What is Digg?38 Comments
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13The problem is that DX10 requires Vista, and there's no way I'm buying Vista in the first year or two, when the second generation of DX10 cards come out. So, I'd say upgrading now is a perfectly viable plan.
- z.unit, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Good review, I'm tempted to buy one but I'm waiting for dx10.
- M4tt3r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6It's PCI-Express just to let everyone know. Even thought it's the GS model, it is not an AGP card. The last AGP was the 7800 GS OC.
- xenonflash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I bought a 7900 GS from woot! as a launch item a couple weeks ago for $140 shipped. It is insanely great and I would buy it for $200 also.
- Surefoot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4http://www.guru3d.com/article/Videocards/377/
http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/xfx-7900gs/
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2827
http://www.techreport.com/reviews/2006q3/geforce-7900gs/index.x?pg=1
http://www.3davenue.com/1688.html
http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=958
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/grafikkarten/2006/test_xfx_geforce_7900_gs_480m_extreme/
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/384/1/
Enjoy - bontux, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I think if your building a system now, it would be good purchase. If your just upgrading your video card, I would definitely wait.
- cdorka, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5nice card! Price range is good especially for us budget folks.
- victimofkratina, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3anyone know how it compares to the 7900gt?
- frgmstr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The 7900 GS is a approx 3 - 5% slower in games overall. It would be a tough time telling them apart in a double blind challenge. From what we saw, the card easily overclocked to be faster than a 7900 GT though with little effort.
- tidu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814150184
Newegg has this card for $189.99 after $20.00 rebate. Check it. - ycng, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2TechARP has their take on it here too... http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=344&pgno=0.
Indeed that it is at a great price range for us consumers. Nice to see that both ATI and NVidia is dropping the prices to allow us normal citizens to purchase decent performing cards. - Yashu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Image quality is subjective... That is why we have issues with these types of benchmarks. You can use a variety of gameplay graphed over time at the same settings to better gauge a card's performance relative to anothers. When you let the reviewer base each card's settings on his own preference of image quality, it makes the whole benchmark kindof worthless.
- frgmstr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I hardly see how you can bury this as inaccurate when we are in fact doing testing with the cards that represents the exact function they are widely purchased for. The "3dfx days" of benchmarking cards for simple frames per second with a canned benchmark is gone for many of us. FPS is secondary as that is simply a function of image quality. Show me the best image quality that the card will support at playable framerates please, not how many frames per second it gets in a time demo that in no way tells me what my gameplay will be like.
- millardkillmore, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I don't get hardocp's "real-games" benchmarking. "Hey, let's take a video card and compare it to other video cards, even though we'll arbitrarily change the settings based on what we think the video cards should be capable of!"
I would think that keeping all parameters of testing the same across all test systems would be a bit more even-handed. I mean, if you have to knock the settings down on one video card to achieve what the reviewer conceives of as the "best Image Quality delivered at a playable frame rate" (a definition which will definitely change from user to user), then why bother comparing them at all? At least with an apples-to-apples comparison you get a sense for the relative power of the cards themselves in a variety of applications. - swaxhog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@jp007. The 9200 Dell (slightly cheaper XPS version) I just ordered comes with this card.
- kampfy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I can't believe that you just pulled that out of your ass. There's only one system config listed in the hardware setup page, so unless your idea of the systems not having the same specs is that the machine had different video cards (imagine that!) you must be smoking some whacky tobaccy. Or insulting people for the sake of insulting them, either or.
- WarMace, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Cutting edge? Sign me up!
- QuimZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Khyber, You might want to re-read that article, they tested all 3 cards on the same system.
- michaelothomas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Beware the standard [H]ard|OCP "real world benchmarking" rhetoric. (rhetoric being a nice way of saying *****) They say that they do 'real world' and everyone else runs 'canned benchmarks', when in actuality they aren't much different than anyone else. And their tables of results are organized so poorly that any accuracy they gain over their competitors by using fraps and custom benchmarks is completely negated by the illegible organization of the results. However, their analysis is excellent. I recommend reading their analysis/conclusions and looking at the graphs on other sites to get the best of both worlds.
