[ATI/NVIDIA]The benchmarks are in

More info here.

http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.cfm?articleid=517

It seems that the X800 beats 6800 in Farcry but the 6800 wins in UT2004 and AquaMark...


Now which one to buy..

Well let's see, I actually play Far Cry ...

... although the lack of PS 3.0 support is only slightly worrying.

heh, and AquaMark isn't a game. Does anyone even play Aquanox?

It seems the radeon 9500's and above are beating any nvidia offering in far cry. Finaly, this 9600 proves it's worth.

go little geforce 2 go!

Arioch said:

... although the lack of PS 3.0 support is only slightly worrying.

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NjA5

I don't find the lack of PS3.0 support all that worrying at all.

That and after the issue regarding driver cheating and such, I only rely on benchmarks done in-game and not with the game-specific benchmarking tools.

honestly i think it comes down to how a game is made. maybe the programer wanted better support for ATI or Nvidia.
also there is the simple fact that some games are not made very efficient, thus being real system hogs. i know an example would be postal 2, it seems to hog more power than UT 2004. runs much much slower than UT 2004.

i am not gonna base my bench marks on just a few games. i tend to look at how well it is supported, features it has, price, games that use said features and drivers.

right now i like ATI, i have had more luck recently with their drivers than i have had with NVIDIA.