Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

is worth it getting an 8800 GTS right now?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 10, 2007 11:08:32 PM


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16814150171

I get $20 off instantly PAYPAL PROMOTION CODE- paypal20 so it would be $260 $30 rebate. $230 after rebate pretty good price dont you think?

Is there any big difference between 320mb vs 640 mb card i should know of it?
i want to get 640mb version for $300 i can't find it anywhere is there going to any price drop soon for this cards?what should i do now buy it or wait.

My current monitor is 17inch so i will be upgrading my monitor end of december to Samsung 22 inch monitor i believe that monitor is 1600x1200resolution.

More about : worth 8800 gts

August 10, 2007 11:36:39 PM

for the moment you shouldn't notice any great deal of difference between the 320 and 640 mb versions although that is a fairly large resolution so it might begin to be affected by the lower memory (and you won't be able to play GRAW 2 on max gfx either)
August 11, 2007 12:08:37 AM

That's a sickeningly good price - the GTS 320 is £180 = $360 over here in the UK.

spuddyt is right - even at that resolution you won't notice a difference in many current games.
Related resources
August 11, 2007 1:13:43 AM

some people saying not to get 320 mb version card i dont want to pay another $130 for 640 version should i?
a b U Graphics card
August 11, 2007 1:27:07 AM

Like everyone else said, there probably won't be a huge difference at that size and resolution. I did by the 640 and have a 22" Samsung monitor (which is absolutely awesome btw).

Remember to check the specs on the vid card and the monitor for resolution. The 22" has a resolution of 1680x1050, so keep that in mind too.

The price you have found is amazing. I think the future will tell if the onboard memory for the vid card will be enough for future games.

Good luck and have fun with your new purchases
August 11, 2007 1:34:59 AM

if you are happy with your gaming now, then you might want to skip this great deal. remember this gen of dx10 cards are BS.
a c 143 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
August 11, 2007 1:38:51 AM

Buy the 320 MB version. At 1600x1200 it does almost the same as the 640 MB version. For example in Oblivion you'd get 23.3 fps with the 320 MB and 23.7 fps with the 640 MB. The price is the best I've seen so far too :) 
August 11, 2007 2:24:01 AM

Having a larger fram buffer doesn't get you more FPS directly, but what it does give you is shutter free FPS gaming. It does allow you to turn on more eye candy without a performance hit. Oblivion uses more than 320MB of frame buffer, it runs really good at 400MB Vram if you've got it.

With my old 256MB card it shutters badly at times and thats because my graphics card is having to spill all the rest of my high res textures into system ram which in turn kills my FPS and slows everything down to a crawl. Having more Vram gives you more headroom so that your GPU doesn't have to swap Vram in & out of system ram.

As for waiting wait a little longer, wait till November!
August 11, 2007 2:32:18 AM

oh thx for clearing that out systemlord. Well i am not sure what to do i just want to play crysis, unreal tournament 2007,gears of war for pc :sleep: 
August 11, 2007 5:48:16 AM

mario2008 said:
oh thx for clearing that out systemlord. Well i am not sure what to do i just want to play crysis, unreal tournament 2007,gears of war for pc :sleep: 


Thats why Nvidia is planning to release their graphics monster along with the release of Crysis. Does anybody remember what the first HDTV's looked like and what type of connectors were used for digital video? They use RGB-HV and now here we are using DVI/HDMI, I feel sorry for the early ones that shelled out all that cash for something that didn't exist yet. By the time actual HD signals began transmitting everything was obsolete and new standards (HDMI/DVI) became the mainstream.

I hate being a beta tester for all the HDTV/videocards.
August 11, 2007 6:21:40 AM

it also depends on his resolution, it's mot gonna stutter at 1024 x 768, now if your @ 9999 x 6666, then yeah, otherwise don't worry about the 640. I don't see 640 meg versions of the GTS costing 300 anytime soon...if they do, I'll buy one too !
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
August 11, 2007 8:11:01 AM

as many said , if u dont play @ resolution higher than 1600x1200 , then get the 320 one , its pretty good and as Avem said , it performs like a 8800gts 640 in most games , also take a look @ xfx 8800gts xxx , it looks very nice
August 11, 2007 8:15:24 AM

royalcrown said:
it also depends on his resolution, it's mot gonna stutter at 1024 x 768, now if your @ 9999 x 6666, then yeah, otherwise don't worry about the 640. I don't see 640 meg versions of the GTS costing 300 anytime soon...if they do, I'll buy one too !


