Need Advice Video Card

Single 8800GTX.

Much better, more features, hands down best card available.

Yea.

But still.

yea but i think TWO 7900 gs are better then 1 8800GTX just one 7900 GS is 600mhz core clock and 1600 memory clock

True, just look at the VGA charts.

I would have to agree, get the 8800 GTX or GTS. Either one will outperform the 7900 GS in SLI. I use an SLI board but have never used the SLI feature because a single high end card almost always out performs lower performance cards in SLI. SLI is nice in theory but it hasn't proved to be of great benefit in real world use, seems to only perform well in benchmarks but not in actual games.

Get an Geforce MX400 from Walmart.

No really, get the 8800GTX. It's the toughest punk on the block right now, and it should be nice to know that you are ready for DirectX 10, unlike the rest of us suckers...
-cm

ya def the 8800 because like celwign said DIRECTX 10
Think about next gen games, with two 7 series cards you won't come close to what dx10 will do with the 8800

Walker, get 8800 GTX, no question about it 7900 GS is decent card, SLi may prolong its life, but GF 7xxx Death is imminent, so why not to go with DX10 from the start? If money is the issue, get 8800 GS, which still would be better in the long run than 2 x 7900GS.

8800 GTX. Expensive but worth it.

While it's true that at lower resolutions a "slow" CPU will bottleneck the 8800 GTX, I think it's important to remember that this "bottleneck" occurs at a really high frame count.

When I see articles titled "...NEEDS the fastest CPU" I think it gives the false perception that the hardware won't work right and probably won't give good results without the fastest of the fast CPUs. I think a better title would be "...BENEFITS from the fastest CPU"

Just think of it in terms of future proofing - like the DX10 compatibility. If you're running a "slower" CPU right now and playing at low resolutions but you plan on upgrading the CPU or the monitor later it makes sense to go ahead and get the 8800 if you buying a video card. It will still play games at the lower resolutions at speeds that are well above where you will perceive any difference if you add 30 or 40 FPS.

I believe you are right. In addition to all those pixel pipelines at also some other differences that are part of DX10 that make it more efficient.

For compairson, my very good GeForce 7800gt has 20 pixel pipelines. Yes. Two-zero. Twenty. Not 120+ like the 8800.

8800 GTX -- just phenomenal, just put one in myself.... could not be happier.

What monitor do you have? If you plan to run this card a 1600x1200 Full blast AA and FSAA then your CPU will only cripple it by a small amount. However if you run it at 1280x1024, your CPU is limiting the potential of this card --- a 4200+ will bottleneck most games at the lower resolutions.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/1 [...] stest_cpu/

It is a tough call what video card to buy balancing against current CPU installed. You may consider saving money and going with the 7900 or even the 1900XTX if you are not willing to use a different CPU.

Jack,

Im curious. Obviously you like the 8800. Ive read of some driver/control software issues with the 8800s current drivers, have you noticed any problems?
As I recall, you had a high end ATI when you first built your system. THGs charts/comparison show a solid improvement for the 8800 vs the 1950 ( I think you had a 1900 series?) but is it worth the extra cost, disregarding the DX10 capability. Ive also read of some heat issues with the 8800. Any comments on heat?

Doh, I forgot my login

I'm gonna b-slap the crap out of you! Just kidding. Thanks for letting me know, I thought it was in the public section of our website, but it is not.

Here is a copy of it: