Video Card: X1900XT(X) or 7900GT(X) ?

I need a new PCI-E video card but I'm finding I'm confused by the wealth of variations out there. I've been looking at ATI's X1900 and Nvidia's 7900 series, but I've started looking at the previous generations of cards (X1800 and 7800).

Any suggestions?
What are the best makes: Sapphire, XFX etc?
Is it best to go for one generation old cards (cheaper)?

I'm also looking to purchase an Enermax Liberty 500w PSU. Is this more than enough power for these cards?

I haven't upgraded my PC in a few years, and I'm a little out of touch...

I read a review in PC Format or PC Zone or one of them which said that the 7900GT's were excellent value for money. They're really close to the GTX for performance and much cheaper.

Enermax is a good brand. I doubt you'll go wrong with that.

I have ATI Sapphire (not X1900)... really like how it has worked. Built quality and components were also good.

I have an MSI 7800GTX and it has performed flawlessly. It does overclock, but I don't bother much because it's pretty much fast enough for what I want it to do anyways.

I would like to have a 512MB card though, either the 7800 or 7900, just to run Oblivion with all the niceties turned on and to enable 'next gen content' on Tomb Raider Legends without certain scenes slowing to a crawl.

I have a Connect3D ATI Radeon X1800XT 512MB, which performs very well and can handle anything thrown at it. Quake 4 is as smooth as hell at 1280x960 at Ultra Quality, FEAR runs great with everything up (except soft shadows) at 1024x768 and even the power hungry next gen graphics of Tomb Raider Legend remain playable (circa 30FPS) with all graphics options on. And it's great playing all my older games at 1600x1200 on maximum quality and still getting a VERY smooth gaming experience. One thing I would say is that the fan (on this model) can be a little noisy when running the high-end games, but to be honest, you don't notice when you're actually playing (your attention is on the game, plus it gets drowned out by sound effects, etc).

Having said that I was looking at the X1900XT(X) and would have loved to have bought one of those instead, but my budget couldn't quite stretch that far.

To be honest, you can't really go wrong with graphics cards these days, as in the ATI v GeForce argument, as all perform extremely well and you're very unlikely to spot the couple of frames per second difference that benchmarks report (and this can change to either's favour depending on the game being played).

If you can afford the 1900/7900 go with one of those, if not then the 1800/7800 series are worthy alternatives. The only question is whether to plump for ATI or Nvidia, and that depends on what features you want from the card. For example, the X1800/1900 can do FSAA and HDR at the same time, the GeForce cards currently cannot. But, the GeForce cards can do soft shadows above 1280x960, whereas the ATI cards disable them from this resolution and higher (fine below that though).

It's a tough one, but you'll be happy with any purchase you make.

This is what it comes down to.

79000 Is the same gpu that powers the ps3.

X1900 is not.

and?

Thanks all. I appreciate the help.

I ended up opting for an XFX GeForce 7900GTX 512Mb over an ATI card. From the comments here and a bit of googling, it looks like the ATI X1900s run hotter and noisier. I've also read that the Nvidia drivers are generally better, but that ATI video quality is crisper. It's been a tough decision - I was up 'till 3am this morning investigating. I was hoping the was an obvious/clear winner, but there simply wasn't.

By purchasing it via www.quidco.com I'll get a 3% cashback. I'll also put it "through the books" (I'm a contractor and I get a yearly £500 allowance), so it'll effectively cost me ~66% of the purchase price. I advise any contractors using an umbrella company who don't already take advantage of this to look into it. I can't justify spending £400 on a video card, but £265 is far more acceptable (to the wife at least).

Anyway... Thanks again for the help.

nice... I was just getting ready to suggest either an XFX 7900GTX or a BFG 7800GTX. Personally I go BFG every time that I possibly can. They are overclocked from the factory and I've NEVER had a problem with one. But the upstarts at XFX seem to be eeking out a bit more performance of late.

The x1900 can use HDR + AA at the same time.
It also has a better avivo chip than the Nvidia cards.
For the noise and heat. I doubt the 7900 is far better.

Anyway, enjoy your pick.

>It also has a better avivo chip than the Nvidia cards.

Not from what I've been reading. PureVideo generally comes out top (see http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2551&p=10 for example).

>For the noise and heat. I doubt the 7900 is far better.

All of the reviews for the X1900 I've read have commented on the noise (and heat) it generates (some even deducting score for it). Comparitively, the 7900 reviews have commented on how quiet it is. The heat generated by the X1900 was a deciding factor for me (and I got the 7900GTX card at a great price).

Also, from what I can tell, the ATI can't do soft shadows above 1280x768? I'll be running at 1280x1024.

They both appear to have their strenghts and weaknesses.

For you avivo review its far far outdated and even made before the beta drivers were shipped (Oct 2005).
Furthermore they compare 2 different cards a(X1600 XT to NVIDIA's GeForce 7800GTX) and use Nvidia's decoder for benchmarking Ati performance which is a bit dumb if you ask me!

This one is a bit newer: (Dec 2005)
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2645

Also:
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1932&page=4
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1919&page=4

"ATi's AVIVO performs very well and CPU usage when running the 720P version of the Discoverers video never broke the 30% load mark!

The 1080P version obviously has more detail, which is why CPU usage is slightly higher but still pretty reasonable. On the whole, AVIVO appears to be generally more efficient than nVIDIA's PureVideo."


No doubt Avivo is in general better than pure video!

On top Ati has atm the better Windows Vista drivers as Microsoft stated.

>No doubt Avivo is in general better than pure video!

[sigh] I knew someone would reduce this to a "my ATI is better than your nvidia" shambles ;) New version of PureVideo was released only recently, which renders your link outdated. I hardly use my PC for video playback, so this is of little interest to me. Ah, I see you've just edited your post...

I could go on to list other points where the nvidia is better than the ATI, as I'm sure you could of the ATI, but why bother? I'm happy with a swap back to nvidia, and you're happy with ATI. No one card excels in all areas. I just felt the nvidia offer more for the money (and it was quieter and ran cooler ;)). Simple as...

As you like. :)
I just dislike plain "Black & White"... be it ATI or Nvidia.

>I just dislike plain "Black & White"... be it ATI or Nvidia.

But I was the one arguing that they both have their strengths! Unbelievable...