Ati Radeon X1900 Xtx Is Out!!! - Page 2

I'll take 5.

What would you do with 5?

You guys are too easily impressed, I think. These cards are only evolutionary. I'm still waiting for the GPU that makes games visually undistinguishable from real life, or at least CGI movies. Until then I'll just go with whatever is the best bang for the buck at the time I next want to upgrade.

Card dont make games look good, people make games look good. The GPU simply handles the graphics people make.

Because it was a good value... I got my XPS2 in July for about $1650 and upgraded to what it is now for another $500 or so. Those video cards are $650 apiece. Terrible value-performance ratio

I got my 7800 GTX for about $100 after selling my 6800U on eBay and if you check out the benchmarks, it's not that much slower than a top-end X1900 XTX, but certainly a lot cheaper and plays all of my games beautifully, in a notebook that I can take with me, no less.

Haha I remember hooking 2 Monster 3D's together to get 8mb of video ram total. The good ol' days.

AMEN, I bought a 7800gtx ko ($569) when they came out thinking I was at the front of the pack, and I was for at least 5 min . Now, people think my A64 4000+ and 7800 gtx KO are outdate ....LOL. I'll never buy top of the line again. The performance difference between a 7800 GTX KO and overclocked 7800 GT is too tiny to justify the $250+ premium, unless you're at high resolutions. 35% price premium for 5% performance increase. No thanks, I'm done with that bandwagon. I'll wait for something truly revolutionary, or something 5 months old on clearance.

Repeat after me:
"I will not be a benchmark whore,I will not be a benchmark whore,I will not be a benchmark whore,I will not be a benchmark whore,I will not be a benchmark whore,I will not be a benchmark whore,I will not be a benchmark whore,I will not be a benchmark whore,I will not be a benchmark whore!!!!"

Ahem - NOTHING is "cheaper" anymore. If anything, ATI's trying to be the "cheaper" of the two, and even that's not saying much.

I disagree. In my experience older stuff gets cheaper. The a64 4000+ was 600+ when it first came out. After the fx-57 came out the chip dropped to around $300+, when I bought it. I agree with you that it seems the gfx card industry doesn't quite work that way though. Instead of old technology gettting cheaper, new technology just gets more expensive. But, in our case, that's because ATI's x1800xt got beat by the 512 version of the 7800 gtx in sales. ATI had to release a cheaper alternative (the x1900 xtx) then the 7800 gtx 512 or it would continue to loose business to nvidia. So we now have a superior card at a cheaper price, and anyone looking at the 7800 gtx 512, will now preferably consider the x1900 series.

It still doesn't change the fact that now magically 500 bucks for a high-end video card is considered in some circles to be "cheap." Some might call that collusion.

You can't really compare GPUs to CPUs at all, one FAR outnumbers the other and thus is GOING to be cheaper over time.

I totally agree with you that prices for these cards are stupid high, but the same can be said for CPUs, FX-60 going for $1400, now that's stupid. But, what do you mean by "FAR outnumbers the other". True, there are many differnt speads and variations, but both industries have only two competitors, AMD and Intel, and ATI and nVidia. In which, they each have similar products that compete at different perfomance and price levels. I have a masters degree in economy from NorthWestern and I studied fluctuations in the technological industry for my senior thesis, in my study, I specialized in the competition between AMD and Intel and how thier manuvers effect the market. Does the GFX industry and its market really differ that much? I'm not trying to pick a fight, so please educate me if I'm mistaken, and I'll go return my degree right away.

And Please no answers like: "Cuz it is Stupid"

The only thing that bothers me is spending several hundred dollars to play the few games that really make use of the high end GPU's.
My Desktop is a P4 2.4 with a 5900xl video card, It will still play 98% of the games out there, it even does good job on BF2
I find it hard to justify spending 2-3 grand to make the same games look better.
I jumped on the I9300 for portability and price ($885) and the $250 7800GTX was just to good of a deal to pass up.
I still want a better faster desktop but I'll wait and buy someone's "old rig" when they think they have to have the latest greatest.

Yeah, but no MobileForce drivers for a Mobility X1900. LOL .

What I meant by "far outnumbers" is AMD/Intel makes more CPUs than nVidia/ATI makes high-end GPUs.

Thus, you're going to get lower prices for CPUs (which don't have any sort of "X" attached to them) and higher prices for GPUs.

But with each die shrink, it theoretically gets EASIER to make MORE components for sale. R&D costs aside, nVidia and ATI are now pretty much just playing a meanspirited game of "how much can we get away with charging before people come with torches and pitchforks?"

It used to be that the midrange cards were the mainstay, and you could say "I don't need to spend 300-400 bucks for a high-end, I'm fine with the mid-range."

Now nVidia AND ATI are setting the midrange cards in at the OLD high-end price points and developing a whole NEW class of under-midrange cards, further mucking up the mix. I remember when people were shitting themselves with glee when they could find a 6800GT for under 400 bucks. SOMEONE has to say enough, or kill the "gottahaveits" before they make high-end video cards cost a grand each.

...of course, the developers aren't faultless here...it's THEM constantly setting the bar progressively higher...and THEIR shit gets paid for and bought wholesale. I just think it very ironic that most of the "best" games out there are mods for older games that people play merely because they don't need a computer that costs more than their car to enjoy them at a decent framerate.

I'm usually a very progressive person, but game development trends need to SLOW DOWN.

ATI finally caught on to NVidia's game: release a video card that beats the competition and have it in stock on day 1. Their crossfire still needs work though, NVidia's SLI is still faster (not surprisingly since NVidia has a 4-5 year head start on SLI...more if you count the 3dfx technology they bought).

It's nice that ATI is back in the game...but check this out:
NVidia 7800 GTX 512: 550MHz clock speed, 24 pixel pipelines, 1700Mhz memory.

ATI x1900 XTX: 650MHz clock speed, 48 pixel pipelines, 1550MHz memory.

It feels like the ATI card should be way faster than the NVidia card just looking at the specs... How much faster is a 7800 with twice as many pixel pipelines?

The comparison up at HardOCP pretty much has the two neck-and-neck, effectively - SLI vs. Crossfire, the only difference being Adaptive AA and HQ AF...which HOCP said wasn't really noticeable in the image quality.