[Busemann]

Sorry if this has been asked before, but I'm about to order a dual 2,0ghz with either the 9800xt or the Nvidia 6800.. I'm leaning somewhat towards the 9800xt because its apparently very silent, ships instantly and is a proven quality card. The 6800 is just a little bit more expensive, but it wont ship until late Ocober, is brand new, and probably a lot noisier.. I'm certainly not a hardcore gamer, but id like doom 3 to run quite smooth and more importantly it should be able to run anything its being thrown at for the next 2-3 years with decent performance (Tiger, FCP etc).

Anyone with a 9800XT who can chime in on its noise level and performance?

[P]

Originally posted by Busemann:
Sorry if this has been asked before, but I'm about to order a dual 2,0ghz with either the 9800xt or the Nvidia 6800.. I'm leaning somewhat towards the 9800xt because its apparently very silent, ships instantly and is a proven quality card. The 6800 is just a little bit more expensive, but it wont ship until late Ocober, is brand new, and probably a lot noisier.. I'm certainly not a hardcore gamer, but id like doom 3 to run quite smooth and more importantly it should be able to run anything its being thrown at for the next 2-3 years with decent performance (Tiger, FCP etc).

Anyone with a 9800XT who can chime in on its noise level and performance?

I don't have one, but you can see the performance stats for a 9800XT and 6800 in Doom3 here:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2146&p=3

From what it sounds like, you don't need the 6800.

[memory-minus]

Originally posted by Busemann:
Anyone with a 9800XT who can chime in on its noise level and performance?

I have a 9800XT and this past week have been running World of Warcraft beta, 1920x1200 (23" Cinema Display), all quality options turned all the way up. Runs smooth as silk. Amazing.

There is a fan on the 9800XT however I can't tell the difference between it and the other very, very quiet case fans in my G5. It is nearly silent.

[Busemann]

Originally posted by memory-minus:
I have a 9800XT and this past week have been running World of Warcraft beta, 1920x1200 (23" Cinema Display), all quality options turned all the way up. Runs smooth as silk. Amazing.

There is a fan on the 9800XT however I can't tell the difference between it and the other very, very quiet case fans in my G5. It is nearly silent.

OK, cool. I think I'll go with the 9800XT, as 6-8 weeks wait and an additional 150$ isn't really worth it (although the radeon didn't fare too well in that test ).

choices, choices...

[blakespot]

Originally posted by Busemann:
OK, cool. I think I'll go with the 9800XT, as 6-8 weeks wait and an additional 150$ isn't really worth it (although the radeon didn't fare too well in that test ).

choices, choices...

Isn't worth the additional $150? For what benchmerks show to be TWICE the framerate in many games over the Radeon 9800XT ??

Seems rather worth that small a part of a $3,000 - $4,000 computer purchase.


blakespot

[Lateralus]

Originally posted by Busemann:
(although the radeon didn't fare too well in that test ).

Doom III really isn't the best game out there to use for benchmarking right now. Reason being that the engine heavily favors nVidia GPUs because the Radeon optimizations were rushed.

id has said that future patches/updates will level the ATI-nVidia playing field.

Originally posted by blakespot:
Isn't worth the additional $150? For what benchmerks show to be TWICE the framerate in many games over the Radeon 9800XT ??

Seems rather worth that small a part of a $3,000 - $4,000 computer purchase.


blakespot

He cited the price and the wait as reasons to not hold out for the nVidia.

[Busemann]

Well, I went with the 9800xt and spent the $150 on a couple of 512mb crucials.

[Turnpike]

I think you made a good choice... if you were deciding between 9800XT + RAM + 6-8 more weeks of computing or 6800, I think the whole package will help you out much more, especially as far as future-proofing goes.

[Oneota]

I agree; 9800XT is a sweet card. We've got a 23" Cinema hooked up to a 9800XT on our 2.5 G5 at work, and UT 2004 on that sucker looks absolutely gorgeous at the 23" display's native resolution with all graphics options turned on full-bore.

I can't imagine needing more power than that (except to drive the 30" display).

