So here's the deal, you know how I said that I was getting my computer upgraded and I also said that my dad was getting a laptop? Well we decided that instead of him spending $2500 on a laptop and $1000 on upgrading my computer, he's going to buy me a whole new computer at the end of the year and I'm going to give him my current one (he'll buy himself a monitor, wireless router and card, keyboard and mouse for it).

He said that if he's in a "good financial position" at the end of the year then he'll ge me a Radeon X800 Pro or a GeForce 6800 GT but I'm having a LOT of trouble trying to figure out which one's better. I know that the 6800 GT is more powerful, has 4 more pixel rendering pipelines than the X800 Pro and Shader Model 3.0 rather than the X800 Pro's 2.0b. But I don't know if it's actually a better card, I've been looking them up and it seems that the X800 Pro better in 3DMark 01 but the 6800 GT's better in 3DMark 03 because the X800 Pro is slightly better for older (not old but older i.e. Tiger Woods 2004 and stuff like that) games and the 6800 GT is better for newer or something and it's all very confusing for me.

So, which should I get - Radeon X800 Pro or GeForce 6800 GT?

It goes without saying that the 6800 GT is alot more bang for your buck than the X800 Pro.

I'm sure no one here will disagree with me.

But the X800 Pro owns the 6800 GT and all nVidia cards when 8xAA and 16xAF are enabled. Can someone please explain whether this matters or not, i.e. what games actually use 8xAA and 16xAF? Also does it matter that the 6800's have SM3.0 while the X800's only have SM2.0b? Same with the 12 pipelines on the X800 Pro and 16 on the 6800 GT, does that really matter? My main concern though, is the performance with 8xAA and 16xAF enabled, can someone please explain this to me?

Also, if the 6800 GT is a better card, can someone please explain to me why it's a better card. i.e. what makes it better than the X800 Pro?

The pipelines do matter, that is why the X800Pro struggles to the 6800GT, and why the the X800XT dominates almost everything. It (6800GT) has higher framerate in a fair few games, with the most notable being Doom 3.

SM3.0 Isn't really a neccessity in graphics cards at the moment, since it wont be fully integrated into all games till the next hardware generation, i.e. the successors to the 6800 and X800 series.

Get the 6800GT.

As for AA and AF, a game doesn't need to support it. You can set it through the display control panel and force games to use it.

OK by what all of you have said it sounds like I'm going the 6800 GT.

Since everyone seems to think that I should go the 6800 GT, which manufacturer should I get it from? I've heard that Leadtek and MSI are good, I don't think that it really matters that much unless I'm going to overclock it though does it (I'm not planning on overclocking it)? I have a friend who can get an Elsa 6800 GT for $700 and the Leadtek and MSI ones are $799 and $779 consecutively from GameDude so could you please tell me which one I should go for?

Also with Anti-Aliasing and Anisotropic Filtering, what's the difference in picture quality between 4xAA and 4xAF and 8xAA and 16xAF and does it really matter that the X800 cards perform better with 8xAA and 16xAF?

Thanks.

EDIT: the $779 MSI 6800 GT from GameDude also "INCLUDES GAME BUNDLE : XIII, Prince of Persia, Splinter Cell, Myst URU" none of those games really appeall to me because the first three are violent and I don't like Myst but I'd be able to trade them in or something.

Go for the well known manufacturer as they tend be better quality, and more reliable.

You don't want your card frying one month after buying. ;)

If your only going to be playing the Sims 2 on this, I seriously wouldn't bother since you won't be playing Half-Life 2, Doom3, Splinter Cell 3, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. etc. with it...so I seriously wouldn't bother getting such a high-spec card.

It's like buying a Gamecube just to play the non-exculsive 3rd party games. :P

Just get a good Radeon 9800 for $350.


BTW, by not playing violent games, it means your not playing about 90% of the best games ever created. ;)

I'm also curious about your violence comment.

Is it that you are not allowed to play violent games, or that it just doesn't appeal to you?

I'm one of Jehovah's Witnesses so I don't like violence. I might end up playing them a bit though because I have a friend who plays heaps of games and I'll be taking my computer over to his place and just playing heaps of games of every genre and stuff, but for the most part I won't be playing violent games, that doesn't mean that I won't be playing any new games though, I'll be getting stuff like NFS:Underground 2 and stuff like that.

EDIT: I might play somewhat violent games occassionally (mainly only when I go over to my friend's place and we network) i.e. possibly Halo, but I wouldn't really play violent games at home and I definitely wouldn't play anything really violent like Doom 3, etc, but I will still be playing games that'll take quite a chunk out of my system resources kind of thing... Tiger Woods 2005'll probably be fairly system heavy :P and besides - my dad's the one paying for the system so I may as well get the best he's willing to get me and then it'll be futureproof anyways.

