7900GTO Pictures and Clocking results!

micketh · *Last edited by micketh; 09-30-2006 at 10:49.*

*UPDATED 3DMARK06 RESULT*

Hey all. Mr Citylink delivered my rather sexy brand spank 7900GTO today. Which I bought to replace my X1900XT 512mb.

The card was £197 including delivery and VAT.

Key features
7900GTX PCB and Core
512mb Memory @ 1.32ghz
24 Pixel Pipelines 8 Vertex shaders
650mhz Core Clock

System
Athlon X2 3800+ @ 2.5
2gb G.Skill KZ 250fsb 3-4-4-8-1
MSI 7900GTO
Ultra-D
X-Fi
FW 91.48

Pictures: The card
The front of the card

The dual slotness

And probably the most important... 1.1ns memory. What a bargain!

The 7900 core in full glory

Oooh the beast in action

Hows about that for an Idle temp

Overclocking
Stock 3dmark05 Run Score 10314
680/1600 See's a nice increase and completly stable at GTX clocks+
700/1600 Still stable however we do get an odd result
700/1700 completly stable artifact free nice increase
710/1720 Also completly stable and artifact free (CPU @ 2.6)

The card still has a tad more headroom and will flash to 7900GTX if I want to. But unfortunatly ive run out of time.
Scores
Stock 10314
680/1600 11179
700/1600 11182
700/1700 11340
710/1720 11613

As you can see by those scores. The card is very cpu limited as by increasing the CPU by a mere 100mhz gave the score a jump of almost 300 points. If my CPU was at 3ghz then we would see the cards real potential. THese are however very promising numbers. How does it compare to ATi?

x1900xt (same system as above with same settings using Cat 6.9)
Stock 10745
650/1550 11132

UPDATE 3DMARK06

THis card is much quicker an more stable than my x1900xt in most areas and has better IQ in 3dmark05. This benchmark is much more optimised on ATi's part.

NOTE: After the Ceramique (Better than AS5) had set in for 24 hours that idle temprature became 40c

Stock paste 47c Idle
Cermaique after 2 hours 43c
Ceramique after 24 hours 40c

UPDATE FLASHED TO 7900GTX

Anyways got to go out off to the missus's crib.

Oh and I forgot to mention thanks to Jamo for the help.

roguesn1per · 09-29-2006, 14:17 | posts: 9,344 | Location: Aussie Perth WA | User is Offline

no picutres.....

overclock please and post back..

also flash with gtx bios

micketh · 09-29-2006, 14:46 | posts: 3,473 | Location: Wakefield, UK | User is Offline

Enjoy

Spectacle · 09-29-2006, 15:01 | posts: 2,296 | Location: Earth | User is Offline

How about some 06 runs? Nice value for the money, but I still think your X1900XT is the better card. And it looks like you did more of a sidestep than an upgrade. May I ask why? Kind of silly to just get a card that gives you the same performance..........

Oh and I've got you beat in 05 by 400 points with a single GT and more than 2000 points with an X1900XTX

Kow

Some people dont care about the money and just want the card.... hard to find those people but this appears to be one. Should be nice to him maybe he'll send you his x1900xt

MTL · 09-29-2006, 16:32 | posts: 1,145 | Location: Canada | User is Offline

Stop trying to overclock the core and give us max memory results. Supposedly you can get that 1.1ns memory to 1900mhz.

Jamo · 09-29-2006, 16:36 | posts: 13 | Location: UK | User is Offline

lol i dont think he'll be that generous to send you his x1900xt!

and wheres my mention mick?!?!? thats me holding the card for him while he takes the shots btw!! not to mention my ceramique!

in all fairness, the 7900gto might not score that much more than his x1900xt but the image quality is far better on the gto than the ati, having seen them both first hand so well done on that front nvidia

the drivers used were the 91.48 WHQL's so with the latest beta's you'll probably see a nice improvment. once ceramique'd we saw a nice 3-4*C drop on idle and slightly more on load temp, btw that gtx/gto cooler is a beast, quad heatpipe and its practically silent

edit: the memory started to artifact at 900, however a slight volt boost might yeild better results

MTL · 09-29-2006, 16:42 | posts: 1,145 | Location: Canada | User is Offline

So you can get the memory up to 1800....wow thats a 500mhz increase over stock.

tommyk2005

thats a nice card there but i would of crossfired the 1900 instead of takin a step sideways

Unity · 09-29-2006, 17:54 | posts: 212 | User is Offline

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jamo

in all fairness, the 7900gto might not score that much more than his x1900xt but the image quality is far better on the gto than the ati,

You're joking right?

The owner of this website will even tell you himself that any X19xx series card has better IQ then any 79xx series card.

I dont care which nVidia card you choose, you're going to get angle dependant AF, and it is a poor solution compared to ATi's own method of filtering.

A 7900GTO is a step down from an X1900XT, and it literally chokes me to see others cheering the original poster on for making the switch to this card, almost as bad as it chokes me to see anybody claim that a 7900 card has better IQ than an X1900 series card.

blue5 · 09-29-2006, 18:08 | posts: 3,967 | User is Offline

well, i mean he was there. Maybe in this case the 7900gto had better quality. Cards can vary in quality in the production process.

Unity · 09-29-2006, 18:20 | posts: 212 | User is Offline

Quote:

Originally Posted by blue5

well, i mean he was there. Maybe in this case the 7900gto had better quality. Cards can vary in quality in the production process.

Huh?

Image quality is derived from a graphics card's driver, and not from any particular production process.

nVidia uses optimizations in their drivers that give them texture shimmering, poor anisotropic filtering, and bad IQ in general in comparison to ATi's.