[BurningBright]

9800 XT all the way. The 6800 is "ultra" because it is DDL. That's all. for gaming, single screens 23" and smaller, it's 9800 XT.

[a2daj]

Originally posted by BurningBright:
9800 XT all the way. The 6800 is "ultra" because it is DDL. That's all. for gaming, single screens 23" and smaller, it's 9800 XT.

No, it's Ultra because it uses the 6800 Ultra chipset, which is one the fastest consumer graphics chipsets available. The Ultra in the name has nothing to do with DDL. It has the potential horsepower to beat down the 9800 XT in the right system. But since the card is Ultra scarce, the 9800 XT is the fastest shipping chipset.

[qwerty2]

Originally posted by Busemann:
I'm certainly not a hardcore gamer, but id like doom 3 to run quite smooth and more importantly it should be able to run anything its being thrown at for the next 2-3 years with decent performance (Tiger, FCP etc).

Let's see, you are not a hardcore gamer but you DO have hardcore gamer requirements listed here!...

1. Run Doom 3 quite smooth
2. Run decently ANYTHING being thrown at it for the next TWO to THREE YEARS with decent performance!!!

Busemann, I don't have to read a single other post here to KNOW that I am answering your question right if those are truly your requirements. The only way you could possibly attain that is with the 6800 or an X800 from ATI. You would do fine with the 9800 XT for your first requirement, but your 2nd requirement is quite unrealistic to achieve with the 9800 XT. The XT is a nice card but it isn't the latest thing right now, and you are talking TWO to THREE years out! Let's see, does anyone remember the Rage 128 card? I got one of those in January 1999 in a Power Mac G3 and it was the "hottest" card at the time. Imagine if I wanted to get the PREVIOUS generation card to the Rage 128 in that machine and STILL wanted it to run decently "anything thrown at it in 2001 to 2002"!! Maybe you didn't really mean what you require in number 2 above. Maybe you just want the computer to RUN in 2 or 3 years, not run decently ANYTHING thrown at it. But if you are even half way serious about wanting as decent performance as you can get in 2-3 years your only option is a 6800 or a X800. Period. The 9800 XT is not shabby at all by any means -- but you are just stating an objective that probably the 6800 won't even be able to meet, much less a 9800 XT.

I'm going to guess that you don't really require the requirements that you stated, and you just want the best, quietest, and best value card out right now. That would be the 9800 XT. If that's what you really want, then you're in luck. If you wanted that other stuff then you are up doo-doo creek without a paddle.

[Busemann]

Originally posted by qwerty2:
Let's see, you are not a hardcore gamer but you DO have hardcore gamer requirements listed here!...

1. Run Doom 3 quite smooth
2. Run decently ANYTHING being thrown at it for the next TWO to THREE YEARS with decent performance!!!

Busemann, I don't have to read a single other post here to KNOW that I am answering your question right if those are truly your requirements. The only way you could possibly attain that is with the 6800 or an X800 from ATI. You would do fine with the 9800 XT for your first requirement, but your 2nd requirement is quite unrealistic to achieve with the 9800 XT. The XT is a nice card but it isn't the latest thing right now, and you are talking TWO to THREE years out! Let's see, does anyone remember the Rage 128 card? I got one of those in January 1999 in a Power Mac G3 and it was the "hottest" card at the time. Imagine if I wanted to get the PREVIOUS generation card to the Rage 128 in that machine and STILL wanted it to run decently "anything thrown at it in 2001 to 2002"!! Maybe you didn't really mean what you require in number 2 above. Maybe you just want the computer to RUN in 2 or 3 years, not run decently ANYTHING thrown at it. But if you are even half way serious about wanting as decent performance as you can get in 2-3 years your only option is a 6800 or a X800. Period. The 9800 XT is not shabby at all by any means -- but you are just stating an objective that probably the 6800 won't even be able to meet, much less a 9800 XT.