Back on topic though, which one should I get, the MSI 6800 GT for $779 with the game bundle or the Leadtek 6800 GT for $799 with no game bundle?

Ok, fair enough.

With the different manufacturers of cards, you wont notice much difference. MSI and Leadtek are both good brands.

So should I just go the cheaper one then (MSI)? How much better are the MSI and Leadtek ones over the Elsa one(which is $700 but doesn't come with any games)? I think that if my dad's willing to take me all the way to GameDude just for the video card then I'll probably get the MSI one but GameDude is ages away from where I live.

Also can someone please answer my question about the difference in quality between 4xAA, 4xAF and 8xAA, 16xAF?

Also, seeing as GameDude is a bit over an hour away from where I live, do you think that I should go to Umart, which is way closer, and get an Albatron or ASUS manufactured 6800 GT or is it worth it to go all the way to GameDude to get an MSI or Leadtek one and which one should I get?

BTW the Albatron and ASUS one's from UMart and $740 and $739 consecutively, but don't come with games as far as I know. They say that the ASUS one is "ASUS V9999GE FX 6800 256M with TV-out/DVI Game Edition" is that still a GT though or what?

EDIT: the Albatron one from UMart comes with Duke Nukem: Manhattan Project and the ASUS one has:
Over 25% faster than other competitors with 6800GPU
* ASUS GameFaceLive™
* ASUS VideoSecurityOnline™
* Advanced and stylish blue LED thermal solution
* High quality webcam bundled
* The Hottest 3D Game Bundled

It says that it's a GE though so I don't know if it's as good as the GT or what... it seems to have the same clock speeds but I don't know - check it out http://www.umart.com.au/newindex2.phtml?bid=2

Well Albatron and Asus make very good cards too. Right now, there really isn't that much to differentiate them, with your decision mainly being swayed by the package, price and aesthetics of the card.

That Asus you mentioned looks like an ordinary 6800, so I wouldn't go near that.

JUMPING JIMINY! From Umarts pricing, it looks like they are selling the Albatron 6800 Ultra for a "mere" $880. But, for the kind of gaming you want it for, the 6800 GT will meet and exceed your expectations.

Thanks, I'll probably end up getting the $740 Albatron 6800 GT then should I?

Also, if I had enough money to get a 6800 Ultra I would get a Radeon X800 XT instead.

Also can someone please answer my question about how large a difference in quality there is between 4xAA and 4xAF and 8xAA and 16xAF and whether it would be very important that the X800 cards absolutely ownzors the 6800's when it comes to 8xAA and 16xAF?

EDIT: Also, is it possible to get ViVo versions of the GeForce 6800 GT and if so how do I know if it's a ViVo?

Look at the specs on the box to see if it says vivo.

A main difference would be less jaggies, but even at 4xAF and 8xAA, you should have really good picture quality. In fact, you probably won't even notice the difference while you're playing.

And yes 6800GT > X800PRO
but X800XT > 6800Ultra

do you mean 4xAA and 8xAF? Also, I'm planning on getting AGP, I don't know if I've already asked this but would it be wise to go PCI Express instead or should I just stick with AGP for now?

Also, I'm giving my dad my current computer and he's planning on getting an LCD but I'm trying to convince him to take my CRT and get me an LCD instead, but he doesn't seem like he's going to budge. Any tips on nagging parents :P? I'm usually pretty good but my dad's a bit of a tough nut to crack. :P

Oh and also if I can get an LCD, would a BenQ FP767-12 suffice?

I'd get the PCI- Express, that'll make it easier for you to upgrade when the time comes as AGP is being phased out.
Also, from what I've heard, the PCI-Express cards are faster.
How much faster, I'm not sure, but I know that all Nvidia's 6800 PCI-EX cards are faster than the ATI's X800 PCI-EX cards. :thumbsup:

But they are all faster than their AGP counterparts.

If he isn't going to be gaming or watching movies, then yes, it'll do fine.
Otherwise, steer clear of this monitor. It has a bad response time, which mean's that moving images(like in games an movies) blurr.

Currently, you can get CRT's that are the same size, and are better quality for the same price as an average 17inch LCD.

BTW, a 17inch CRT has roughly the same size display area as a 19inch CRT.

