8800: GTS or GTX

[vonwombat]

Hello, recently I've bought a new PC with a BFG 8800 GTS 640mb graphics card. However, some people told me that the GTS won't be able to run the new DirectX 10 games like Crysis or Alan Wake with good performance, thus making the GTX or Ultra the only viable choice for such games. However, I game in 1280x1024 resolution, so I was wondering if I will really need a GTX to play the DirectX 10 titles that are about to come and should get rid of my current card and try getting a GTX or will my GTS handle them good? The card is paired with a Core 2 Duo 6420.
Thanks.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Look, no one knows just how good these 2 or any first gen DX10 cards will do, as there isnt any "real" DX10 games out, and there wont be aby real ones for some time to come. The current DX9 games that are or just have come out are finally using the DX9 capabilities, so itll be awhile before we see true DX10. Knowing this, time will tell and to guess at this point would be folly. Ill say it again, by the time real DX10 games comes out, therell be newer better DX10 cards out. If youre currently enjoying your experience with the card you have, then stay with it...tho the GTX IS a monster, but its also a huge card, that draws lots of power, and runs a lil hot, but still, a fantastic card.

 

[squall_leonhart]

Look, no one knows just how good these 2 or any first gen DX10 cards will do, as there isnt any "real" DX10 games out, and there wont be aby real ones for some time to come. The current DX9 games that are or just have come out are finally using the DX9 capabilities, so itll be awhile before we see true DX10. Knowing this, time will tell and to guess at this point would be folly. Ill say it again, by the time real DX10 games comes out, therell be newer better DX10 cards out. If youre currently enjoying your experience with the card you have, then stay with it...tho the GTX IS a monster, but its also a huge card, that draws lots of power, and runs a lil hot, but still, a fantastic card.

I agree that you just can't tell at the moment how good your card really is with DX10. However, in a resolution of 1280x1024 I'd be very surprised if you need a £300+ card to do it properly. We know Microsoft are inefficient, but surely not THAT inefficient!

 

[Stevemeister]

Don't listen to your advisers. The card you have will be more than adequate at the resolutions you are playing at.

 

[aevm]

OK, I'll be the 4th to tell you you'll be fine with the GTS. How many people told you you need a better card? We should have a vote :lol:

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Let me be the voice of dissent but also of reason.

No I don't tink your GTS will run Crysis with 'good performance', I think it will run it with 'acceptable performance' but you're likely going to have to compromise. However I don't think the gTX will be significantly better IMO, and selling your GTS and getting a GTX is a waste of money.

I personally think you should save the difference and consider re-buying a card once you know the whole story. Buying now is a shot in the dark liike people were doing preparing for Doom3 and HL2 before they launched. Stick with your solid and good for now GTS, and then when the future games finally come out, and are finally tested, then if you need more power sell your GTS, and then buy the card at the time that plays the game the best.

IMO, I wouldn't spend any more money on old hardware like the GTX, I'd wait for nV's 65nm replacements in the fall shortly after Crysis launches. IMO, those cards will have all the benefits: more shaders, less power consumption, and likely better refined design to deal with the DX10 future and not focus as much on the DX9 past.

I agree with the others about keeping your GTS and enjoying it, but I want to prepare you for the likely crushing impact of games like Crysis on our belief of how well the cards can handle the DX10 games when they come.

 

[aevm]

Ape, good to see you're still around! Moderator, nice...

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

Thanks, yeah I'm not sure if it means i have to act more 'reserved and respectable' or not.

 

[badge]

Thanks, yeah I'm not sure if it means i have to act more 'reserved and respectable' or not.

Wow congratulations. Nice going...I can get away with anything now. :lol: I was poking around the graphics card threads today hoping to learn about the 'now' cards too. I was thinking I would have to post a 'vs.' thread. Was looking at the ATI 2900 with 1gb RAM vs. the 8800gts 640. After all the reading, I'll keep my 7900 GTO 512 for now and wait until this fall to upgrade. Thanks for all the great information. Of course, if I have a really tough question I know who to ask

 

[apache_lives]

Hello, recently I've bought a new PC with a BFG 8800 GTS 640mb graphics card. However, some people told me that the GTS won't be able to run the new DirectX 10 games like Crysis or Alan Wake with good performance, thus making the GTX or Ultra the only viable choice for such games. However, I game in 1280x1024 resolution, so I was wondering if I will really need a GTX to play the DirectX 10 titles that are about to come and should get rid of my current card and try getting a GTX or will my GTS handle them good? The card is paired with a Core 2 Duo 6420.
Thanks.

there isnt too much difference between the GTS and the GTX anyhow?