I'm going to guess that you don't really require the requirements that you stated, and you just want the best, quietest, and best value card out right now. That would be the 9800 XT. If that's what you really want, then you're in luck. If you wanted that other stuff then you are up doo-doo creek without a paddle.

Yes I'm not a hardcore mac gamer so it doesn't really matter either way (I guess I should be more clear on that). In any case, if I find the performance to be disappointing, I'll get a new card at that time. Even the 6800 can't run Doom 3 in all its glory anyways (as that would require a 512MB card), so I figured spending the money towards memory was the better choice now.

[MindFad]

It comes down to bad-ass or mega bad-ass with these two cards. I would probably just go with a 9800 XT, since it will be good for at least a few more years—though I wouldn't mind splurging on a 6800, which will be excellent for the next two-three years. Good choice, though, on the 9800 XT.

[Jansar]

Well, I'm stuck in a rut, since I'm starting school and I need a new computer. I'll live with the ATI card, and by the time I'll want a new one, nVidia might even have a successor to their 6800...who knows.

[qwerty2]

One other possible argument for the 6800, although I think the 9800 XT is a great card, is that it is likely that Apple will switch over to PCI-Express sometime next year. 8xAGP is starting to be left behind and that will just accelerate in the next year or so. I saw this when I bought the last PCI only Power Mac -- the video card options started to dry up rapidly. I was never REALLY happy with any PCI card that came out after that. That was one reason I decided to go with the 6800 -- because for right now it will get me as far into the PCI-Express years as I can go.

What is sad about Apple is that it defaults towards video cards with low VRAM and that are either not very current or are even flat outdated. It seems to me that this is a major reason that my friends have purchased new Macs (in this case mostly laptops and iMacs). Although the Macs are wonderful machines over all, it seems that the VRAM choices for these machines become THE limiting factor much sooner than processor MHz or any other aspects of the machines. That's one reason I like to get the best VRAM option I can, and also why I was so happily surprised when Apple allowed a choice for significantly better VRAM in the top of the line Power Book. I just think that same choice should be available for iMac G5s, the other Power Books, and iBooks. It's an important part of the system and I feel pretty sure that Apple defaults toward these lamer cards to speed along the customers to buy new systems.

Well, again I usually default toward buying the beefiest card available, but for general use the 9800 XT will be good for a year or 2 and decent for 3-5.

[balls]

Originally posted by qwerty2:
8xAGP is starting to be left behind and that will just accelerate in the next year or so.

How is it starting to get left behind? Even the 6800 Ultra or the X800 XT can't use the full bandwidth of 8X AGP...

[Turnpike]

Originally posted by balls:
Even the 6800 Ultra or the X800 XT can't use the full bandwidth of 8X AGP...

I have heard this as well. AGP 8x still has a year or two left in it. After that, we'll see what we need....

[UnixMac]

I don't know about the 9800XT, but this temporary 9600XT that Apple sent me is all but useless in the 3D games I've trued, Star Trek and Halo both only play well at low res... I can't wait for my 6800 to get here!

[qwerty2]

Originally posted by balls:
How is it starting to get left behind? Even the 6800 Ultra or the X800 XT can't use the full bandwidth of 8X AGP...

It's not being left behind because of any lack of ability. Not at all. But just spend some time each week reading about how ATI and Nvidia and the motherboard makers are handling PCI-Express and you'll know that this deal is being pushed big time. Since when does the computer industry stay with something because it is doing the job? It doesn't, and Intel has a way of really pushing things through that aren't necessary. The companies that make this hardware do not want to support 2 different standards. They see their job as not only making what the customer wants, but making the customer want what it makes. And they sell a lot more when something is new and fresh even if it is not necessary. Anyway, enough said. PCI-Express is the buzz. 8xAGP is being euthanized.

(Again, I say that as a person who just bought an 8xAGP machine, so it's not like I don't have a vested interest in the OPPOSITE being true. I would love 8xAGP to be the thing a while longer and PCI-Express to have been delayed. I needed a new machine last year, though, so I couldn't wait another year for PCI-Express to get to Apple. If I could have waited for PCI-Express then I would have, personally.)