PDA

View Full Version : 6800GT vs 6800 Ultra Opinions


rickshobbies
06-30-04, 01:08 AM
I'll start by saying that this is a great forum and many of you have provided some great information in here. This is my first post and I would like to get some of your feedback on a tough decision... a 6800GT or a 6800 Ultra.

I have a P4 3Ghz CPU running on an Intel MB. I have an Antec 550 PS, so I know I am good there either way. I have a 6800 GT on the way which cost me about $400 and I have a BB preorder 6800 Ultra, which will be about $550 shipped to my door (whenever that might be! lol) Anyway, I can't overclock this CPU since it's an Intel board, but I suppose I can play with OCing the 6800. In this system, does it make sense to just stick with the 6800GT, or will I really be able to benefit from the 6800 Ultra. Oh, both cards are BFG OC cards BTW. I have a feeling that the performance difference might not be worth the extra $150 for the Ultra.

What do you guys think?

Thanks in advance!

Regards,

Rick

P.S. Just noticed e-mail confirmation that the GT will be here Thursday!

Also, I forgot to mention that I am upgrading from a 9800XT

MUYA
06-30-04, 01:12 AM
I think u can get away with GT ;) Ultras and Gt performance deltas isn't much with available games. Maybe the new engines increase the deltas between the GT and ultra.

At any rate seems even P4 3GHz or athlon 3200+ will CPU limit the GPUs anyway

John the Canuck
06-30-04, 06:14 AM
The specification for the clock speed is 400 mhz. The GT is 350. So, there's a 13.5 % difference there. There's a a 9.09% difference in the clock speed of the memory. So, if you look at it that way and look at the actual frame rates that these cards are pushing, you can bet that there isn't a huge performance delta. In terms of overclocking, the ultra can be pushed higher, but that requires the use of a good quality power supply for stability reasons. I'm not a fan of overclocking for a few reasons that I don't really care to mention. If you're like half of the people on here who buy video cards on a regular basis, I don't think it's worth getting the Ultra over the GT. I could have bought one if I wanted to, but having something that just performs slightly faster and in the region of 10% isn't worth paying the extra money for. Plus, the GT is a single slot solution with only one molex. It seems funny looking in my case and seeing this thin card. So used to seeing the 5800.

zer0xp
06-30-04, 06:32 AM
The specification for the clock speed is 400 mhz. The GT is 350. So, there's a 13.5 % difference there. There's a a 9.09% difference in the clock speed of the memory. So, if you look at it that way and look at the actual frame rates that these cards are pushing, you can bet that there isn't a huge performance delta. In terms of overclocking, the ultra can be pushed higher, but that requires the use of a good quality power supply for stability reasons. I'm not a fan of overclocking for a few reasons that I don't really care to mention. If you're like half of the people on here who buy video cards on a regular basis, I don't think it's worth getting the Ultra over the GT. I could have bought one if I wanted to, but having something that just performs slightly faster and in the region of 10% isn't worth paying the extra money for. Plus, the GT is a single slot solution with only one molex. It seems funny looking in my case and seeing this thin card. So used to seeing the 5800.
While i agree with everything you say there, and it does mke a lot of sense, i cant help but think that the bold and powerful look of the 2 molex, 2 slot cooler 6800 Ultra will look so good in my case.. :D:D:D lol :drooling:

John the Canuck
06-30-04, 06:46 AM
Well, as nice as it is to have a cool case, I'd rather spend time looking at my monitor. Don't get my wrong, I have my case pimped out. I really wanted to get the Asus card b/c of the blue LCD's, but they where taking to long to come to market.

saturnotaku
06-30-04, 07:31 AM
I have a feeling that the performance difference might not be worth the extra $150 for the Ultra.

I don't think so. You and I have the same processor and it absolutely bottlenecks a 6800. Besides, I've overclocked my GT to past Ultra speeds.

DivotMaker
06-30-04, 07:35 AM
I have a reference 6800 GT (350/1.0) paired with an Intel D875PBZ/3.2 C and 1 GB of PC3200 Dual Channel DDR.

Getting consistent OC of 425/1.0 set manually. Auto OC actually proves to be slightly faster. I am thinking that the GT is simply an underclocked Ultra in sheeps clothing. I do not think most GT's can OC to the level that Ultra's can. but I think they can get within 25-35 mhz of the Ultra's which does NOT suck being $100 less and only one molex and slot.

mikechai
06-30-04, 07:46 AM
I think the reason why GT can't overclock as high as the ULTRA is because it has only one molex connector. To reach higher clock speed, you simply need more power.

scott123
06-30-04, 08:10 AM
450 / 1.2 on my 6800 Ultra.

