Holiday 2006 Shopping Guide: GPUs
by Jarred Walton on December 13, 2006 5:15 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
High-End GPUs
Like we said with the Midrange GPUs, SLI and CrossFire probably aren't necessary even in the High-End GPU market these days. You can still look to buy one GPU now and plan on adding a second later, or if you already have one High-End GPU and you want to buy a second one now that is also reasonable. If you're looking to go out and buy a dual GPU setup right off the bat, however, in most instances you will be better off purchasing a single Extreme Performance GPU. We showed in our GeForce 8800 launch article that there are many instances where a single 8800 GTX is faster than X1950 XTX CrossFire and 7900 GTX SLI. Combine that with the fact that you don't have to worry about whether or not SLI/CrossFire will be supported in your game du jour, and once again we would take a single GPU that comes close in performance over two GPUs that may be faster in some cases, but will also consume more power and generate more heat and noise.
Not counting multi-GPU configurations, the High-End GPU market extends up to around $400. At the lower end of the price spectrum, there is a gray area where you could call certain cards either upper-midrange or lower-high-end designs. If we just forget about the semantics, though, the Radeon X1950 Pro is still one of the best overall cards. It offers competitive performance, and currently it is priced quite a bit cheaper than any of its direct competition. Most of the NVIDIA's 7900 cards are a bit difficult to recommend, given the current prices, making the 7950 GT the only GeForce card in this price range that we worth considering. Stock performance is going to be a tossup between the 7950 GT and X1950 Pro, but there are quite a few factory overclocked 7950 GT cards available and that helps to keep things interesting.
If you want more performance than the X1950 Pro, the X1950 XT 256MB cards cost about $40 more and give you a full 48 pixel shaders along with faster clock speeds, and they offer more bang for the buck than just about any other High-End GPU. If you want a 512MB GPU, Diamond and PowerColor make X1950 Pro 512MB cards that sell for around $270. X1900 XT/XTX cards with 512MB of RAM may also be available for $330-$400 if you can find them in stock. That's a pretty big "if", however, so you might find it easiest to simply move on to the X1950 XTX for about $375.
We don't have much love left for the 7900 GTX cards, as their prices are almost the same as the 8800 GTS cards and performance is definitely lower. If you're still after a 7900 GTX card, you might try picking up a 7900 GTO instead and give overclocking a shot. The GTO cards are becoming difficult to find, but for around $300 you can get near GTX performance. Some of the cards might even be rebadged GTX cards, so a BIOS flash would be all that's necessary to get them to behave like a full GTX. Your mileage may vary in such pursuits, and for most people we would recommend taking the next step and picking up a GeForce 8800 GTS rather than any of the more expensive High-End GPUs. After all, DirectX 10 and Windows Vista will be available in the next month or so, and the only cards that currently have DirectX 10 support are the GeForce 8800 models. If you can justify spending $300-$400 on a graphics card, you can probably justify spending $450 as well.
Once again, here's a quick summary of the High-End GPU market.
Like we said with the Midrange GPUs, SLI and CrossFire probably aren't necessary even in the High-End GPU market these days. You can still look to buy one GPU now and plan on adding a second later, or if you already have one High-End GPU and you want to buy a second one now that is also reasonable. If you're looking to go out and buy a dual GPU setup right off the bat, however, in most instances you will be better off purchasing a single Extreme Performance GPU. We showed in our GeForce 8800 launch article that there are many instances where a single 8800 GTX is faster than X1950 XTX CrossFire and 7900 GTX SLI. Combine that with the fact that you don't have to worry about whether or not SLI/CrossFire will be supported in your game du jour, and once again we would take a single GPU that comes close in performance over two GPUs that may be faster in some cases, but will also consume more power and generate more heat and noise.
Not counting multi-GPU configurations, the High-End GPU market extends up to around $400. At the lower end of the price spectrum, there is a gray area where you could call certain cards either upper-midrange or lower-high-end designs. If we just forget about the semantics, though, the Radeon X1950 Pro is still one of the best overall cards. It offers competitive performance, and currently it is priced quite a bit cheaper than any of its direct competition. Most of the NVIDIA's 7900 cards are a bit difficult to recommend, given the current prices, making the 7950 GT the only GeForce card in this price range that we worth considering. Stock performance is going to be a tossup between the 7950 GT and X1950 Pro, but there are quite a few factory overclocked 7950 GT cards available and that helps to keep things interesting.
If you want more performance than the X1950 Pro, the X1950 XT 256MB cards cost about $40 more and give you a full 48 pixel shaders along with faster clock speeds, and they offer more bang for the buck than just about any other High-End GPU. If you want a 512MB GPU, Diamond and PowerColor make X1950 Pro 512MB cards that sell for around $270. X1900 XT/XTX cards with 512MB of RAM may also be available for $330-$400 if you can find them in stock. That's a pretty big "if", however, so you might find it easiest to simply move on to the X1950 XTX for about $375.
