Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Upgrade to GeForce 8800 GTS advice please.

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
June 27, 2007 11:02:12 AM

Hi all,

I've just upgraded my AMD 3000+ to an E6600 (thanks to the advice in this forum) but I've not noticed a great deal of difference as (I think) because my card is AGP (an eVGA Geforce 7800 GS OC).

Question is would upgrading to a GeForce 8800 GTS 320 meg make a big enough difference to be worth the money? Also are there any comparisons out there which may help me?

Very much appreciate any help, thanks.

P.S. I have 2 gig DDR 1 & the borad is AGP & PCIE compatible.
June 27, 2007 1:57:41 PM

I would check to make sure you processor is running at full speed. Depending on what speed DDR you have it might not be so. I'm not sure how DDR that operates at speeds lower than the stock FSB of an E6600 will effect the speed.

If you're getting smooth frame rates right now then there isn't much reason to upgrade, but the short answer to your question is an 8800GTS 320mb would be a HUGE upgrade over your 7800GS.

You would have to make sure your power supply is capable of supporting an 8800GTS, a 500W w/ 30A would be ideal.
June 27, 2007 1:58:46 PM

What motherboard do you have?
Is it the asrock dual vista if it is you just made a very wtong choice because the PCI-e slot works at just 4x not full 16x.
But to answer youre question yes upgrading to a 8800gts would make a huge diference thr 7800gs isn't high end anymore it's more mainstream.
So my7 advice is go for it.
Related resources
June 27, 2007 6:52:08 PM

I don't believe it - yes I bought the dualvsta!!

It's not all bad as it only cost £39 and I have a 500 watt power supply.

Not sure about the CPU setup - the CPU frequency is 266 Mhz - I've no idea what this should be sitting at - any help???

All other settings should be fine.

Any suggestions for a cheap board that will take the 8800 GTS, E6600 and DDR1?

Many thanks guys.

P.S. I think I've picked the one - eVGA 8800 GTS superclocked - good choice? :?
June 27, 2007 9:20:01 PM

There would be no point to buying a new motherboard, you would have to get one that supports DDR2 ram, right now you are really in a pickle, you either can fork over the money, get a new mobo and ram or just get the video card and run it with your current motherboard at the reduced PCIe speed. While it will perform much better you won't see its full potential.

Kind of stuck between a rock and hard place but its your money . You might just be better off living with what you have now till you can save some more money.
June 27, 2007 9:25:51 PM

Quote:
There would be no point to buying a new motherboard, you would have to get one that supports DDR2 ram, right now you are really in a pickle, you either can fork over the money, get a new mobo and ram or just get the video card and run it with your current motherboard at the reduced PCIe speed. While it will perform much better you won't see its full potential.

Kind of stuck between a rock and hard place but its your money . You might just be better off living with what you have now till you can save some more money.



Here I go again (hence the purchase of the dualvsta to postpone a Pcie card! :roll: )

Ok - if I have to buy DDR2 then can someone please advise me of a motherboard sub £40 which will run my E6600, Pcie x16 and support FSB of 1066?? PLEASE!

Also - is the CPU frequency quoted above correct?

Many thanks!
June 27, 2007 10:36:47 PM

Yeah you're cpu speed is correct, i think you better off sticking with your current setup and not trying to buy a cheap 40 board.
June 28, 2007 11:19:27 AM

Quote:
Yeah you're cpu speed is correct, i think you better off sticking with your current setup and not trying to buy a cheap 40 board.



I can't see what's wrong with getting a board sub £40 - it'll do everything I need won't it? i.e. Pcie x 16, FSB 1066, DDR2 etc??

I don't need anything else or is there something I'm missing?
June 28, 2007 12:15:05 PM

Well I don't know what motherboards you are looking at but the brands I have seen that I would trust (socket 775, PCIe, DDR2) are going for between £60 > £90. You'll need the same again for about 2gb of DDR2 as well. The 8800GTS are anywhere from £180 for a 320mb to £270 for a 640mb superclocked.

Just to get your PCIe speed up to x16 you'll have to spend quite a bit more.

Like Icy18 says......

Quote:
you either can fork over the money, get a new mobo and ram or just get the video card and run it with your current motherboard at the reduced PCIe speed. While it will perform much better you won't see its full potential.


I would go with the cheaper 8800GTS 320mb as it will do much better than the 7800 even on x4 as long as you are not running high resolutions where the extra memory of the 640mb would be better. Judging by the fact you only want to spend £40 on your MB I asume you don't have a 20"+ LCD monitor and would be better with the 320mb. Don't go for a superclocked model your paying extra for a factory overclock which you can quite easily do yourself (if the card will do it). There isn't that much to gain and don't forget you only have x4 anyway. Keep that extra money for other new bits like DDR2, or even DDR3, for when you decide/afford to upgrade again.
June 28, 2007 12:27:10 PM

Quote:
Yeah you're cpu speed is correct, i think you better off sticking with your current setup and not trying to buy a cheap 40 board.


