I'd hardly call it an image quality enhancer, but some hardcore FPS'ers live and die by v-sync. Counter-Strike: Source is the only game I use v-sync in, and it's absolutely marvelous. Of course, I don't really care and can live without it, it'd just nice not having to see horizontal tearing.

But believe me, tearing is just as prevalent on an LCD and flat screen as it is on an old fashioned CRT.

Using v-sync doesn't cause the game to "stop" unless you're completely stressing out your video card. Vertical synchronization will attempt to sync the monitor's frequency with the game. I use the word "attempt" because if it fails to sustain a framerate at your monitors frequency, it will drop in intervals of 15FPS (if I remember correctly) until it can find a framerate it can hold. This is modern v-sync anyway, it used to drop in halves. For instance, 60FPS > 45FPS > 30FPS > 15FPS > 1FPS? it used to be 60FPS > 30FPS > 1FPS. Of course, this is an example of a display at 60Hz, things will change depending on the frequency you've set your monitor to.