New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

7900GS vs GTX

post #1 of 13
8/10/06 at 1:43pm
Thread Starter 
Just wondering, as the 7900GS apparently is a BEAST, I was wondering if anyone could post some comparative benchmarks. I know there are a lot out there but these would be special for people that want to choose wisely and save a buck or two or splurge a bit.

The optimal benchies as the 7900GS is rock solid at 1.24v would be the following:

1. Stock clock a GTX card
2. Match those clocks with the 7900GS (500/1200 i think @ 1.24v)

Race them in 3DMark, HL2 stress test, etc. Under the same windows install to insure consistency. I would do it but I dont have a gtx card laying around anywhere..... yet.

I am thinking that the GS will slightly outperform or match the GTX at the GTX stock speeds.

Anyone up to the challenge?
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 13
8/10/06 at 1:49pm
I'll do it!

Promptly send me one of each of those cards. Oh, can you please also include a M1710 so I can put them in??

Reply
Reply
post #3 of 13
8/10/06 at 2:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by whackamac

I am thinking that the GS will slightly outperform or match the GTX at the GTX stock speeds.
It won't. A GS @ 500/600(1200) can barely hit 8000 in 3DMark05 @ 1024x768. The stock GTX hits around 8500 at the same clocks. The delta is significantly larger when you raise the resolution.

There are a ton of benchmarks in my GS thread and you can find many stock GTX benchmarks in this forum as well.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 13
8/10/06 at 2:37pm
The GTX has 512MB and 24 pipelines versus the GS's 256MB and 20 pipelines, so at the same clocks the GTX will be faster especially as the resolution increases. However from a bang-for-the-buck standpoint an E1705 with 7900GS will get you darn close to the M1710 with 7900GTX speeds for less than half the price. And apparantly lots of people have overclocked even higher than that.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 13
8/10/06 at 7:50pm
Depends on what resolution you are running and as AA and AF setting you are using. If you are running at low resolution, you wont see the difference. If you are running high detail with 1920X1200 with aa and AF on, 7900GTX will beat 7900GS at least 20 to 25FPS. I have both 7900GS and 7900GTX on my M1710 and I play CSS and BF2 that 7900GTX are much smoother when runniing 16XAA
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 13
8/10/06 at 7:59pm
my 7900gs is highly overclockable, I get over 9000 on 3dmark05 @ 630/1200 stable, with no artifacts.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 13
8/10/06 at 9:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by exabytehd
my 7900gs is highly overclockable, I get over 9000 on 3dmark05 @ 630/1200 stable, with no artifacts.

wow, thats good to hear.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 13
8/10/06 at 11:20pm
for all intents and purposes, the 1705 and 7900 gs are good enough for most people.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 13
8/10/06 at 11:40pm
agreed
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 13
8/10/06 at 11:43pm
WTF does that have to do with this thread?
Read people, read!
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 13
8/10/06 at 11:48pm
I get 8500 on 3DMark05 with no overclocking at all. When games get to the point that I can't run them maxed out, I'll think about overclocking.
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 13
8/10/06 at 11:57pm
Thread Starter 
I guess I am sittin pretty (see sig scores...). Though I am a hi rez freak . I have 20/10 vision and WUXGA is pretty big to me... If they dont get my screen right this time, I may request the gtx. 10K in 3D'05 is nutz..
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 13
8/11/06 at 1:00am
I believe ther are tons of reviews on comparing 7900GS and 7900GTX. The above posts said it all. I was once reading a review and told that 7800GTX performed better than 7900GS(stock setting).
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home