- Gerz1219, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Eh, every time there's a new video card, Anandtech runs their exhaustive list of FPS bar graphs. It's a useful way to judge the overall power of a card, as you mentioned. This method gives you a better idea of what to expect in actual gameplay, where tweaks to the game settings are inevitable. I'd prefer two different methodologies rather than every site trying to copycat Anandtech (which, assuming their results are accurately measured, would be very redundant).
- schmiggyjk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Bring on the 7950GT's september 14th! My e6700 conroe is waiting for a nice GPU to go with. No sense is getting a 7900GT when that is so close to market.
Maybe Bestbuy or Compusa will let some slip this week or weekend. - frgmstr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah, if you remember the Titanium series with the 4200, 4400, and 4600.....the sales of the 4400 and 4600 suffered some setbacks because the 4200 was so scalable. It was also part of the reason of the phenomenal press the card got. I think they are trying to keep from the lower end "high performance" cards from cutting into sales of the higher parts while still doing a great job and generating tons of positive press. No doubt a tough line to walk.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That's an awesome price. No reason to buy a 7600 or 7800 anymore, unless you're still using AGP.
This also beats anything ATI is offering. Expect to see ATI drop prices now. Good for us all around. - pennyfan87, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1w00t!
(recognize the icon?) - WarMace, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1My x800pro has disabled pipelines, i unlocked them and had a lot of errors (popping polygons), so it appiers they were disabled because it couldent be sold as a platnum edition. If they only sold a PE then my gpu would of been discarded and x800's would be more expencive as a whole.
Plus if making 1 product and underclocking it gets it in my hands at less expense to me than a company trying to recover costs of manafacturing 2 diffrent products is o.k. in my book. - pixogen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Me too :) It's a great card for the money.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I would never want to buy a card that has any disabled pixel pipes."
Sometimes you can unlock them. Either with a BIOS mod alone, or a simple hardware mod. - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You're not really going to "need" DX10 until 2008 or later. Games like Crysis use it, but only as an option for those with cutting-edge systems.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I bought a 7900 GS from woot! as a launch item a couple weeks ago for $140 shipped."
/me smashes head against desk repeatedly. That was a killer deal. That is an insanely low price. 6800s are still going for that price! - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I prefer it rather than trying to digest numerous charts and graphs that shows the framerate at each resolution with each feature turned on."
That isn't really a benchmark anymore then. - michaelothomas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://www.gpureview.com/show_cards.php?card1=443&card2=384
The GS has the same clocks as the GT, but with 4 pipelines disabled (it has 20/24 enabled). - Dogtown7, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@millardkillmore
It's a different take on reviewing. They are keeping the hardware the same and showing the best settings for the card that still achieves a playable framerate. I prefer it rather than trying to digest numerous charts and graphs that shows the framerate at each resolution with each feature turned on. - Yashu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I would never want to buy a card that has any disabled pixel pipes. I think a card with the full 24 pipes at a lower clock speed would have been more attractive... but yes, they already have this card... it is called the 7900gt... this makes me wonder what market the 7900gs is supposed to take. The 7900gt is not exactly expensive. And a slower clocked one with less memory would have been attractive.
This is nvidia trying to "keep you at your price point". A slower clocked card with full pipelines may be overclocked with a much higher net gain then a faster clocked card with laser cut pipelines. Even when both cards have the same stock performance. - Deanje, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Looks like a decent enough card, it's just a shame that they don't benchmark the cards using the same in-game settings to give a better overview of performance.
- frgmstr, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Yup, I would have to agree with you. I say wait on DX10 parts if you can. I mean if you are dogging it gaming now, a nice card will be nice to have for the full Q4 season.
- jp007, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"this makes me wonder what market the 7900gs is supposed to take."
I believe the 7900gs was originally created for a "high end gaming solution" Dell OEM's. I agree though. Disabling functionality is stupid. - khyberkitsune, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2This article is BS, and here's why..
Neither machine has the SAME SPECS. Did you notice that?
How do you do a fair comparison when you're not even running comparable machines?
Here's a suggestion: Keep OLDER machines that you've used in previous benchmarks lying around. Toss in new GPU in place of old GPU, run standard benchmarks. Compare with the last benchmark using the same machine and the older GPU so I can get an accurate representation of performance boost.
I can't believe the fact the computer specs were different slipped past the Digg crowd. - Gundam, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3Buried as inaccurate, please provide a site that provides something more than editorial but actual testable comparisons, like Anandtech.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is