Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nvidia is still retarded for naming it the 8800's again
The 8900's would've made so much more sense, but instead I guess they didn't want to see sales of the GTX/Ultra get cannibalized more by knowledgeable buyers so they're relying on the uninformed
Also, people think NVidia does this stuff for them. OMG 8800GT at $250 with near-GTX performance! They did that for them, not for us. That's called dominating a market that was open for domination. They did that for them, out happiness to buy performance at that price is just a side effect.
from where????
from where????
For the love of god please let that new technology be a 9800 ultra due for release in early January! My pathetic 6800GT just cant handle modern games anymore
Oh hey look at me, I can call people names and chastise them for not reading something, while blatantly ignoring half the content of their post.
That still doesn't address point #2 - which is that it's hard pressed for a rational observer to see how the card deserves a seal of approval for approaching GTX-level performance when 3 cards from the same company released in the last year also approach GTX-level performance.
My basic metric is this - does this card warrant an upgrade from an "old" GTS? The answer with the GT and GTS 92nm 112SP was obviously "not really." This new GTS falls into the same category, offering marginal performance increase and zero new features except for hardware decoding.
Unless you're going with the step-up program, dropping $400 for an old-gen part with a fresh round of make-up is going to look very silly come February.
I completely disagree with your conclusion that the G92 GTS is the best bang for the buck, even at your specified resolutions. The G92 GT is clearly the owner of that title.
Is it still rumor, confirmed, or disproved that there will be a 1GB version? If it is in fact slated for release, Wouldn't the extra ram bring it over the GTX and possibly the Ultra as well?
Might still be held back by 256-bit though
Might still be held back by 256-bit though
yes but enough with the refresh crap. we need the new generation of much more powerful cards.
for what though? crysis? whoop di freaking whoop. How many of you guys actually play multi-player crysis where image quality and smooth frames actually matter? I beat single player crysis with crap settings on my 7 series card and now im done with it. No real games to that make me wanna upgrade. BF2 made me wanna do it, so did CoH. TF2 and COD4 are currently doing fine on my 20in and 7950gt. I'll think ill worry about games that i want to play long term (I.E. Multiplayer) first, then ill back it up with whatever hardware i need.
"Basically you couldn't be more bass ackwards if you tried."
Oh hey look at me, I can call people names and chastise them for not reading something, while blatantly ignoring half the content of their post.
Okay, I missed that most the numbers have widescreen. I'm glad it's there.
That still doesn't address point #2 - which is that it's hard pressed for a rational observer to see how the card deserves a seal of approval for approaching GTX-level.
Good for you, there are some people who are still stuck on shittier cards than the 7900 generation and would like to upgrade to the latest and greatest, but not to a card which:
(a) is unlikely to perform well with future DX10 releases;
(b) is likely to be obsolete in a matter of months;
(c) is the same damn product from a year ago which barely qualifies as a refresh and is being sold for about the same price!
Glad to know you like playing games on crap settings but quite frankly I am sick of it and am prepared to pay top dollar for the new generation of video cards.
I think you just described me. I'm on a 6800 still, and it's eol hit just about when the Wii came out so it didn't hurt as bad.
But now with all these new games out...it's time to upgrade; but that credit card isn't coming out until I see a card running Crysis/UT3/CoD4 @1920x1200 w/ settings cranked.
I'm not making the mistake of buying a vanilla version card again. (BFG 6800 OC 128mb)
i'm in the same boat.
I still have a 6600GT and really hurting lately so i've been looking to get a 8800GT but the crap cooler scared me. then new cooler but it's pretty random so far an i hate that.
so the the new 8800GTS comes out which solves the cooler issue ( i don't care about OCing anyway) and i game at 1600*1080 on a 20" so i don't need top dog.
Now i'm tempted to wait for the 9 series in February but for what price? and i'm not even sure my system will be compatible (nforce 4 and athlon 64 3500+) so that would mean a whole complete new rig....
that's why the 8800GTS tempts me. because i wouldn't have to modify it and it would probably run games very well for at least a year or 2 and then i could upgrade again.
I think most people's issues are that they already have a 8800GT or GTS or even GTX and have had them for a while so they want really new cards and that's fair....it's just not my case.
for what though? crysis? whoop di freaking whoop. How many of you guys actually play multi-player crysis where image quality and smooth frames actually matter? I beat single player crysis with crap settings on my 7 series card and now im done with it. No real games to that make me wanna upgrade. BF2 made me wanna do it, so did CoH. TF2 and COD4 are currently doing fine on my 20in and 7950gt. I'll think ill worry about games that i want to play long term (I.E. Multiplayer) first, then ill back it up with whatever hardware i need.
How is the market milking people if that same $500 8800GTX you bought a year ago is still whipping butt and taking names even today? How is that milking? The only difference is that many more people can get close to your performance and by spending less money.
I for one am glad that the expensive video cards people buy can actually get a years worth of use of them before something faster comes out. That's value!!!! I can't believe I am hearing people with GTX's complaining that they can't spend more money on a faster card yet. Amaziing, you consumers amaze me sometimes.
You said it yourself. "$500".
Does your definition of "whipping butt" mean medium settings and no AA? I'll probably have to play on low settings if I ever get a bigger LCD.
So to summarize your post. You're happy to pay $500 only to play with no AA on medium settings a year later?
You said it yourself. "$500".
Does your definition of "whipping butt" mean medium settings and no AA? I'll probably have to play on low settings if I ever get a bigger LCD. So to summarize your post. You're happy to pay $500 only to play with no AA on medium settings a year later?
My personal opinion is that we haven't seen a real speed increase with these new processes because there is no need. The 8800 Ultra can handle every game but Crysis/S.C. at 1600+ resolutions w/ maxxed out game settings. Why crave for better hardware cause a few game designers can't write efficient enough code*? Also, AMD/ATi gave them no pressure to release something either.
*half joke here, but in all seriousness does crysis deserve to run that slow... I mean really?
So performance is within a hair of the 8800 GTX -- not bad at all. Lets hope they have an 8800 GTX (65 nm) in store for us or something even better!
Looking at the results, it's making me ask if we're going to see a G92 based GTX prior to the launch of the next gen cards...
Looks like taking the G92 based GTS and simply widening the memory bus (and of course providing the matching amount of memory) would easily be enough to outdo the G80 GTX/Ultra.
So... any insight into if we'll see such a thing?
Oh, and if EVGA puts one out at the $299 price point, I think a step-up will be in order
this video card stuff and timing with crysis sucks. I mean why release a game that you cant use the full capability of? I guess my 360 is getting played a little while longer. LOL
If you're still running a single-core 3500+, you definitely ought to upgrade that... it would be a tremendous bottleneck for even an 8800, much less a hypothetical 9 series. Then again I guess it depends on what you're playing, but if you can get by with that CPU, then you don't really need an 8800 either
well if I wait until the 9 series i'm definitely changing the MB and the proc as well (but $$$$ :/ )
you really think my single core would bottleneck a 8800 (GT or GTS) that much? (with 2G of ram)
I play anything. right now on my list are FEAR, Hitman 2, GoW, Witcher, Far Cry...that kind of stuff
i get by really fine on single core really. i just played Bloodlines, Doom 3, Divine Divinity. And i wanted to upgrade monitor and GC to play the games mentioned above.
The trend isn't really that games are getting more demanding. That's just Crysis and Halo pc ports. We all know UT3 is a diff game but it sure gives shitloads better performance than Crysis. According to H's review, UT3 will allow you to play @ maximum details using cards less than $200. Crysis IS NOT the standard to go by. It is just ONE piece of the puzzle.
.