Final Words

With the insertion of the NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GT into the high end landscape, it becomes difficult for us to provide our readers with a one size fits all answer. Recommendations are complex because we must take into account current hardware, performance needs, price, and future upgrade prospects. Buying a graphics card right now poses quite a difficult situation.

From the numbers it is very clear that the 7800 GT is a better card than the 6800 Ultra. For the price, there is no contest between the two. The 6800 Ultra is no longer a viable solution except as an upgrade to SLI from a previously owned Ultra. That being said, paying about $400 for a second 6800 Ultra may be a good solution if everything else is already there and ready to go. For those who have a non-SLI PCI Express system and only a 450 W power supply, spending the money on a 7800 GTX is a much better upgrade than spending the money for a decent PSU, SLI motherboard, and 6800 Ultra. The best case scenario there will cost something like $650. If a system upgrade is in your future, it may be better to save your money until the new AMD processors and sockets come along.

We feel that the verdict for 6800 Ultra owners is to hold their cards and wait rather than go for the SLI upgrade. Those with less than last year's high end may be interested in the upgrade to the 7800 GT, but there are some cautions we would make in recommending this card. The current street prices show the 7800 GTX hitting as low as $500 (and a few OEM models are even lower). With many of the 7800 GT cards on the market hovering at $450, throwing the extra $50 at a GTX is a worthy upgrade for the performance increases gained if you need the extra push to get the quality and resolution desired. If high resolution and solid performance are needed, the GTX will not disappoint.

Here is where everything gets a little hairy. Will you be monitor limited by an upgrade? Many very good flat panels will only display up to 1280x1024 or 1600x1200. Owning one of these panels really negates the necessity for a 7800 GTX right now. From the numbers we have seen, the highest end card we would recommend for owners of a 1600x1200 flat panel (who don't get paid for gaming) is the 7800 GT. We would also recommend finding one for $400 rather than paying full price.

Owners of 1280x1024 panels don't really need to spend the money here as even the 7800 GT will run into walls at this resolution. 6800 GT prices are now dropping to $300 and below. At this price point, owners of older systems who haven't taken the high end plunge and don't want to spend the money on 1600x1200 and up panels would do very well to upgrade to a 6800 GT. Even the venerable 128MB 6800 is available at nearly $200.

We have entered an era where the graphics solution is often limited by the monitor more than anything else at the high end. It is important to pay attention to what is needed for a particular system rather than just grabbing the fastest thing out there. Even with all the bells and whistles, if nothing is going to be done at very high resolutions, current games do not stress the highest end cards enough.

Granted, when games based on technology like the Unreal Engine 3 come along, that 7800 GTX SLI system will come in handy at any resolution. However, we don't like recommending buying now for some promise of longevity or future performance. When games that push these cards come along, new cards will be out (or just around the corner). It is always best to buy for current needs.

That brings us back to the SLI situation and we have to stress that using SLI as an upgrade path isn't the best idea. SLI is best exploited as an ultra high end technology. For that reason, we won't recommend going out and buying a 7800 GT SLI system as spending less money on a single GTX (or a little more on two) are both more valuable options. This time around we can recommend 6800 Ultra SLI as a special case upgrade for current owners of SLI systems and a single 6800 Ultra who want added performance and need to choose between the 7800 GT and a second 6800U card. This recommendation is based on the fact that no more API features or technologies have been added to the GeForce 7 series that make it desirable over a 6 Series setup of the same speed.

Overall, our feeling is that the 7800 GT is a suitable replacement for the 6800 Ultra in the market. Keeping the relatively new, lower yield G70 silicon relegated to the very high end and eliminating (or severely reducing production of) the lowest yield NV4x part will help NVIDIA to maintain higher margins. The fact that plenty of 7800 cards are available now (including the GT) is a huge improvement over what we saw last year on the high end from NVIDIA with very low availability of high end parts. Keeping this trend rolling as long as they have is absolutely wonderful. We are very impressed with NVIDIA and we hope ATI will be able to follow this trend when they finally release Crossfire and their R520 based parts.

For now, NVIDIA's 7800 series own the high end graphics space. Now it's time for monitor makers to catch up and start releasing panels that can make use of the available dual-link DVI port at reasonable prices.

Power Consumption
Comments Locked

77 Comments

View All Comments

  • Hacp - Thursday, August 11, 2005 - link

    THANK YOU FOR MAKING ALL THE POSTS VISABLE! IT WAS ANNOYING CLICKING ON THE DOWN BUTTON!

    sry for the caps :).
  • crimson117 - Thursday, August 11, 2005 - link

    Page 4, first two sentences:

    "One of the most demanding games we test in terms of graphics, Doom 3 shows some impressive gains here. First lets compare the 6800 Ultra and the 7800 GT."

    should be

    "One of the most demanding games we test in terms of graphics, Doom 3, shows some impressive gains here. First let's compare the 6800 Ultra and the 7800 GT."

    note: the comma after Doom 3 makes "One" the subject of the sentence. Alternatively, it could be:

    "Doom 3 is one of the most demanding games we test in terms of graphics, and it shows some impressive gains here."
  • pio!pio! - Thursday, August 11, 2005 - link

    Can the sample card you obtained be overclocked to anywhere near GTX speed? (cpu and memory)

    Also I know it's early, but any thoughts on softmodding it to enable more pipelines?
  • JNo - Thursday, August 11, 2005 - link

    Good question. xbitlabs.com state in their review that, "The GeForce 7800 GT reference graphics card we had in our lab proved quite overclockable. We managed to increase its working frequencies from 400MHz for the chip and 1000MHz for the memory to 470MHz for the chip and 1200MHz for the memory, which should ensure a significant performance increase during our tests." Unfortunately they did not include overclocked results in their graphs.