I've got some nice nVidia cards which perform really well, but I'll never like them enough to blindly make claims like the ones written above.

Spectacle · *Last edited by Spectacle; 09-29-2006 at 18:32.*

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unity

Huh?

Image quality is derived from a graphics card's driver, and not from any particular production process.

nVidia uses optimizations in their drivers that give them texture shimmering, poor anisotropic filtering, and bad IQ in general in comparison to ATi's.

I've got some nice nVidia cards which perform really well, but I'll never like them enough to blindly make claims like the ones written above.

I agree with you about the IQ. I was using an X1900XTX before I decided to get SLI 7900GTs and the image quality was better with the ATI card. I have no idea where they are getting that the 7900 looks better, because damn near anyone will say other wise........and as for a single card, yes I also have to agree that the X1900XTX is hands down the better card, but my mobo dictated that I use Nvidia if I wanted a dual card setup.

Unity · 09-29-2006, 18:35 | posts: 212 | User is Offline

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hilbert Hagedoorn

NVIDIA still compromises on image quality. Obviously with optimizations enabled ATI simply is king of Image Quality and I just do not understand that there's no movement from NVIDIA to do something about it. I still play games sometimes and see the shimmering effect and go WTF?!

http://www.guru3d.com/article/article/367/4/

Hilbert is the owner of this site, and most deffinately knows what he is talking about.

blue5 · 09-29-2006, 18:38 | posts: 3,967 | User is Offline

Wel ati drivers aren't exactly the greatest thing on the planet. I've had both ati and nvidia cards. See although drivers are the medium for the os and the hardware, the card's components can vary in quality and ultimately how much they can pushed before artifacting.

In this case, the latest 9 series has great IQ. I haven't really seen any of the shimmering texture issues you have seen.

Unity · 09-29-2006, 18:53 | posts: 212 | User is Offline

Quote:

Originally Posted by blue5

Wel ati drivers aren't exactly the greatest thing on the planet.

That's a pretty weak cross-argument.

Quote:

Originally Posted by blue5

the card's components can vary in quality and ultimately how much they can pushed before artifacting.

Artifacting?.....we're talking about IQ here....not overclocking...

Quote:

Originally Posted by blue5

In this case, the latest 9 series has great IQ.

The drivers you are refering to are loaded with optimizations by default, and their IQ is the same as that of which hardware reviewers and serious users have been complaining about all year.

blue5 · 09-29-2006, 19:28 | posts: 3,967 | User is Offline

Aren't all drivers omptimized in some way? People get different results, some got the sli warning even though it was an agp card...in some cases things went fine.

I've had instances where drivers mis-identified the card. Had some that the chip driver worked in some senarios while in others the card driver allowed some stuff to work,(my infamous ati xpert with a rage pro chipset, although curiously, on ati's website the chip identified is the rage xl).

Everybody has brand preference, and some even believe that one is better than the other when in fact they show the same quality.Ultimately card parts play a role in IQ since these are where the stuff is processed

Spectacle · 09-29-2006, 19:31 | posts: 2,296 | Location: Earth | User is Offline

Quote:

Originally Posted by blue5

Aren't all drivers omptimized in some way? People get different results, some got the sli warning even though it was an agp card...in some cases things went fine.

I've had instances where drivers mis-identified the card. Had some that the chip driver worked in some senarios while in others the card driver allowed some stuff to work,(my infamous ati xpert with a rage pro chipset, although curiously, on ati's website the chip identified is the rage xl).

Everybody has brand preference, and some even believe that one is better than the other when in fact they show the same quality.Ultimately card parts play a role in IQ since these are where the stuff is processed

If the last ATI card you used was a rage pro, you need to stop right there. I have had both an X1900XTX and now my SLI 7900GTs. And will be the first to tell you that ATI has the better image.

blue5 · 09-29-2006, 19:39 | posts: 3,967 | User is Offline

actually, that was an example. last one was an X800.

Unity · 09-29-2006, 19:55 | posts: 212 | User is Offline

Quote:

Originally Posted by blue5

People get different results, some got the sli warning even though it was an agp card...in some cases things went fine.

I've had instances where drivers mis-identified the card. Had some that the chip driver worked in some senarios while in others the card driver allowed some stuff to work,(my infamous ati xpert with a rage pro chipset, although curiously, on ati's website the chip identified is the rage xl).

You're going off track again with all this. It doesnt have anything to do with the debate.

Kon$olE · 09-29-2006, 20:02 | posts: 3,896 | Location: Canada, eh? | User is Offline

Keep it clean guys, no flaming. Respect for not doing it so far though.

Micketh, thank you! I cant find a review anywere on the web. Very temping.

Unity · 09-29-2006, 20:16 | posts: 212 | User is Offline

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kon$olE

Keep it clean guys, no flaming. Respect for not doing it so far though.

Respect back at ya.

I think I'm finished here anyways

roguesn1per · 09-29-2006, 20:28 | posts: 9,344 | Location: Aussie Perth WA | User is Offline

Unity

ATI have better AF, but nvidia have teh upper hand with Transperancy AA...

blue5 · 09-29-2006, 20:48 | posts: 3,967 | User is Offline

Agreed, intent was not to flame. Last thing we need is another ati vs nvidia blah, blah, blah.

nutyo

HDR seems more pronounced on Nvidia cards. Up to you whether you think this is better or not but IMHO I give lighting to Nvidia, AF quality hands down to ATi. I like AA on ATi better but some may say nvidia is better. In my opinion ATi has had the better overall IQ for a long while, but Nvidia do some particular things better now so the answer for me is no longer clear cut.