rFactor Screenies.

the car looks like he's flying a bit on the first one

Thanks for the info

Just installed a few new bits yesterday, and @#$%& does this sim rock when you give it the headroom to run free. I'm running 1920x1200 at 4xAA and 16xAF and the Carrera's look absolutely stunning. So much more enjoyable.

Just for reference, my system wasn't exactly lacking prior to this... same CPU, but with 1gb RAM, and an ATi X800XT. Relatively small bump to 2gb and a X1900XT, but the difference is just staggering.

x800xt to x1900xt is more than a small bump i'd say thats like going from those 6800gt's straight to a 7900gt

---

A low-performance card isn't one that can run GTP at 1920x1200 mate.

The X800s are only 1 generation old. It's nothing like going from a 6800GT to a 7900GT. The X800XTss are roughly on par with the 6800GTs, but an X1900XT wipes the floor with a 7900GT.

//edit: obviously in the early hours I was a bit tired... what I should have said was that X1900XT only gain a huge advantage in newer games with their pixel shaders and wot not. When it comes down to raw textures the X800s and 6800s and such aren't at all shabby. If I was playing FEAR all day long, then yes, I'd see a huge boost in performance. But I'm not.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/20/2006 03:37PM by gav.

sorry i meant to say 7900gtx. from what benchmarks i've seen the x1900xt struggles to keep up with it, and the x1900xtx is barely on par in some games.

---

from what I read the ATi rules a bit more :P

nVidia should be bloody ashamed to be brutally honest. In a matter of 3 months ATi have gone from having horrifically poor drivers in some hands (never had any issues myself) and a poor product line, to be clear leaders with some simply awesome drivers. nVidia were caught wanting, making poor drivers themselves, with support posts on forums jumping to levels I've not seen in quite a while.

The 7900GTX is much better in OpenGL (nV always has been much stronger), but DirectX is where it's at, and they're pretty level, while ATi have miles better multimedia support, the upper hand in drivers, still the better image quality, better performance at high resolutions, and a product £100 cheaper for the top models.

nVidia have been caught sleeping -they had a shocker with the 7800GTX 512, and have been panicked into releasing a product 3 months late as a knee-jerk reaction that's still a rather stupid purchase unless you're an nV fanboy.

It's a staggering turn-around in fortunes.

I am an nV fanboy, my GeForce 4 128mb pwns any graphics card on the market!

well i've been an ATI user for the past 4 odd years now so i'm certainly no nvidia fanboy. and obviously havent had any experience with their recent drivers so cant comment on that. but right now the 7900gtx is selling here for $650 where as the x1900xtx is $750. in most benchmarks ive seen theyre pretty even. on games where it falls behind its usually only a few fps which is pretty insignificant when you consider the price difference. having said that its pretty hard to declare a winner at the top between the two. then there's nvidia users complaining bout too many jaggies with nvidia's AA as compared to ati which seems to look a lot better. theyre both great performing cards and for me it comes down to price in such a situation. and then you have to look at the longterm factor when thinking about adding a 2nd card. the question then becomes which will give you a bigger performance boost - sli or crossfire. looking at benchmarks it seems crossfire seems to have improved quite a bit,with ati's xpress 3200 based boards. tough decision! for me right now it would come down to price since the x1900xtx is a $100 more expensive...but if ati can match nvidia's price for the 7900gtx (and according to the stories ive read they seem to have already done that but havent seen the updated prices in stores here) then yeah the x1900xtx would be a way better buy.

---

Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 03/21/2006 05:49AM by Karan.

Karan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sorry i meant to say 7900gtx. from what benchmarks
> i've seen the x1900xt struggles to keep up with
> it, and the x1900xtx is barely on par in some
> games.

Doom3 based games, or OpenGL, yes the nVidia pulls ahead. But in high-resolutions and with high levels of image quality settings (anistropic filtering and anti-aliasing), the ATi is in a league of its own.

It all depends on what you're looking for. Whether you work by high frame-rates or quality. Personally, I like my quality, so I got an x1900xt. Paying £100 more for a card a few FPS faster is hard to justify in anyones case.

Dunno what's happening over there, but in the UK the prices at a store well-known for cheap prices, overclockers.co.uk, an ATi X1900XT is available for £280, while the cheapest 7900GTX is £380. The X1900XTX is just a slightly bumped X1900XT, and easily hits X1900XTX speeds anyway.

---

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/03/2006 01:33AM by Karan.

the track might look dead due to the clean looking textures, but i think he just wanted to go for a different look to toban which had the lush green grass. the dry brown grass in mills is pretty similiar to what it looks outside my house right now - exactly how its supposed to look after a long, cold dry winter.

---

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 04/08/2006 02:13AM by Karan.

Is it just me or are Hudson's textures making that track look dead? Everything is just so 'clean', or in the grasses case 'dead'. Where's chipped paint? dirty adverts? green grass?

wow those are nice pictures... so where can i get this rFartor ? do i have to buy it? i've been out of racing games for so long i can't even remember the last time i played GP4 (3+ years) probably a good time to get back in


Btw Karan, how awesome is Jagr :P GL to NYR for playoffs.


Andrew. Australia.