Also there are going to be games coming out that if you have less than 512mb Vram you will lose options, like how high you can go on texture quality regardless of how small you LCD is. There are already games out now that limit your selection, Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 1 & 2 will only allow you to select high quality textures if you have a card with at least 512mb of Vram and if you don't then your stuck on medium quality. If you building a new system and spending time & money why not have a great card that can do it all, why limit you options? Thats my take on it.
August 11, 2007 8:38:01 AM

Well then why not wait for cards with 1280 mb ?! You have to buy sometime, if you always wait a lil longer, you'll never buy, and a 640 gts, is more than 300, not much though.
August 11, 2007 8:55:01 AM

Isn't it the same with Doom 3, Quake 4 and Neverwinter Nights 2? You cannot select some graphics options if you don't have 512 or more RAM on the graphics card.
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
August 11, 2007 9:15:04 AM

yes DOOM3 and QUAKE 4 also need 512+
August 11, 2007 10:18:00 AM

systemlord said:
If you building a new system and spending time & money why not have a great card that can do it all, why limit you options? Thats my take on it.


I agree - if you're building a new system you should budget for your GPU first.

But the OP isn't building a new system and $230 is a fantastic price. The cheapest 640 I've seen was around $360. For anyone upgrading their GPU considering the 320 is a must.

You could just as easily tell anyone buying a 640 that they're a fool for not spending the extra $ on a GTX. Why settle for a card with disabled pipes and less memory when you could have the real deal?
August 11, 2007 11:17:36 AM

gts 320, get it, its cheap and performs well, thats not going to change, so yes it is worth getting
August 11, 2007 11:33:25 AM

SHOW me where you NEED 512 for features, BS...
August 11, 2007 12:19:15 PM

the 320mb version will be quite limited in DX10 games to resolution and settings, once the new proper DX10 cards come out will will likely be considered performance or mainstream sections.

Memory seems EXTREMLY important in DX10.
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
August 11, 2007 12:27:34 PM

Hatman said:

Memory seems EXTREMLY important in DX10.


absolutely right , u hit the spot !
August 11, 2007 2:35:48 PM

Hatman said:
Memory seems EXTREMLY important in DX10.


Is this conjecture or is there any evidence for this?
August 11, 2007 8:46:17 PM

royalcrown said:
Well then why not wait for cards with 1280 mb ?! You have to buy sometime, if you always wait a lil longer, you'll never buy, and a 640 gts, is more than 300, not much though.


You'll never buy, what??? Are you speaking for all of us or just you? :heink:  Waiting to November to buy the graphics card that you want is hardly a problem. And its 1024MB not 1280mb.
August 11, 2007 8:51:27 PM

He's saying that if decide to wait for newer hardware you'll never buy something because something new comes out all the time.
August 11, 2007 8:54:12 PM

royalcrown said:
SHOW me where you NEED 512 for features, BS...

if by NEED you mean to play it on max graphics, then there have been several examples (quake 4 graw etc.) if by NEED you mean to play it on minimum graphics... well you dont NEED a computer to play games on do you?
August 11, 2007 10:27:04 PM

Whether buying a 8800gts 320 is worth or not also depends on what card you are upgrading from. If you already have a decent card you can wait a bit more.

But if you really need a new card now, then just buy it. It's a great deal and it's NOT worth waiting till November – that's three months of your life and you are never going to get them back, while you'll always be able to buy a new card again when you feel it's necessary.

And we can’t really be sure that new generation of cards will come out in November, or Crysis for that matter.
August 11, 2007 10:35:09 PM

royalcrown said:
SHOW me where you NEED 512 for features, BS...


All were saying is that having less than 512MB limits your options, just wait till DX10 games come out there memory hungry. I can tell that you have less than 512MB by your responce. GRAW has been out for over a year and it likes lots of Vram as if your Vram is under 512 your stuck on medium textures aka limited.
August 11, 2007 10:44:31 PM

ethel said:
Is this conjecture or is there any evidence for this?