Nandro
06-30-04, 08:25 AM
Which GT is it that comes with the 2 molex's?

saturnotaku
06-30-04, 08:34 AM
This one:

http://www.albatron.com.tw/images/product/it/vga/picture/big/6800gt.jpg

Banko
06-30-04, 09:28 AM
GT is good and for 100 dollars less it overclocks beyond ultra speeds, at least mine did.

rickshobbies
06-30-04, 10:02 AM
Admittedly, I am a little conservative when it comes to overclocking and I usually leave things in stock form. I guess I am concerned more about reliability and protecting the warranty.

Having said that, the GT that's on it's way to me is a BFG OC. So, it's GPU is factory OC'd at 370. I am not sure if you let the drivers determine your best OC and it's over 370 if BFG's warranty still applies.

In my situation, there is a $150 difference between the BFG 6800 GT and the BFG 6800 Ultra I have ordered. From the sounds of what I am hearing here, it might not be worth the extra money. My MB is maxed out with the P4 3.0 so I am not going to be upgrading the box until I move to a PCIe, probably in a year. So, I am hoping this will be my last AGP card.

My first inclination is to stick with the GT, but I don't want to end up seeing big performance gains with the Ultra and wishing I had done that.

Rick

burningrave101
06-30-04, 10:03 AM
The 6800GT uses cheaper Samsung 2.0ns QDDR3 memory while the Ultra uses more expensive QDDR3. What speed is the QDDR3 for the ultra's?

2.0ns = 500Mhz

And thats a nice looking card saturnotaku! Does anyone know if there will be a 6800GT any time soon with a black or blue PCB? Possibly from Gigabyte or XFX?

DivotMaker
06-30-04, 10:35 AM
What speed is the QDDR3 for the ultra's?

1.6 ns is what I am hearing..

PaiN
06-30-04, 10:36 AM
rickshobbies...imo, I think the GT is a great match for your system. I think the Ultra would be overkill unless....you plan a CPU upgrade while you still have the card.....So, hurry up and cancel your BB Ultra order and get out of the que...hehehehe :lol2:

For me, I'm a MaD OverClocker :firedevil .... I want the card with the most headroom.

rickshobbies
06-30-04, 11:02 AM
Yeah, my MB is maxed out, so there will be no more CPU upgrades until next year when I setup a new PCIe based system, so this card needs to hold me over for 8 to 12 months.

Also, my system runs on a 533Mhz FSB with 1Gb of 333Mhz DDR. Not sure how much of an impact that would have on this decision.

rickshobbies
06-30-04, 03:33 PM
OK, with my current system (see specs in my sig) and a 22" NEC monitor, I usually use 1024x768 or 1280x1024 resolutions. If I can go higher, great, but I would rather use the lower resolutions and turn on AA and AF and all of the game's eye candy and maintain a smooth frame rate.

Looking at the benchmarks and everyone's feedback, it looks like the GT is the way to go.

Are there any benchmarks comparing a 6800 GT to and 6800 Ultra that anyone can point me to? Particularly with FarCry and BF1942 data?

Once again, thanks to everyone for your input!

Rick

burningrave101
06-30-04, 04:00 PM
http://www.guru3d.com/article/article/136/1/

noko
06-30-04, 04:12 PM
In FarCry the 6800GT and Ultra was virtually identical with the 2.8c Pent and the 3.8+ Athlon 64 except at 1600x1200. Real world difference seems to be very small between the two.

Ruined
06-30-04, 04:42 PM
I've said it before I've said it again.

The Ultra is better than the GT for one reason: Dual DVI. It also overclocks better, but the performance gained from an extra 10-30mhz core clock is not going to make a major difference in gaming.

If something makes the GT choke, it will make the Ultra choke just as hard. So unless you want Dual DVI or just want to overclock crazy high for fun (or if you can watercool - then the 6800U would be a better idea because you can make the core much higher, like 480mhz), save the $100 and go with the GT.

rickshobbies
07-01-04, 12:40 AM
If the difference between an Ultra and GT are only a few fps on my rig, then I agree that it makes sense to stick with a GT and save the $150.

Thanks for everyone's input!

Rick

Jarred
07-01-04, 12:57 AM
If the difference between an Ultra and GT are only a few fps on my rig, then I agree that it makes sense to stick with a GT and save the $150.

Thanks for everyone's input!

Rick

yeah in some cases it would be a few fps if your overclocking.

EDIT: Actually in most cases... damn that GT is a good buy. :)