Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

8800 or r600, that is the question

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 4, 2007 2:14:03 AM

I was waiting for the r600 because its supposed to be faster, and i like the fact that ati can force triple buffering on d3d games whilst nvidia cant. But now that iv'e heard its gunna be released in may, im considering getting an 8800 gtx instead. anyone know any other news about the exact release date of the r600?

i certainly dont want to buy a new psu either, as my current one is a 700 w game x stream, which i only bought with this new pc 4 months ago. (btw i only have 1 dvd drive, 1 hard drive, 1 graphics card 7600gt, so dont require loads of power anyway)

the games i want that are out now are: Supreme commander, company of heroes, and maybe rainbox six vegas. But im really excited some games which are going to be out in months: Crysis, UT 3, Quake wars.

So, i dont think i really want to wait for another 3 months, need a new psu, and have to pay loads of cash for a brand new card.

what are your thoughts?

More about : 8800 r600 question

March 4, 2007 2:20:44 AM

Quote:
what are your thoughts?


don't want to wait? - get 8800gtx, and don't even ask which one performs better, g80 or r600 or you're gonna get flamed :) 
a b U Graphics card
March 4, 2007 2:39:56 AM

If you have a 7600GT now, I'd do a 320MB GTS and then see later on if you want a new card for games like Crysis. In the mean time, the GTS will provide incredible gameplay compared to that 7600GT.
Related resources
March 4, 2007 2:43:46 AM

Quote:
In the mean time, the GTS will provide incredible gameplay compared to that 7600GT.


agree, but gts will provide incredible gameplay pretty much compared to any card, besides gtx of course :wink:
March 4, 2007 2:49:09 AM

In my opinion go for the 8800 for 2 major reasons


1. Its a great card for the money.

2. There is no other alternative if you are looking at the price/performance ratio at the 300 $ mark. I have ordered the Evga Super clocked version 320 mb Gts .


I am upgrading from a x1800 gto . I have never owned a Nvidia card .
March 4, 2007 2:54:26 AM

Quote:
I have never owned a Nvidia card.


yep, gts is great $/perf. wise i mean, i've upgraded from x1600pro :oops:  and boy did i notice a difference
a b U Graphics card
March 4, 2007 2:58:30 AM

lol I bet you did.
March 4, 2007 3:20:42 AM

The way i see it The R600 will top the 8800GTX no doubt.... it just that is 10% more performance in games worth waiting 2 months for? i myself bought a 8800GTS from eVGA then step-uped to 8800GTX. R600 is going to kick butt in some games and the 8800GTX is going to win some but its like how the X1900XTX and the 7900GTX spare off in the DX9.0C ring, its going to be the samething in the DX10 ring.



I suggest waiting for the R600 because then the GTX will have dropped dramatically in price and maybe the 8900GTX might be popping up.

Its up to you in the end. :wink:
March 4, 2007 3:23:27 AM

Quote:
it just that is 10% more performance in games worth waiting 2 months for?


lol, i'd be very interested to know where you got these numbers from when r600 is not even released yet?
March 4, 2007 3:23:42 AM

Be patient, your games aren't going to disintegrate if you don't play them for couple of months, plus there are tons of other games that you can enjoy in the meanwhile with your current configuration.

How will you feel if you spend your 600 bucks now and in 2 couple of months comes out a new 3d card way better...
I've never owned an ATI card but I'm really looking up to how AMD+ATI will strike back...

If that doesn't convince you then here is a little word of advice: competition will bring down the prices, thats a nice extra don't you think?

And don't be fooled by the power requirements, just make sure your power supply have a nice Amperage and everything will go smooth. Thats if you are not planning on going through the super ultra "my money grow on trees" SLI way.
March 4, 2007 3:28:07 AM

hmmmmmm. thanks for the thoughts. well i dont know if i can hold out any longer, i think im gunna go with the gtx or the 320 gts version. im quite excited about playing Supreme commander, however im worried ill be dissapointed as its supposed to be extremely demanding graphicly.

my system is good though:

core 2 e6600 (not overclocked)
2 gig ddr2 corsair
gigabyte ds3 mobo
x fi soundcard
western digital sata 2 drive
700w ocz game x stream psu
lastly...... 7600gt (oh yess!!)
March 4, 2007 3:38:01 AM

Quote:
How will you feel if you spend your 600 bucks now and in 2 couple of months comes out a new 3d card way better


If this were the case, he would never get a card, becuase every 4 months a new card will come out
March 4, 2007 4:25:52 AM

As long as you can play current games, y not wait?
James
March 4, 2007 5:23:37 AM

