Geforce 6600GT vs X800 - price/performance

  • Thread starter Thread starter nil_einne1
  • Start date Start date
N

nil_einne1

I'm a bit hesitant to write this since the cross post required and the
topic itself is the kind of thing which can start a flame war but
hopefully the ATI/Nvidia fanboys are too busy arguing about the
goods/bads of Crossfire too disturb this...

Anyway since I'm getting a new system with PCI-express I need a card
and really the 6600GT seems to be the best one given it's superb price
performance and it fits well with what I would like to pay.

I've been using ATi cards for a while now but the X700 Pro isn't even
worth considering and I've looked at the X800 (no suffixes) and
honestly from what I've seen it comes out second best def. Yes it does
beat the the 6600GT in general, especially with DX stuff obviously but
the percentage it beats is generally relatively low in comparison to
the price premium.

Where I live (which is not the US so please no newegg links) the price
premium of the X800 is over 50%. But the performance difference from
most reviews I've seen varies from - (with Doom3 and such) to about
35%. In extreme case, 1600x1200 with 4xAA and 8xaniso it does reach
about 50% in some games but at at reses I'm (and I expect most people
looking at these cards) like to run at (1024 - 1280) this is never the
case.

Looking forward, the extra 128mb (well you can get 256mb GTs but
they're not worth it either) will probably be a fair help in the future
but then I expect the 50% performance advantage will probably still be
a rare feat, especially with playable settings. Much better to save up
and buy a new card sooner or whatever...

Perhaps this is no surprise since the mid-range does tend to be the
best and the ATI cards are just a bit too slow this time around so the
6600GTs come off the best.

As for other cards, well the other X800 are just way to expensive for
me, whatever their price/performance is like. Similar the 6800 are
mostly out of my range. The 6800LE looks okay, provided I could unlock
at least 4 pipelines (which is always a risk) but where I am they're
only decently priced if you go AGP.

Have I missed anything? Dissention opinions (preferbly with facts)?

Thanks for replies all (well except fanboys who should stick with their
Crossfire arguments)
 
I'm a bit hesitant to write this since the cross post required and the
topic itself is the kind of thing which can start a flame war but
hopefully the ATI/Nvidia fanboys are too busy arguing about the
goods/bads of Crossfire too disturb this...

Anyway since I'm getting a new system with PCI-express I need a card
and really the 6600GT seems to be the best one given it's superb price
performance and it fits well with what I would like to pay.

I've been using ATi cards for a while now but the X700 Pro isn't even
worth considering and I've looked at the X800 (no suffixes) and
honestly from what I've seen it comes out second best def. Yes it does
beat the the 6600GT in general, especially with DX stuff obviously but
the percentage it beats is generally relatively low in comparison to
the price premium.

Where I live (which is not the US so please no newegg links) the price
premium of the X800 is over 50%. But the performance difference from
most reviews I've seen varies from - (with Doom3 and such) to about
35%. In extreme case, 1600x1200 with 4xAA and 8xaniso it does reach
about 50% in some games but at at reses I'm (and I expect most people
looking at these cards) like to run at (1024 - 1280) this is never the
case.

Looking forward, the extra 128mb (well you can get 256mb GTs but
they're not worth it either) will probably be a fair help in the future
but then I expect the 50% performance advantage will probably still be
a rare feat, especially with playable settings. Much better to save up
and buy a new card sooner or whatever...

Perhaps this is no surprise since the mid-range does tend to be the
best and the ATI cards are just a bit too slow this time around so the
6600GTs come off the best.

As for other cards, well the other X800 are just way to expensive for
me, whatever their price/performance is like. Similar the 6800 are
mostly out of my range. The 6800LE looks okay, provided I could unlock
at least 4 pipelines (which is always a risk) but where I am they're
only decently priced if you go AGP.

Have I missed anything? Dissention opinions (preferbly with facts)?

Thanks for replies all (well except fanboys who should stick with their
Crossfire arguments)
Click to expand...
Your spot on. :) A friend of mine from Finland a few days ago had his
9700Pro go bad.. Looking for a new
vid-card he priced ATi and Nvidia products... The 6600GT 128MB card was
his product of choice for 217 Euros.
ATi had nothing in that price range that could meet the specs of the
6600GT. Since my friend is/was a staunch ATi
user his switch to Nvidia speaks volumes. ;) If ATi is to compete
with Nvidia it's going to have to drop it's prices
on ""spec equal" cards.

--Looker007
 
There's a good comparison article for the x700-x850 vs. 6600gt-6800 Ultra at
extremetech.com. Just came out on the 26th I think
 
I'm a bit hesitant to write this since the cross post required and the
topic itself is the kind of thing which can start a flame war but
hopefully the ATI/Nvidia fanboys are too busy arguing about the
goods/bads of Crossfire too disturb this...

Anyway since I'm getting a new system with PCI-express I need a card
and really the 6600GT seems to be the best one given it's superb price
performance and it fits well with what I would like to pay.

I've been using ATi cards for a while now but the X700 Pro isn't even
worth considering and I've looked at the X800 (no suffixes) and
honestly from what I've seen it comes out second best def. Yes it does
beat the the 6600GT in general, especially with DX stuff obviously but
the percentage it beats is generally relatively low in comparison to
the price premium.

Where I live (which is not the US so please no newegg links) the price
premium of the X800 is over 50%. But the performance difference from
most reviews I've seen varies from - (with Doom3 and such) to about
35%. In extreme case, 1600x1200 with 4xAA and 8xaniso it does reach
about 50% in some games but at at reses I'm (and I expect most people
looking at these cards) like to run at (1024 - 1280) this is never the
case.

Looking forward, the extra 128mb (well you can get 256mb GTs but
they're not worth it either) will probably be a fair help in the future
but then I expect the 50% performance advantage will probably still be
a rare feat, especially with playable settings. Much better to save up
and buy a new card sooner or whatever...

Perhaps this is no surprise since the mid-range does tend to be the
best and the ATI cards are just a bit too slow this time around so the
6600GTs come off the best.

As for other cards, well the other X800 are just way to expensive for
me, whatever their price/performance is like. Similar the 6800 are
mostly out of my range. The 6800LE looks okay, provided I could unlock
at least 4 pipelines (which is always a risk) but where I am they're
only decently priced if you go AGP.

Have I missed anything? Dissention opinions (preferbly with facts)?

Thanks for replies all (well except fanboys who should stick with their
Crossfire arguments)
Click to expand...
My last 4 cards have been ATI including a 9500 Pro and a 9600XT. This
time I did the same as you and went with the 6600GT. I am pleased with
the performance. The ATI cards in the same performance range weren't
priced well. Since I am using an AGP system, it was even easier to go
with the Nvidia card. The only ATI card I would have gotten was the 9800
Pro and they are almost impossible to get (non mail order), let alone at
a decent price.
 
Back
Top