We don't have much love left for the 7900 GTX cards, as their prices are almost the same as the 8800 GTS cards and performance is definitely lower. If you're still after a 7900 GTX card, you might try picking up a 7900 GTO instead and give overclocking a shot. The GTO cards are becoming difficult to find, but for around $300 you can get near GTX performance. Some of the cards might even be rebadged GTX cards, so a BIOS flash would be all that's necessary to get them to behave like a full GTX. Your mileage may vary in such pursuits, and for most people we would recommend taking the next step and picking up a GeForce 8800 GTS rather than any of the more expensive High-End GPUs. After all, DirectX 10 and Windows Vista will be available in the next month or so, and the only cards that currently have DirectX 10 support are the GeForce 8800 models. If you can justify spending $300-$400 on a graphics card, you can probably justify spending $450 as well.
Once again, here's a quick summary of the High-End GPU market.
| High-End GPUs | |||||||
| GPU | Pixel Shaders |
Vertex Shaders |
ROPs | Core Speed |
RAM Speed |
Memory Interface |
Price |
| 7900 GT | 24 | 8 | 16 | 450 | 1320 | 256bit | $246 |
| 7950 GT | 24 | 8 | 16 | 550 | 1400 | 256bit | $249 |
| 7800 GTX 512 | 24 | 8 | 16 | 550 | 1700 | 256bit | $460* |
| X1950 Pro | 36 | 8 | 12 | 575 | 1380 | 256bit | $206 |
| 7900 GTO | 24 | 8 | 16 | 650 | 1320 | 256bit | $310 |
| X1900 XT 256MB | 48 | 8 | 16 | 625 | 1450 | 256bit | $275 |
| 7900 GTX | 24 | 8 | 16 | 650 | 1600 | 256bit | $430 |
| X1900 XT | 48 | 8 | 16 | 625 | 1450 | 256bit | $335 |
| X1900 XTX | 48 | 8 | 16 | 650 | 1550 | 256bit | $400 |
| X1950 XT 256 | 48 | 8 | 16 | 625 | 1800 | 256bit | $259 |
| X1950 XTX | 48 | 8 | 16 | 650 | 2000 | 256bit | $378 |
| X1950 XTX CF Edition | 48 | 8 | 16 | 650 | 2000 | 256bit | $406 |
* - Prices for these parts are prone to fluctuation, as these are discontinued products.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
51 Comments
View All Comments
justly - Thursday, December 14, 2006 - link
I apoligize for straying from the video topic, but I really get annoyed at the all to often trash talk about VIA and SiS chipsets.I understand that this is a GPU article so I can see Anandtech not recommending SiS or VIA integrated graphics based on their lack luster video capabilities. My question (or maybe I should call it a complaint) is how can Anandtech claim SiS and VIA boards are not stable or reliable? The last reviw (that I can remember) of a SiS based board was over a year ago, even then I dont think it was a production board. Coverage of VIA based boards isn't much better but at least Anandtech does give VIA some budget coverage.
I can fully understand if Anandtech doesn't want to recommend VIA or SiS to their enthusiast crowd due to poor overclocking, or being "a bit more quirky" as your article states.
I'm not going to read all the way through old articles just to try and figure out what these stability and reliability issues mighy be (mainly because most of the articles are so old that a BIOS update could easily have made any stability issues invalid). Well I lied a little, I did briefly look through the VIA board articles within the last year and found no stability issues at stock settings. In fact, the only stability issues I saw mentioned in an article happened when "we tried to exceed the SPD settings of our DDR memory modules" but the next line reads "We did not experience these same issues with our DDR2 memory modules" (and that article is 1 week shy of 9 months old).
I hope Anandtech decides to either stop repeating these claims of unstable, unreliable and quirky boards based on VIA & SiS or start reviewing these boards and show its readers why they deserve these remarks.
Then again if the only thing we as readers get from reviews of these chipsets/boards is complaints about how budget boards are not able to overclock, or the lack of a tweakable BIOS in a sub $60 board then blame the board not the chipset as most people are already aware that budget boards are like this reguardless of what chipset they use.
JarredWalton - Thursday, December 14, 2006 - link
I know of at least one attempted SiS board review in the past year that was canned because our reviewer could not get the board to function properly (after several BIOS updates and two boards, IIRC). Motherboards (and chipsets) are such an integral part of any computer that I would never skimp in that area. Then again, maybe I'm just too demanding of my computers?If you read user reviews of VIA/SiS boards you typically see a pattern that indicates the boards are overall "less reliable" - periodic instabilities and far higher failure rates. Some people report no problems and love the low prices, while others try to do a bit more with their systems and encounter difficulties.
If you just want to use a computer for office tasks, just about any system will be fine... but then again, if you're doing office work and your computer crashes, you probably won't be too happy. Anyone planning on running a higher-spec GPU should avoid cheaper motherboards IMO, as running a $300+ GPU in a <$75 board is just asking for problems. (For the same reason, I recommend $75+ PSUs for anyone running a CPU+GPU that cost more than $400 combined.)
Basically, I just can't recommend a questionable motherboard that saves a person $10-$20. The fact that the companies aren't out there promoting their products says something. If they're not proud enough of their work to try hard to get reviews at reputable sites, perhaps it's because they know their boards won't pass muster.