Quote:
How will you feel if you spend your 600 bucks now and in 2 couple of months comes out a new 3d card way better


If this were the case, he would never get a card, becuase every 4 months a new card will come out

Got a point, but remember that the geforce 7 series couldn't use HDR and AA at the same time... and the current geforce 8 doesn't come with VIVO
a b U Graphics card
March 4, 2007 5:41:33 AM

Thats not a prob if you dont use it.
March 4, 2007 5:45:21 AM

Quote:
Thats not a prob if you dont use it.


lol, brilliant comeback :trophy:
a b U Graphics card
March 4, 2007 5:51:18 AM

thanks
March 4, 2007 5:53:19 AM

the best part is that it's universal
a b U Graphics card
March 4, 2007 6:14:54 AM

lol you're right. Should use it more often.
March 4, 2007 6:21:22 AM

What about HDMI?

From what I know it's only on AMD cards at the moment. Is HDMI of interest to you?

Also save a few more $$$ and get the 8800GTS 640Mb if you decide to get the 8800.
March 4, 2007 6:27:14 AM

Quote:
i like the fact that ati can force triple buffering on d3d games whilst nvidia cant.
What are you talking about? You can force triple buffering in the Nvidia driver for both OpenGL and Direct X.
March 4, 2007 7:15:36 AM

i am having the exact same dilemma..

at the moment i have decided to wait for the r600, it just makes it hard when the card keeps getting pushed back and there are no real benchmarks to know if its worth the wait!
March 4, 2007 1:23:26 PM

Quote:
As long as you can play current games, y not wait?


I can't really play the games I want to atm. I usualy just stick with 1 or 2 amazing games and play those for months, but the only games that are out which I really want, would only run smoothely on low graphics settings with my current graphics card. This is kind of unaceptable to me because the rest of my system is designed for playing games at maximum settings. The only game i do play atm is Eve online, which im bored with as it's not allways the most exciting thing to play.

as for Vivo, i don't even know what that is. iv'e seen it mentioned before and allways wondered, isnt it to do with watching movies or using HD tv's or something?

Quote:
What about HDMI?

From what I know it's only on AMD cards at the moment. Is HDMI of interest to you?


again, i don't know what this is either. is it good?

Quote:
What are you talking about? You can force triple buffering in the Nvidia driver for both OpenGL and Direct X.


actualy im pretty sure that in order to do triple buffering on d3d games with nvidia, you need a 3rd party program which will force it on. this is ok for some games, but for others it simply does not work. Like with Eve online, the game won't start with this 3rd party software as the client thinks its a hack or something. this means i have to settle for not using vsync, and seeing a bit of tearing with my lcd monitor.
March 4, 2007 2:27:03 PM

you wrote :the games i want that are out now are: Supreme commander, company of heroes, and maybe rainbox six vegas. But im really excited some games which are going to be out in months: Crysis, UT 3, Quake wars.

So, i dont think i really want to wait for another 3 months, need a new psu, and have to pay loads of cash for a brand new card. Ok in my opinionget a 8800GTS 640MB from EVGA .why EVGA ? 'cause they are the only card makers that have a 3 MONTH STEP UP program that way by May or June you can upgrade to a 8900GTX or maybe a 8950GTS
March 4, 2007 10:36:55 PM

Quote:

What about HDMI?

From what I know it's only on AMD cards at the moment. Is HDMI of interest to you?


again, i don't know what this is either. is it good?



8O

Off the top of my head:

High Definition Multimedia Interface. Designed for HD (i.e. Blu-Ray/HD-DVD) content. Mainly in the home theatre but there are a few mid range graphics cards (X1300/X1650) which support HDMI-out; mainly for HTPC purposes. I believe it was Viewsonic that announced they will be bringing monitors with HDMI-in to market in 2007.

Why HDMI when we have DVI? HDMI carries video and audio (meh), but I believe the main reason is the copy protection it carries. HDMI is thinner as well but again, meh.

Don't know about the bandwidth though; will be interesting to see if it can support 2560x1600 like double DVI* can.

*double DVI = DVI with twice the bandwith of regular DVI. If you want to game on Dell's 30" monitor at 2560x1600 you'll need cards that support it, otherwise say hello to 1280x1024 (the 8800's support it). Not sure about Apple's 30" but I presume it's the same deal.
March 6, 2007 12:25:38 AM

Quote:
it just that is 10% more performance in games worth waiting 2 months for?


lol, i'd be very interested to know where you got these numbers from when r600 is not even released yet?