Don't forget £40 is $80, you can get some quite decent mobo's for $80

LMAO, so you went with a crappy motherboard because you didn't want to upgrade your graphics card? And now weeks later you realise that it was your graphics card that was the problem anyway and are going to upgrade it anyway. AND you could have spent about the same by just getting a decent motherboard, new ram, an E43 or E63 and overclocking it past the speed of the E66 anyway.

Oh man, that's too funny.

anyway, you could get something like this;
http://www.misco.co.uk/applications/SearchTools/item-de...

Why people don't just flog their old machines to friends and build from scratch is a complete mystery to me.
June 28, 2007 12:51:12 PM

Major_Trouble:

I have a 19" TFT and would be going for the 320meg version.


andybird123:

I've never overclocked before so this wasn't an option for me.

As for a crappy board, well the only thing it didn't give me was 16x Pcie and that was my fault as I've only ever run AGP and didn't check it out properly

So the only thing I've lost out on is £39 for the dualVsta board - not really a big loss?

The only reason I got the board was because I spent £230 on a graphics card around 12 months ago and thought this would suffice.

BUT since getting the new processor I haven't seen a big enough improvement - so a new card is needed, if my board had 16x Pcie then no problem but it doesn't - so what ya gonna do eh?

I see the board you suggested only has a FSB of 800Mhz - do you know if this can be increased?

Thanks all.


P.S. Any more suggestions for a MB would be welcome.
June 28, 2007 12:59:47 PM

Board with pcie 4x or 16x i don't think so you will see any difference. I would go for the 8800 320mb than if you need more power its not lost. But make sure you have the psu to run the card.
June 28, 2007 1:07:47 PM

Don't forget parts are cheaper on your side of the pond. I don't know if I would recommend a 945 board when for a few dollars more you could get the faster FSB.

Give the guy a break he was advised by someone (on here?) to go for that board so it's not all his own work. Upgrading a PC is a great learning experience (especially if you do it cheaply). You get to see what actually makes the PC run better replacing 1 bit at a time.
June 28, 2007 1:16:21 PM

Quote:
Don't forget parts are cheaper on your side of the pond. I don't know if I would recommend a 945 board when for a few dollars more you could get the faster FSB.


I went through all the non "trade only" suppliers and couldn't find a 965 board for less than £60

I checked the other thread, he said cost was a major issue so people were advising that board alongside a E21 or E43 processor... cost was obviously not that much of an issue as he bought an E66 and is now about to buy another new mobo and graphics card!

I just think it's funny, people always go through these cost cutting excercises when really they should just decide what they want and save for it, rather than cutting corners and end up buying twice.
June 28, 2007 5:51:58 PM

Quote:
I went through all the non "trade only" suppliers and couldn't find a 965 board for less than £60

I checked the other thread, he said cost was a major issue so people were advising that board alongside a E21 or E43 processor... cost was obviously not that much of an issue as he bought an E66 and is now about to buy another new mobo and graphics card!

I just think it's funny, people always go through these cost cutting excercises when really they should just decide what they want and save for it, rather than cutting corners and end up buying twice.



I did what was right for me at the time - because I got a MB which was a very good price I could afford a higher spec CPU which had just been reduced by £100 locally and spending the extra also increased the amount of time before I had to buy another one.

The only downside to all this was that the board I bought didn't have Pcie x16 which by srgress's account won't make any noticable difference anyway?

I still can't get anyone to tell me why these low cost boards are so bad anyway as they do everything I need them to do - here's one I would go for at only £42:

http://www.ebuyer.com/UK/product/124855

I appreciate your help on the technical side of things and that's all I want from here - I feel bad enough that I have to fork out more money (if I actually have to) because I didn't notice the lack of x 16 support without having to hear how you would have done it so much better. :roll:

Cheers.
June 28, 2007 5:56:32 PM

I like the Gigabyte one that was linked earlier, regardless there is nothing wrong with the mobo you have picked out, it just won't be able to overclock. If you have no desire to then you'll be fine.
June 28, 2007 6:02:07 PM

Quote:
I like the Gigabyte one that was linked earlier, regardless there is nothing wrong with the mobo you have picked out, it just won't be able to overclock. If you have no desire to then you'll be fine.


Cheers - the only reason I preferred the MSI one is because it had a 1066 FSB while the Gigabyte didn't appear to...
June 28, 2007 7:01:15 PM

Ah i'm very sorry, you most definitely would want to go with the MSI one as you probably know your cpu would require a 1066mhz fsb to run at its specified speed.
June 28, 2007 7:21:30 PM

Upgrading from 7800GS to 8800GTS 320 will make a huge difference.