More Vram is already important in games like Oblivion, GRAW 1 & 2 and RTS games as well. I already see limits in my graphics card in those games mentioned above because of the limited 256MB. So don't tell us that less Vram is still good enough, 256MB in my opinion is below standard with todays new games.
August 11, 2007 11:05:31 PM

Texture levels are definitely an issue for some so I decided to check for myself.

So I loaded up FEAR again and set it to different texture levels at 1680x1050 (everything else maxed, 4xAA 8x AF, Nvidia control panel set to high quality). I can honestly say - I really struggled to see the difference between medium and high textures.

During the actual flow of gameplay I couldn't process any difference at all.

Is 640 better? Of course - it's only logical. If the extra scratch is no biggie get one, or better yet get a GTX.

A lot of people seem to like bashing the 320. Most of the bashing is based on a) the very few games that require more than 320 mb for high texture levels and b) conjecture about they think is going to happen in the future of GPUs and DX 10.

Don't worry about purchasing a 320. If you're upgrading from any sort of inferior card you'll love it. I'm sure it will be a viable gaming card for quite a while.
August 11, 2007 11:12:01 PM

lol i dont think bashing the 320 is justfied, there is so much more to bash about on the 8600's
August 12, 2007 12:24:39 AM

I swear. Some of you guys just know toooooo much. You sound just like the ones who told me not to buy my 8800 gts 640 (duh) last November, because the ATI card would be out in a month or so and it'd kick nvidia in the balls. Well I didn't listen, ATI didn't rock and roll, and all those guys can bite me. I don't much care that dx10 is apparently smoke and vapor (so far), as I've had close to a year of maxed-out eye-candy on everything I've played.

As for 320 vs 640, you can't run 16x AA and AF on a 320 at any decent modern res. It'll look good running Tetris, or the Sims, though. :non: 
August 12, 2007 8:14:54 AM

Yeah - I bet that 640 really rocks out on demanding games at 16xAA with all other options maxed.

The 320 vs 640 debate is so stupid; they're both great cards.

The only reason I get involved in these kinds of threads is because I think it's irresponsible to scare someone who is willing to stretch their budget to shell out those extra bucks and get a 320 over something like a 1950xt or a 8600 GTS because "the 320 is crap and they should only consider a 640".

Well - that and I just sort of like to argue :D 

August 12, 2007 9:29:29 AM

yes, get any graphic card that suit your need. i love my 8800gts 640 and would hold on to it till the next gen cards come. imo people cant really tell others what to get since everyone is different. but facts are facts, if you looking forward to real dx10 games then wait a bit longer. if you cant wait then imo 8800gts and 2900xt are really the best bank for the bang atm for gamers of coz.
August 12, 2007 9:42:31 AM

Well Crysis is a real DX10 game and they said it will run well on current hardware. Cevat Yerli said an 8800GTS could run the game on high settings(not ultra though, but it's likely that the G90 won't be able to do those as well, since they said that the game could be maxed only on hardware that will come out in ~ 2 years). At E3 the game ran on a 8800 and performed quite well, and they will work on optimization even more until the launch in November.
I plan to buy a 9800 when they come out, not because current cards are crap in DX10 as some say, but becuase of the raw peformance increase and DX10.1
August 12, 2007 10:47:09 AM

I just dont think on DX10 with everything maxed cards like the 8800gts will be enough. They aint crap but they will struggle, the 320mb one for sure because if its lack of memory..

Great for DX9 though.
August 12, 2007 11:00:14 AM

Nope, definitely not max, but then again, no current hardware will be able to max out Crysis, not even the GTX or Ultra. Sure, they will run the game better, but not way better than a GTS, especially an overclocked one.
a c 169 U Graphics card
a b C Monitor
August 12, 2007 11:59:56 AM

How do u say that ? There arent any specs out yet ? u may have seen some specs in some sites but EA hasnt released its specs yet ,also there was an article i saw in anandtech which was showing 2x8800GTX that ran Crysis maxed out , (it is about 1month old i think )
August 12, 2007 12:15:43 PM

Well i think that if you are happy with how your currebt card performs with most games, way upgrade now. May as well wait untill you are reduced to playing the latest games on low settings rather than spening £150 on a new card for a few more frames and higher AA.

My 7600GT runs everything ok at 1280x1024 with either high or medium settings, so I wondered you the hell I wanted to upgrade to a X1950XT, may as well wait an then get an even better card for the money.
!