    Also, xbitlabs noted that the PCB is shorter than for the GTX, that the cooler is shorter and also commented on noise levels, given that unlike the GTX, the GT is apparently unable to regulate its fan speed. It is a shame that anandtech missed out on such details.
  • mmp121 - Thursday, August 11, 2005 - link

    I'm thinking this is a typo when you re-made the charts for BF2 to include the NV 6800 Ultra. The ATI Radeon X800 XT is really the ATI Radeon X850 XT PE right? Maybe I am wrong. Just wanted to point out the fluke so you guys can fix it. Good read so far!
  • DerekWilson - Friday, August 12, 2005 - link

    The BF2 numbers use the X800 not the X850
  • Phantronius - Thursday, August 11, 2005 - link

    Waaaah!!! Why no 6800GT comparison and why the hell didn't you guys benchmark Far Cry with HDR Mode???????
  • AtaStrumf - Thursday, August 11, 2005 - link

    I really resent this comment on page 1:

    "Until performance is increased beyond the 7800 GTX, it will be hard for us to see a reason for a new desktop 7 series part."

    So you rich boys got your flashy new toys and now you see no need for a new desktop 7 part, because you're too busy thinking about how you're gonna be playing games on the go (i.e. your new laptop GPU).

    What about us stuck at 6600 GT level. Don't we deserve an upgrade??? Like a 12-16 pipe/ 256-bit 7600 GT? I guess that we are just fine, since we're stuck with 1280x1024 res monitors anyway, right? WRONG! We've been cheated out of a significant upgrade long enough. Until 6600 GT there was only BS in the mainstream for about 2,5 years (R9500/9600/PRO/XT/GF5600/Ultra,...) and we're not going back there, no sir!

    Same sh!t when people with broadband post large uncompressed images on the web and forget about all those with dial-up, even though they themselves left that sorry bunch not too long ago. The world is weee bit bigger than your own back yard and someone writing for a site as big as AT should really know that.
  • DerekWilson - Friday, August 12, 2005 - link

    I just want to add my two cents as well ...

    I will agree with you that the 6600 GT was the first real solid mainstream option in a while. It's a good card.

    I'll argue that the next mainstream card you'll want to look at is the 6800 GT. There are 128MB parts and 256MB parts all with 256-bit busses and 16 pixel pipes at good clock speeds.

    As other's have said, releasing a G70 part with the same specs as the 6800 GT will have the same performance as well.

    We tried to explain in the article that the 6 Series comprises the rest of the lineup going forward. There are no performance gaps that the G70 needs to fill in. The only reason NVIDIA would want to release slower G70 parts would be to phase out the 6 Series part at that same speed grade.

    It also doesn't make sense for NVIDIA to immediately release a slower G70 part. The lower transistor count and more mature process used on NV4x chips will likely make it easier for NVIDIA to sell the parts at a lower price and higher profit than equivalently performing G70 parts. The economics of this are very complicated and depend quite a bit on NVIDIA and TSMC and the cost per IC for NV4x and G70 chips.

    It would almost make sense for NVIDIA to take less functional G70 chips and sell them as 6 Series parts. But maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps NVIDIA will think it can trick people into thinking a part with the same performance as a 6800 or 6800 GT and a 7 Series name is worth more money.

    It really shouldn't matter to anyone whether 6 Series parts keep falling in price or other 7 Series parts come out. I stand behind my statement. We'll see lower performing G70 parts come out if and when it becomes more financially viable for NVIDIA to sell those parts than NV4x parts. There really isn't any other factor that matters.

    Transparency AA may be an interesting thing, but moving towards the budget end of the spectrum will tend to make the performance impact of Transparency AA too high to matter. Other little tweaks and features have already been covered and aren't that compelling over the 6 Series, and seeing a G70 perform the same as an NV4x for the same price really wouldn't be that exciting no matter what my budget looks like.

    Derek Wilson
  • coldpower27 - Thursday, August 11, 2005 - link

    It would be interesting to see if the 90nm based 7600 part has a 256Bit Memory Interface, as it seems 256Bit Memory Interface cards usually have a minimum die size of around 200mm2 just out of range of a high volume mianstream level card.

    I would certainly want a 7600 GT if it had a similar pipeline configuration in comparison to the 6800 or 6800 GT because G7x does have some improvements I like, most notable the improvement in HDR performance levels, and Transparency AA, also what about WGF 1.0 support? It usually for the most part better to have a new mainstream card based on newer tech then just shifting older technology into the lower price points, as those cards aren't meant for those price points and are usually more expensive to produce.

    Not all of us can even afford the current 399US price point of 7800 GT.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now