So should I just get a new 19" CRT that can run high resolutions at 85 hertz at least(that's my main complaint about my current monitor, a Syncmaster 753DFX, it can run at 1280x1024 but only at 60 hertz, also it's got the worst picture settings memory EVER)? The BenQ FP767-12 has a 12ms response time by the way, ala the 12 in the name.

Also, if you think that I should get a new CRT rather than that BenQ FP767-12 (12ms response time) what kind of CRT should I get?

Also, how much more expensive would a PCI-Express system be over an AGP system and also what processor should I get, Intel or AMD, to the best of my knowledge, Athlon 64's are better for gaming than P4's so I'm leaning more towards an Athlon 64 can someone please confirm this for me? Also, is it possible get PCI-e Athlon 64's?

Yes Ath 64s are better for gaming.

Yes you can get AMD PCI-E mobos.

Are they worth it?

Not really... the performance gains at the moment are barely worth mentioning. Getting a PCI-E board now is also not the best plan. BTX is coming (slowly... but surely) So if you spend the extra on getting a PCI-E system you aren't going to get much bang for your buck and you are still going to need to look at doing a full upgrade in the next year or so.

I'd save your money and go with a standard mobo and forget PCI-E extra cost for virtually 0% performance gain. Not the best plan.

What is BTX anyways? Also can you get mobos that support AGP and PCI Express?

BTX is a new type of Motherboard, the current standard is ATX.
Basicaly(think) BTX is designed to run quicker and more effcient.(it's to do with the architecture I've been told)

I'm not sure what sort of solts it uses, but I think you can ones that support PCI and PCI-Express, although I'm not sure about AGP.

I should really do some research on BTX. :P

I think there are some boards that support both PCI-E and AGP, while they phase PCI-E in. But these mobos would be ATX, and thus would still be prone to requiring a full upgrade when BTX is here. However, BTX is very very slowly coming in, so I wouldn't worry too much about it. If you got a good system now, it'll hold you till at least 2006.

BTX will only support PCI-E

Well ElPrez, could you kindly explain to us all exactly what BTX is please?

It is just a new type of form factor. Just like ATX.

It is a technical specification that tell hardware manufacturers how to design their hardware.

At the moment we all run ATX systems, BTX provides a more logical layout and better cooling. But it requires a difference case design to fit the BTX mobos and cooling units in. PCI-E is part of the BTX spec.

Do a search on Anandtech if you want the real low down.

As I'm sure most, if not all of you would know by now I'm getting a new computer at the end of the year but I don't know whether to get a socket 754 or socket 939 Athlon 64 and what speed to get, please help me decide?

By the way just so you'd know my total budget is $2500

939 IS a superior socket type, but it does come with a cost. For a $2500 budget, it'd probably be easier to slip in a socket 754 CPU which are still fine and dandy.

I say go S939. AMD have now launched their 3000+ and 3200+ 90 nm 'Winchester' CPUs in socket 939 form. Previously the lowest S939 model was the 3500+ which cost upwards of $450.

Some online stores have now listed the 3000+ for $253 and the 3200+ for $291 due in Australia in November sometime. At these prices they are cheaper than the equivalent S754 CPUs and even the Athlon XP 3200+!

And for you overclockers the 3000+ and the 3200+ both have the potential to be overclocked to 2.5 Ghz (3500+ speeds) with standard air cooling and little or no voltage increases. The 3000+ and 3200+ are clocked at 1.8 Ghz and 2.0 Ghz respectively by default.

A 3200+ for $291 sounds alright but it might not be fast enough for me, I'm going to be getting a GeForce 6800GT and my current monitor can only run 1280x1024 at 60 hertz so I'm pretty much only going to be able to run at 1024x768 resolution.

Why is the 3200+ socket 939 so cheap? And why are socket 939's better (I know they support dual channel RAM (what's that mean?) but is there any other reason)?

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the 939 mobos are the first to support PCI-Express. Either way, you should still be going for 939 nowadays.

3200+ not fast enough? Well that's why you buy a 3200+ and overclock it to 3500+ speeds (or even further if you're into phase change or water cooling).

S939s are better because the CPU has dual memory controllers meaning it has twice the bandwidth of RAM available to it. Also S939 will give you the best upgrade path as it supports more models of CPUs (including the overpriced FX range). The way I see it the S754 will become AMDs budget platform and the S939 will be their main range.

Why are they so cheap? Well previously the A64 line was manufactured with a 130 nanometer process. The S939 3000 and 3200 are the first processors to be built on a 90 nanometer process (i.e. they take up less space for the same number of transistors). Why move to a smaller process? A smaller process usually means your chips use less power, you get higher yields (ie less defective chips per batch) which equates to cheaper prices. However in Intel's case their chips actually became hotter after moving to 90nm.