I actually had a company representative complain to me once about my stress tests being "unrealistic". He asked, "How many people actually try to run Folding@Home and a bunch of gaming benchmarks in sequence?" Basically, the system would crash if I used my script to benchmark games at various resolutions without rebooting in between each run. It's true that a lot of people might never stress a system to that level, but when I've looked at dozens of computers that handle that workload without problems, a system that crashes/locks in the same situation is clearly not as "stable or reliable" as competing solutions. All things being equal, I would recommend a different PC at the same price.
That's basically how I see the VIA/SiS situation. $10 is about 100 miles of driving, a trip to most restaurants, a two hour movie.... It's not worth the risk just to save $10. If it is, maybe a new computer isn't what you really need; a used PC would probably be just as good and likely a lot cheaper (and possibly faster as well).
justly - Thursday, December 14, 2006 - link
I agree with most of what you say, no one wants a system that crashs.One thing I do notice though, is that most of your arguments can be atributed to low priced boards, yet the comments I find annoying are the generalizations about chipsets. Do you actually believe a $50 nvidia based board is significantly more stable or reliable than any other chipset? and if you do, couldn't this just be a side effect of being a more popular chipset thus less work programming a bios? I'm sure this isn't what you meant, but going by your comments about motherboard pricing, if I found a $100 SiS based board it should be more stable and reliable than a $50 nvidia board.
You also want me to read "user reviews"? this doesn't sound like a good way to judge reliability to me. Most user reviews are either in enthusiast fourms like the ones you have here, these usually only rewiew overclocking abilities, or on retail sites like Newegg, and to be honest most of the bad reviews I see there look more like PEBKAC.
You really haven't cleared up why VIA or SiS chipsets should be considered unreliable or unstable, although your dislike of budget boards is quite evedent.
I'm not trying to deny you your opinion, I'm just asking that you refrain from singling out specific chipsets if what you are really having a problem with is all budget boards, if there actually is a chipset specific problem please try to get a review published indicating what the problem is.
BTW if the board that wouldn't function, and had the review canned was a production board I feel sorry for the person that bought it without a proper warning from a review site that knew it was flawed (you don't want to know what I think of the review site that would let this happen).
Knowing what to expect from a product can help a budget builder as much as it can help an overclocker.
Sunrise089 - Thursday, December 14, 2006 - link
I tend to view guids like these through the eyes of my own system, and having a 7900GT at 500/1500, there is little reason to upgrade if I'm going to continue to play games at 1280x1024. However, 22" (widescreen) LCDs have also become a lot cheaper, and with my poor eyes, the 1650x1050 or so resolution will probably work pretty well. That leads me to the great situation I'm apparently in - it looks like my card will fetch around $200 if I sell it, and I have the option of either a perhaps slightly faster X1950pro for $199, basically making it a free change but only slightly faster, or a X1950XT 256meg for only $249. That's a lot of additional card for only $50, and pretty tempting. I cannot see why the $249 part doesn't get the nod for your pick over the 7950GT though.JarredWalton - Thursday, December 14, 2006 - link
Despite the fact that they are separated by quite a few cards in the table, the X1950 XT 256MB and the 7950 GT give relatively similar performance. The XT is probably 10-15% faster depending on game, but that's not really enough to mean the difference between one resolution and another in my opinion. You also get 512MB of RAM with the 7950GT, and it tends to overclock better than the XT resulting in performance that is basically equal.However, you're right that it is still worth considering, and so I added it to the final table. This is particularly true for people that don't like NVIDIA hardware for whatever reason - just as the 7950GT is worth considering for people that don't like ATI's drivers. Honestly, I'm still unhappy with ATI's drivers overall; they NEED TO DITCH .NET! What's next, writing low level drivers in C# or Jaba (that's big, fat, slow Java for the uninformed)? I know the .NET stuff is just for the UI, but it still blows, and I get about a 45 second delay after Windows loads while the ATI driver starts up. If I weren't running CrossFire, I might not have as many issues with ATI's drivers, though.
JarredWalton - Thursday, December 14, 2006 - link
As a side note, Neverwinter Nights 2 appears to require/use .NET 2.0, and for those who have played the game that probably explains a lot of the performance issues. I'm not sure if CrossFire/SLI support is working yet, but I do know that my CrossFire X1900 XT config can't handle running with antialiasing, and/or water reflections/refractions at resolutions above 1280x1024. Seems decent without the AA and water stuff at 1920x1200 with the latest drivers and patch, though.PrinceGaz - Thursday, December 14, 2006 - link
Something seems to be missing from this part of the last paragraph on page 8.JarredWalton - Thursday, December 14, 2006 - link
Weird speech recognition there, I guess. I'm pretty sure it was supposed to be "they are" instead of "fair so"... but I can't honestly remember if that's what I said or not. LOLgerf - Thursday, December 14, 2006 - link
On the second page, were should be "where."BTW, good article. Laptop integrated's good enough for me though (ex-gamer).
Noya - Thursday, December 14, 2006 - link
Chart of best values jumps from about $100 w/rebate to $200+, while a highly overclockable 7900gs can be had for $145 after rebate (about $35 over a 7600GT).