IM just guessing off the numbers its not an accurate statement you got to realize that. Most the time the gap between ATI and nVIDIA isnt much both offer GPUS but differently its not like the R600 is going to be 80% faster then the G80.
a b U Graphics card
March 6, 2007 1:21:40 AM

Quote:

Why HDMI when we have DVI?


Because HDMI can support all of DVI, but DVI can only support part of HDMI. It's like saying why DVI and not VGA. That the R600 wil carry audio and video along HDMI 1.2+ spec connection means it's a sweet bonus, but not everyone will use it, so it's like SM3.0 support in the GF6800 era, not a killer app, but a nice bonus/checkbox feature, but wouldn't make up for a performance difference.

Quote:
Don't know about the bandwidth though; will be interesting to see if it can support 2560x1600 like double DVI* can.


HDMI bandwidth is higher than Dual-Link DVI, just depends on the implementation, and the G80 doesn't support dual-link HDCP support, whereas the R600 supposedly does.

Quote:
*double DVI = DVI with twice the bandwith of regular DVI.


No it doesn't, doublle DVI means 2 DVI connectors. You're confusing Dual-Link DVI which uses two TMDS transmitters to supply output to the DVI connector.

Quote:
If you want to game on Dell's 30" monitor at 2560x1600 you'll need cards that support it, otherwise say hello to 1280x1024


Yeah but it's of little concern neither is an issue; and really why get the Dell when you can get the better looking Samsung or HP? But pretty much every current generation gaming card supports dual-link, but that doesn't mean it's going to be able to game at that native resolution.

Quote:
(the 8800's support it).


As does the the lowe end X1300 and and older R9650Pro or R9600PC/MAC, Parhelia 256DL, some X800 series, and the GF6800U-DDL; dual link DVI is nothing new.

Quote:
Not sure about Apple's 30" but I presume it's the same deal.


Of course, it was the first to make it an issue.
March 7, 2007 2:09:07 AM

:oops:  Thanks for clearing up most of that; I remembered the other day that it's "dual-link" not "double DVI".

Still not sold on HDMI though. To this day I have still never heard anyone complain about DVI, and the HDMI audio seems to be little more than a gimmick for people more concerned with reducing cables in their designer apartments. I'll stick with TOSLINK thanks.

As for the DELL monitor? Where else are you going to get a 30" 2560x1600 monitor (from a reputable company) for that price?
a b U Graphics card
March 7, 2007 7:23:18 AM

Quote:

Still not sold on HDMI though. To this day I have still never heard anyone complain about DVI, and the HDMI audio seems to be little more than a gimmick for people more concerned with reducing cables in their designer apartments. I'll stick with TOSLINK thanks.


But I think you're missing the point, it's not about replacing one or the other it's about trying to add something. DVI and HDMI are pretty interchangeable for displays. And in the same way that there's co-axial digital out, Toslink is just optical, while the HDMI audio portion is the electrical representation of that. It's not only about cable management but it's also a nice benefit. However it doesn't work equally as well for everyone, for me the audio over HDMI isn't as helpful because I don't use my TV alone to handle the audio, and would need to still use the Toslink out the back to hook up to my surround system for the best audio. Currently I can use the SPDIF on my audigy card straight into my surround sound, so I would need to still do both, however at least I can use the 2.1 within the HDMI to feed the TV should I not need surround sound. Just nice to have options.

Quote:
As for the DELL monitor? Where else are you going to get a 30" 2560x1600 monitor (from a reputable company) for that price?


Welll the Samsung and HP are a few hunderd dollars more expensive (about 10%), and we are talking about the high end of cards here, so it's a question of quality vs price in that case, and for better colour, faster refresh, better viewing angles the Samsung and HP are better panels. Since they are newer they aren't quite as cheap, but even now it's a question of what you're looking for in the panel as to whether it's worth it. It's like a GTS vs GTX debate, only some people will appreciate the difference, however is trying to talk about the gold standard, then the DELL is not the choice, it's the value standard. However from what I read DELL is also going to replace their panel this summer with an update, so it'll be interesting to see what they add and whether they add othe resolutions to the support the way has been added for the HP and many of the 24" (and the new DELL 27"). Also they will likely add more inputs (don't be surprised if one isn't HDMI) because HP have 3 HDCP compliant DVI-D, the Samsung is just a single (dual-link) DVI-D like the DELL. Overkill for most, but having the support options one again is nice (personally I'd prefer the DVI + HDMI over the 3 DVI). I was surprised that the 27" didn't add HDMI for dell, especially with the 19x12 being pretty much perfect for HD content.

