alex_london0
Lord Fatshit
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2004
- Messages
- 135
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2005
wat are all the sppeds of the NVIDIA 5700LE...its an nforce chipset??
Its faster than yours... not by much, though :]SashatheMan said:the speed = slow
i can tell u that much
If the 6600 is out of date, then I don't know what the FX5700 is.alex_london0 said:no budget really.....im just looking for a new card and ill save for it....im looking at x800 and the nvidia equivalent and i like em both but 6600 is alil outa dat enow...isnt it
LoL.. well you're gonna be waiting for awhile buddySashatheMan said:how much are nvidias 6800 gt s ???? i am waiting for the price to drop below 300
I know where you're coming from, but in my opinion I think both can be very important.. and even your point illustrated it.. i.e both pipeline count or clock speed can make up for the poor performance if it's deficient in the other. (e.g for X1800, lower pipeline count, hence bump up the clock speed, 7800GTX, lower clock speed, hence bump up the pipeline count).insert-username said:For graphics cards, clockspeed really isn't that important. More important are the number if pixel and vertex shader pipelines and the particular architecture (some games just like NVIDIA cards over ATi, and vice-versa). Example - the current NVIDIA 7800 GTX is clocked at around 430 Mhz. Its main competitor, ATi's x1800 XT, is clocked at about 600 Mhz, almost 33% faster than the NVIDIA part. However, the cards are pretty much equal in gaming tests - framerate and image-quality wise. The difference is that the GTX has 24 pixel pipelines, compared to the x1800's 16 - the extra pipes give it the ability to match the ATi card despite the speed differential.
Remember the X800XT-PE was the original competitor to the flagship 6800 Ultras.. not the X850XTPE. By the time ATi released the X850, nVidia couldn't be bothered with another NV40 style competitor (although they did release that 512MB version of the 6800U.. prolly for die-hard Doom III fans who insist on having 512MB to be able to run the game on the Ultra setting.. which of course was bullcrap anyway). If anything I thought the X800s were pretty much on par with the 6800 Ultras. Infact, the X800PRO was pretty dissappointing compared to the 6800GTs so if anything if people were gonna go ATi in the last gen, I would certainly hope they went X800XT. Performance-wise overall I didn't think anyone kicked the other's butt either.. X800 did well in some and 6800U did better in others etc. (well, if we want to generalise let's just stick with the good ol' Direct3D & OpenGL). Plus ATi was dogged with a poor implementation strategy since they were seriously understocked in manufacture components for the cards.. which in the end resulted in minimal availability to impatient buyers for many months. So in the end, it seemed pretty much like an anti-climax paper launch. Finally, the X800s were criticised by more advanced hardware gurus as having less longevity than the 6800U due to it not incorporating SM3.0. Don't worry, I'm not biased against ATi if I sound like it, I mean I have an X800XT myself... just that for the last gen-cards.. if anything most people I have talked to tend to agree nVidia blew ATi out of the water for that round, rather than the other way round.Minai said:Off topic, ATi's new X1800 series is a tad disappointing, because it was supposed to blow the 7800GTX away, like what the X850 XT PE did to the 6800 Ultra..