 

[squall_leonhart]

there isnt too much difference between the GTS and the GTX anyhow?

The difference becomes more and more clear the higher the resolution becomes, to such a point where the GTX is your only option (e.g. 2560x1600). But at 1280x1024 they would both manage 60FPS easily. I think Ape's point about both cards being surpassed by newer models is probably true - if the 8800GTS can't play your DX10 game in 1280x1024 then the 8800GTX probably can't either, but by then there will be newer cards on the market.

 

[derek2006]

Call of Jaruez is a DX10 game and it plays like crap on even the GTX Ultra. And just has Acceptable performance when SLI'ed. So save up and wait for like the G92.

On the Call Of Jaruez Benchmark for my GTS I got average FPS of 19 if I remember correctly at 1280x 1024 and settings maxed.

 

[one_dollar]

Call of Jaruez is a DX10 game and it plays like crap on even the GTX Ultra. And just has Acceptable performance when SLI'ed. So save up and wait for like the G92.

On the Call Of Jaruez Benchmark for my GTS I got average FPS of 19 if I remember correctly at 1280x 1024 and settings maxed.

No Call or Jaruez is a DX10 patched game.

 

[squall_leonhart]

Soldier37, out of interest, which 8800 card do you have?

EDIT: OK I just noticed your signature. NOW I feel silly...

 

[one_dollar]

That rig is HOT!

 

[TheGreatGrapeApe]

I think you confuse 'designing a game to be unplaybable' and designing a game to max out current and challenge future hardware.

I don't think Crytek is going to make Crysis a game that gets manhandled by a GF8800 or HD2900, if anything it'll be the other way around.

It's just a guess on my part, but looking at the early sandbox demo, I'm certain that you will have folliage and particles turned down and many visuals (like motion blur) turned down for the current high end cards.

That's not to say they will suck, but you're not going to be able to play with all the sliders pushed to the max. Looking at cytek's interviews that's pretty much what they also say where even SLi and Xfire rigs will be hardpressed to play at high levels. The game is aimed to be 'playable' under a wide variety of conditions, but it's unlikely that these settings will be maxed in the same way we've come to expect 'maxed' sofar in the last of the DX9 titles.

Considering just about every gameplay demo sofar was played at medium resolution, I doubt many people will be playing Crysis @ 16x12 or above with any heavy level of AA with the sliders turned all the way up. I suspect particle effects and foliage will just about kill any card when they are turned on high.

Your advice of letting the system select settings and go with it is likely what we'll all be doing, but I expect bad news for anyone expecting to see the words MAX or Ultra in those defaults. But personally if my hardware at the time just makes the game look somewhat similar to what they intended and look 3/4 as good as the demos, I'll be more than happy.

Like we've said before we'll have to wait and see, but don't think that Crytek is going to make this easy on new systems. It'll be playable to a wide variety of systems, likely all the way down to the X800/GF6800 series and maybe beyond, but it's different making it accesible (like the way HL2 was all the way down to an original radeon/geforce) versus allow options for future cards to exploit that are beyond the power of current systems (like FartCry, HL2, and D3 all did).

Just my two frames worth, but I wouldn't start wasting money on a GTX for an unreleased game on the gamble that it might be able to add something more than just 5 fps.

 

[enewmen]

A 8800 GTS is MORE than enough now.
While the GTX is faster and consumes a lot of watts, I expect it will choak when real DX10 games come out in over a year. (no proof, just going by history). Get a 2nd or 3d gen. DX10 card at that time.
For now, enjoy all DX9 games and Crysis @ 1280x1024.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Addressing the Crysis wont be too hard on systems issue, I think back to Oblivion. No one could max that game out. Also, consider that people that still own the 1900 or 7900 series cards. The owners of those cards have spent a fair amount of money on them, and expect results, BUT, those same people DO expect results. Most wont settle for mid settings in games they HAVE to have. Theyll upgrade, if they havnt already. I agree once again with the APE, Crysis will present a challenge for any current card made, just like the top games of yesteryear did

 

[vonwombat]

Thank you very much for answering. I'll stay with my GTS for now, and in case it won't play DX10 games with acceptable performance I'll upgrade when the next gen cards come out. I suppose I could live with a few foliage and particles missing in Crysis, but it remains to be seen how much detail I'll have to sacrifice for good performance.