ATI's New Leader in Graphics Performance: The Radeon X1900 Series

120 Comments

View All Comments

• tuteja1986 - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

  wait for firing squad review then :) if you want AAx8

• beggerking - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

  Did anyone notice it? the breakdown graphs doesn't quite reflect the actual data..
  
  the breakdown is showing 1900xtx being much faster than 7800 512, but in the actual performance graph 1900xtx is sometimes outpaced by 7800 512..
  

• SpaceRanger - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

  All the second to last section describes in the Image Quality. There was no explaination on power consumtion at all. Was this an accidental omit or something else??

• Per Hansson - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

  Yes, please show us the power consumption ;-)
  
  A few things I would like seen done; Put a low-end PCI GFX card in the comp, boot it and register power consumption, leave that card in and then do your normal tests with a single X1900 and then dual so we get a real point on how much power they consume...
  
  Also please clarify exactly what PSU was used and how the consumption was measured so we can figure out more accuratley how much power the card really draws (when counting in the (in)efficiency of the PSU that is...

• peldor - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

  That's a good idea on isolating the power of the video card.
  
  From the other reviews I've read, the X1900 cards are seriously power hungry. In the neighborhood of 40-50W more than the X1800XT cards. The GTX 512 (and GTX of course) are lower than the X1800XT, let alone the X1900 cards.

• vaystrem - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

  Anyone else find this interesting??
  
  Battlefield 2 @ 2048x1536 Max Detail
  7800GTX512 33FPS
  AIT 1900XTX 32.9FPS
  ATI 1900XTX Crossfire. 29FPS
  -------------------------------------
  Day of Defeat
  7800GTX512 18.93FPS
  AIT 1900XTX 35.5PS
  ATI 1900XTX Crossfire. 35FPS
  -------------------------------------
  Fear
  7800GTX512 20FPS
  AIT 1900XTX 36PS
  ATI 1900XTX Crossfire. 49FPS
  -------------------------------------
  Quake 4
  7800GTX512 43.3FPS
  AIT 1900XTX 42FPS
  ATI 1900XTX Crossfire. 73.3FPS
  
  
  

• DerekWilson - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

  Becareful here ... these max detail settings enabled superaa modes which really killed performance ... especially with all the options flipped on quality.
  
  we're working on getting some screens up to show the IQ difference. but suffice it to say that that the max detail settings are very apples to oranges.
  
  we would have seen performance improvements if we had simply kept using 6xAA ...

• DerekWilson - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

  to further clarify, fear didn't play well when we set AA outside the game, so it's max quality ended up using the in game 4xaa setting. thus we see a performance improvement.
  
  for day of defeat, forcing aa/af through the control panel works well so we were able to crank up the quality.
  
  I'll try to go back and clarify this in the article.

• vaystrem - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - link

  I'm not sure how that justifies what happens. Your argument is that it is the VERY highest settings so that its ok for the 'dual' 1900xtx to have lower performance than a single card alternative? That doesn't seem to make sense and speaks poorly for the ATI implementation.

• Lonyo - Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - link

  The XTX especially in Crossfire does seem to give a fair boost in a number of tests over the XT and XT in Crossfire.