Oh the other reason to move to a 90 nm process is to pack two CPU cores onto one chip. Two 90 nm cores will take up just a little more space than one 130 nm core. These chips won't make it to the desktop segment for at least another year though but two CPUs in one socket should be quite the power boost.

It depends what type of games you plan on playing. Some games scale well with faster CPUs but other games are bottlenecked by the graphics cards. On the whole however a 3200+ and a 6800GT be more than enough to run games at 1280x1024.

Also there are apparently some core enhancements of the 90 nm CPUs over their 130 nm counterparts as the 3200+ that was overclocked to 3500+ speeds outperformed its 130 nm 3500+ brother.

Here's a couple of articles on the new socket 939 CPUs:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2242
http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&articID=230

PCI-Express support is a feature of the motherboard rather than the CPU itself. Nvidia has just announced that the Nforce4 has PCI-E support and they will also offer an SLI version with two PCI-E graphics slots (dual 6800GTs anyone?).

I know that it'd be more than enough to run games at 1280x1024 but my point before was that I can't run games at 1280x1024, not at any higher refresh rate than 60Hz at least (with my current monitor anyway), so I would have to run at 1024x768 and I've heard that at any lower resolution than 1280x1024, even the 3400 isn't fast enough for the 6800GT to be at it's full potential, so I didn't think that with an Athlon 3200 I'd get full potential out of the 6800GT at 1024x768. I suppose that it'd still be full of awesomeness though wouldn't it?

Do you get what I mean?

Does anyone happen to know if/when PCI-E 6800GT cards will be released here in Australia?

Yes I get what you mean. You're talking about games being CPU limited when you take the graphics card out of the equation (i.e. low resolutions).

Well I'm sure there may be some games in the future that will stress your graphics card at low resolutions (if 3DMark05 is any indication).

If I remember correctly there are some games that don't improve when you add in a faster CPU (they are graphics card limited).

Well what you can do to max out your GT is to turn on FSAA and 16x AF or something. ;)

Yeah I'll see to what extent the video card is bottlenecked (don't know if that's the right term for this exact thing) by the CPU and adjust the detail depending

I need to know if and when the nForce 4 motherboards and PCI-E 6800's, specifically 6800GT's will be released, can someone PLEASE tell me?

As most of you know I'm getting a new computer in a little over a month and I want to get an nForce 4 and a PCI-E 6800GT but I don't know if they'll be available, I may just have to stick with AGP 8x for now, can someone please help me out here???

There is no real solid release date, so anyone's guess would be as close to the truth, and considering there has only been a few reviews based on the motherboards / chipset, I wouldn't say they would be out for at least another month.

Hmm, how much do you reckon the nForce 4's will be around about? Also, how much will PCI-E 6800GT's probably be? I'll be getting the computer early-mid December, so I hope that they'll be out by then, if not though, are there any other PCI-E Athlon Socket 939 motherboards around??

Well for a single 6800GT on PCI I would be looking at around $800 - $850 whilst a NForce 4 Mobo should be in the range of $200 to $350 depending on feature set.

Personally I don't think that there is really a need to go PCI in this generation, as their is negligible difference at the moment, unless you are running dual cards, in which case, you must have a lot of money to spend...

I just saw that UMart have GeCube X800XT's for $840 http://www.umart.com.au/phtml/products_lis...&bid=2&sid=8989
so what do you think? Is GeCube a good enough brand? I'm not planning on overclocking it, do you think that I should go with the GeCube X800XT or the Leadtek Winfast 6800GT for $795 http://www.umart.com.au/phtml/products_lis...&bid=2&sid=8760

It's probably a stupid question but GeCube X800XT or Leadtek Winfast 6800GT??

EDIT: Just noticed also that a shop called Centre Com Online have a GeCube X800XT PE for $825! I've never been to or really heard of Centre Com though and I don't know where they are, can someone verify whether this is actually an X800XT PE or just a regular X800XT? http://www.centrecom.com.au/catalog/produc...oducts_id=10022

Also, should I get that one instead of a Leadtek Winfast 6800GT? If it is just a regular X800XT then I'd probably just get the one from UMart because I kinda know where that is but if it's a full fledged Platinum Edition then I'd have to get it... But that leads me back to the original, though probably stupid question of whether it matters that it's a GeCube. Help me make a decision please?

Hot damn the XTs have dropped.

I still think the video card is overkill, but if you're deciding between a 6800GT and X800 XT, the XT wins hands down.