We'll have to see whether they go that route of if they're just holding off until DisplayPort becomes a player to replace both DVI and HDMI.
March 7, 2007 8:10:20 AM

if the r600 is scheduled for May, when can we expect to see some kind of concrete benchmarks?

this waiting game is killing me... i'd hate to wait all that time then find out the r600 is the same or less powerful than the 8800GTX :( 
March 7, 2007 8:58:15 AM

the r600 is almost out... look at this
it is more a matter of weeks than of months.... so they may be available already at the beginning or mid of april... and i bet the R600 is faster than the GF 8800...
March 7, 2007 10:56:05 AM

Quote:
why get the Dell when you can get the better looking Samsung or HP?


What models are you referring to? I am planning on getting a 30" Dell mid-summer because I've heard it's amazing, what does Samsung offer?
March 7, 2007 10:52:11 PM

Quote:
why get the Dell when you can get the better looking Samsung or HP?


What models are you referring to? I am planning on getting a 30" Dell mid-summer because I've heard it's amazing, what does Samsung offer?

Samsung and Sony monitors are made on the same production line, which means they share a lot of parts. Considering the quality of Sony monitors, this is a good thing (Sony aren't really a gaming monitor though; that's more Samsung's thing). Try the Samsung 305T if you want 30".

From my (admittedly limited) experince with HP monitors the colour palette is smaller and the dot pitch seems larger than a Samsung. But as I said, my experience is limited.

If you can, try to find someone with a HP monitor that you're interested in and make a comparison to the Samsung.
a b U Graphics card
March 8, 2007 12:04:19 AM

Quote:

From my (admittedly limited) experince with HP monitors the colour palette is smaller and the dot pitch seems larger than a Samsung. But as I said, my experience is limited.


The Samsung and HP panels are similar in design, and the reason I said they were beter is because their colour gamut is better, their refresh is better, contrast better, and their viewing angle is better, which makes them closer to a CRT and really improves on all the weak areas of LCD (now if only we could get a LEDlit model for near the same price). The HP lists for $150 different than the DELL, and the Samsungs I've seen for $50 different from the DELLs, DELL currently has a sale on so the prices are all shifted by the $150 discount.

Now DELL is supposed to bring out the HC model soon which is the exact same Phillips/LG panel that HP uses, and it will bring the quality in line with the Samsung and HP, but for now based on the specs on their site they seem to still be selling the old model with the weaker specs.

Here's a few reviews of the HP versus the current/old DELL;
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2077916,00.a...

The ONLY drawback of the HP is the lack of built in panel hardware, which is why resolution suport was added in the software (supposedly according to the DELL site the DELLs have issues with OSD.exe in 64bit Vista). But the HP has 3 DVI ports, the DELL only 1, and right now the MSRP for the DELL HC model is the same as HP's panel $1699, but dell still has their old model on their site according to the specs. I wouldn't risk it unless they tell you the discounted model is in fact the HC model.
March 8, 2007 1:51:15 AM

I have EVGA 8800GTX and I still haven't played that many games on it which would make me drop my jaw and say "Wow!"

I bought it mainly for some GPGPU work I do for living and occasional gaming.

What I got for the money (650€ here in Europe) is a solid space heater, 60°C in idle and I am afraid to think of what it is going to be like in summer. Luckily I have air conditioning.

Don't get me wrong, 8800GTX is a great card, it is blazingly fast but neither this one nor ATI's upcoming R600 are practical. They are both too inefficient when it comes to power consumption.

If I were you I would wait for some massive process shrinking to take place (like to 65nm). But there is a problem, they aren't going to switch soon not because they can't -- technology is there but they prefer selling mobile chips because they can earn more money from them (smaller process x smaller chip = big saving = extra profit).

Also, there is PCI-E 2.0 to consider as well as the announcement of external PCI-E devices. That would mean you could buy a VGA in its own box with its own PSU and cooling which can be as far as 10m from your PC. Hell, if you have a house you could as well keep the monster in basement with a fire extinguisher at hand instead of having it in your room making tons of heat and noise.

Getting 8800 GTS 320MB is not a bad idea, especially if you get EVGA because you can step up to something better (although NVIDIA only) in the next three months.
March 8, 2007 2:14:39 AM

Have you played Oblivion on the 8800GTX and compared it to your results with any older card? I went from two eVga 7800GT COs and the improvement in Oblivion was astounding.
March 8, 2007 2:29:47 AM

My thoughts? Well maybe you should have searched the forums for the keywords "r600 vs 8800" and see the hundreds of posts concerning this topic. I don't mean to be rude, but before I post an opinionated question like this, I look to see if anyone did it before I did.

Regarding the actual question, my anwser is: Now or Later, it's your choice. Enjoy :wink:
!