7800GS 3DMark 2006: ~3800
8800GTS 3DMark 2006: ~7500

You will double your games performance and also have support for DX10.
June 28, 2007 8:01:43 PM

Quote:
Upgrading from 7800GS to 8800GTS 320 will make a huge difference.

7800GS 3DMark 2006: ~3800
8800GTS 3DMark 2006: ~7500

You will double your games performance and also have support for DX10.


Superb - I like those numbers!

After all the advice I now have another decision - the 320 or the 640meg? As I can get a 640meg (OC not superclocked) for another £25 or so and I have a 19" TFT widescreen and play games such as Oblivion which have large textures - the money is rising fast!

Any suggestions on this?

ANyone else think the 4x Pcie wouldn't make much difference over the 16x??

Cheers.
June 28, 2007 8:09:02 PM

Stick with the 320mb, you could put the money toward more ram or system ram or somethng more useful.
June 28, 2007 11:53:28 PM

Quote:
Stick with the 320mb, you could put the money toward more ram or system ram or somethng more useful.


noted.
June 29, 2007 12:48:57 AM

I hear what ur saying motto... my recent cpu list with oc speed...

805D @ 3.8Ghz
925D @ 3.4Ghz
940D @ 3.6Ghz
E4300 @ 3.1-3.5Ghz

And to be honest... while the extra clocks DOES make a difference in video/photo apps, i saw diminishig returns VERY quickly in games.

My theory atm... with a modern dual core cpu, anything over ~2Ghz is gonna get u very little extra fps in games. WIth that regard ur MUCH better of spending that money on new graphics.
June 29, 2007 9:50:05 AM

Quote:
I hear what ur saying motto... my recent cpu list with oc speed...

805D @ 3.8Ghz
925D @ 3.4Ghz
940D @ 3.6Ghz
E4300 @ 3.1-3.5Ghz

And to be honest... while the extra clocks DOES make a difference in video/photo apps, i saw diminishig returns VERY quickly in games.

My theory atm... with a modern dual core cpu, anything over ~2Ghz is gonna get u very little extra fps in games. WIth that regard ur MUCH better of spending that money on new graphics.



Cool I hear what your saying - its just been a learning curve as several years ago I bought a new CPU and it made a big difference, now I suppose its mostly the GPU which makes the difference.

Does anyone else feel that the 4x Pcie wouldn't make that much of a difference (in terms of real world gaming)?

If this is the case I think I would rather buy in stages, e.g. new card then a little saving and then a new board with RAM??

Cheers.
June 29, 2007 10:51:08 AM

yeah i would just buy the card and then save up till you can get a better board and ram
June 29, 2007 10:58:26 AM

Quote:
I'm not sure how DDR that operates at speeds lower than the stock FSB of an E6600 will effect the speed.


it doesnt affect the speed, but obviously the system is slightly slower than one with a higher memory speed. (pssst...im still using DDR333 memory with my E6600...dont tell anyone..lol)

Quote:
What motherboard do you have?
Is it the asrock dual vista if it is you just made a very wtong choice because the PCI-e slot works at just 4x not full 16x.


i dont know about you, but last time i checked..it was only the 8800 series that were affected by the 4X bandwidth...and even then it was mainly COD2 that saw a big difference :p 

here is a scaling review for you : http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/2007/03/27/pci_express_sc...

plus since this board is soooo damn cheap...who really cares if i dont get the extra 10 fps in quake.. :roll:
June 29, 2007 11:14:01 AM

Quote:
I'm not sure how DDR that operates at speeds lower than the stock FSB of an E6600 will effect the speed.


it doesnt affect the speed, but obviously the system is slightly slower than one with a higher memory speed. (pssst...im still using DDR333 memory with my E6600...dont tell anyone..lol)

Quote:
What motherboard do you have?
Is it the asrock dual vista if it is you just made a very wtong choice because the PCI-e slot works at just 4x not full 16x.


i dont know about you, but last time i checked..it was only the 8800 series that were affected by the 4X bandwidth...and even then it was mainly COD2 that saw a big difference :p 

here is a scaling review for you : http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/2007/03/27/pci_express_sc...

plus since this board is soooo damn cheap...who really cares if i dont get the extra 10 fps in quake.. :roll:


Cheers mate - really interesting, I think buying the card now will be fine, I can't see that it will make any noticable difference (having only Pcie x4) at the moment but I'll definetly upgrade board and RAM in the next two or three months.

Who knows - might even get some decent cash for the 7800GS, 2gig DDR1 and board on ebay or something?
July 6, 2007 11:21:09 AM

Well if you would have had the 8800gtx it would have made a very big difference but with only a 8800gts 320mb and playing at 1280x1024 it wouldn't make that much of a difference.
Look at this review
http://www.ocworkbench.com/2006/asrock/4coredual-vsta/g...
It's exactly the same board as yours but with quad core support i hope the review will be helpful.
!