Battlefield 2 Performance

Under Battlefield 2 the 7800 GS falls right between the 6800 GS and the 7800 GT. At 1600x1200 the X1800 XL performs about 8.3% better than the 7800 GS, though with a solid 44.8 fps it is very playable.

Battlefield 2 Performance

With 4xAA the 7800 GS remains playable up to 1600x1200. It is also only 1.1 frames per second behind the X1800 XL. The added power of the 7800 GS does give gamers a little more flexibility than with the 6800 GS when it comes to antialiasing.

Battlefield 2 Performance 4xAA

The Test Black & White 2 Performance


View All Comments

  • AmberClad - Monday, November 28, 2005 - link

    Sorry if this was already mentioned in the article, but is there a reason that there were no pictures of the actual card? Were there distinguishing marks/logos on the card that would have revealed to Nvidia which company had leaked the card, or was it just due to legal issues? Reply
  • gulizi - Saturday, November 26, 2005 - link">;thre... Reply
  • vailr - Wednesday, November 23, 2005 - link


    There are some rebate and coupon offers that can get you a 7800 GT for $300 right now if you look hard enough.

    This 7800GT"> is ($289.00, after $50.00 MIR).
  • NullSubroutine - Wednesday, November 23, 2005 - link

    thankfully the 12x10 4x 8x are on there. anyone know the availbility date since this was a sneak peak? Reply
  • yacoub - Wednesday, November 23, 2005 - link

    The only thing you didn't mention in your conclusion are the prices of the ATI cards, which would really help drive the point home that the 7800 GS or GT are the way to go. Reply
  • LoneWolf15 - Wednesday, November 23, 2005 - link

    That Anandtech has posted that cards in a test (I saw this last week too, but didn't mention it then) include the Radeon X800XL, and then didn't. I'm getting really tired of it. It seems like a simple thing, but a lot of people purchased the X800XL as a performance/value solution, and the comparison is worth it to us. I'd like to see Anandtech tes with it, but if you decide not to, REMOVE IT FROM THE LIST OF CARDS IN YOUR TESTING SO THAT NO-ONE IS LED ON. Don't you guys have ANY PROOFREADERS?

    (pauses, takes several deep breaths) Rant over. Carry on.

    P.S. It appears that in looking closer, your tests include the X1800XL, which is not listed in the test specs. Perhaps the specs have a typo, but if so, it's rather an egregious one...maybe you could correct it?
  • yacoub - Wednesday, November 23, 2005 - link

    I'll second the notion that the X800XL would be nice to include since that was the hottest bang-for-the-buck card just a couple months ago. Reply
  • DerekWilson - Wednesday, November 23, 2005 - link

    Would you guys rather see an X800 GTO or an X800 XL in future reviews of this nature?

    Also, it was a typo. It should have read X1800XL. I'm sorry about the confusion.

    As always, we very much appreciate our readers pointing out errors we need to correct. Thanks!
  • Matkun - Wednesday, November 23, 2005 - link

    There seems to be something wrong with the x1800 parts in the Black and White 2 Benchmarks, since they perform quite a bit below the x850 xt, even though they are faster in every way.

    Is it really proper to include scores that seem to be bugged?
  • DerekWilson - Wednesday, November 23, 2005 - link

    If a hardware/software combination has a problem isn't it even more important that we report it? This is an accurate measure of the performance of the different parts with equivalent settings. We checked and rechecked our benchmarks this time and there's no doubt that R4xx hardware runs B&W2 better thant R5xx hardware with the latest ATI drivers.

    This is a problem and we hope ATI or Lionhead will take notice and fix the issue.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now