Best reso to run at? Perf vs. Looks

I think that 1280x1024 is the sweet spot for your Graphics Card.(F.E.A.R doesn't support this resolution so 1280x960 is the way to go)
You have a huge monitor, you can go higher resolution if you like but as your card has 320MB memory, you may experience some FPS drop.(in the newer games only, older games you can play at any resolution that you want)
For FPS games anything above 45FPS would be awesome so i guess you have no problem getting awesome FPS in F.E.A.R & S.T.A.L.K.E.R at 1280x1024/1280x960 with Max in-game details & 4xAA+16xAF. 8)
:!: Just a little recommendation:
F.E.A.R can not be played with both AA & SoftShadows, so better choose 4xAA cause it makes your game looks beautiful!
S.T.A.L.K.E.R has Full-Dynamic-Lighting, better disable it cause your FPS will increase much & you won't lose much eye-candy!
By the way, Nice Rig!
Maiden Rule!

I agree w/ Brick. 1600x1200 is probably optimal. I've got a 8800 GTX and it runs great at that resolution with everything I have.

I saw somewhere that there is a noticeable difference between 320MB & 640MB version of 8800GTS in Oblivion at 1600x1200+4xAA+16xAF. Gonna find that link and post it here... :x
By the way, the OP can try different resolution to find his sweet spot! 8)

Of course 8800GTX can run everything at any resolution fine! (But we are not talking about the GTX, are we?)

Good point!

Actually i bought S.T.A.L.K.E.R last week but i didn't have time to install it(C&C3 all the time at 1600x1200+16xAA+16xAF 8) ) but i read from lots of reviews that Full-Dynamic-Lighting makes the FPS drop by much and don't add much eye-candy!(i`m gonna try that anyway! :x ), so maybe you are right!
I didn't know about F.E.A.R, good news!

Wtf is wrong with every reply in this thread?!

You have a 226BW which has a native resolution of 1680x1050.
You should not be running at any other resolution.

How could you run a 4:3 resolution on a 16:10 monitor without noticing the stretching? :|

/edit
my bad, i was so disgusted by the first few replies i glanced over the rest to see if anyone gave the guy the correct information. Missed them

http://anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2926

this link explains the performance difference or lack thereof between the two memory sizes. as you can see the difference is only apparent at 1920x1200 and only after 4x antialiasing. there isn't any difference in fear at 1600x1200 or 1680x1050 which would be that monitor's native resolution.

And the OP is one of those with an LCD...

Personally I found 1280x960 adequate on my CRT (also a 19" Trinitron) when 16x12 had framerate issues. But since I upgraded to the 8800GTS I was able to run 16x12 in everything without framerate issues until switching to the LCD for widescreen. Too bad they don't make widescreen CRTs, I still prefer the CRT picture.

As a side not, strangely I personally found more difference in perceived quality between 1024x768 (ugh!) and 1280x960 than I did between 1280x960 and 1600x1200, sort of like I see more difference between 2x and 4x AA than between 4x and 8x AA. And what idiot came up with 1280x1024 instead of 1280x960, it's not even the right 4:3 ratio?