Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

8800GTS 640 vs 8800GTX?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
August 20, 2007 5:18:12 PM

Hello, I was split between these 2 cards at first until I saw the prices. Basically what you have in dollars I have in euros, which means you multiply your prices by 1.3 to get mine.

So my question is why the heck is GTX so costly when I can't see so much improvements on benchmarks except in 1600x1200 resolutions?

I was thinking of getting the Asus 8800GTS with 640 mb, reason is I work in 3d studio a lot and I often run out of video memory on my 6800GT, which is why I favor it more then the 320mb variant. Do you think it's a good choice?

Thanks! :hello: 

More about : 8800gts 640 8800gtx

a c 169 U Graphics card
August 20, 2007 5:46:17 PM

well i was stock in the same situation , but i went for 8800GTX , and i play @ 1280x1024 (might get a new monitor :D  )
August 20, 2007 6:19:06 PM

Well I have seen the real world difference between the two and the GTX does in fact blow it out of the water. Things to watch out for: Do you have enough room in your case? Do you have a good enough power supply? Those are the two questions you need to ask first and then also do you upgrade often? If the answers to the first two questions are yes and the last question no and you have enough cash to spend on the GTX without really putting you into a bind then I believe that it will be worth it. It all depends on your needs and cash situation. Hope this helps!

P.S. I would advise against getting either card with a huge OC on it because I have seen many problems with many different manufacturer cards and overheating. At most I recommend to my friends to get one that may have just a 25mhz OC on the core and memory left alone to avoid any problems and still have some more performance. But stock speeds on both cards run great!

Best,

3Ball
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
August 20, 2007 6:28:24 PM

InfiltratorSF said:

So my question is why the heck is GTX so costly when I can't see so much improvements on benchmarks except in 1600x1200 resolutions?


Supply/Demand, and lack of competition in the market segment.

Quote:
I was thinking of getting the Asus 8800GTS with 640 mb, reason is I work in 3d studio a lot and I often run out of video memory on my 6800GT, which is why I favor it more then the 320mb variant. Do you think it's a good choice?


Should be fine.
But for the same reasons you consider the GTX, nVidia knows you'll be tempted to spend $100€ + for the benefits of more memory, more bandwidth, and more shaders.
Really though for what you're doing how much more do you need the viewport accelerated when we're likely talking about 0.5-2fps?

Should be fine, and good choice in getting the extra memory (640 instead of 320), definitely worth it for a smaller premium. The GTX is tougher to call.

Edit: For games it'll be a little more noticeable at higher resolutions, but for professional apps. Personally unless you are really compeled to play at the highest resolution and AA then don't worry about it. I'd save the difference for a more powerful replacement in 2008, especially one that would be better at GPGPU as professional apps start to take greater use of the processing power. Depending on what you do Gelato may have some benefits to you later, and likely then 2GTSs would be better than 1 GTX.
August 20, 2007 7:20:17 PM

Thanks for the nice info guys. I'm not crazy about running games on all max but from what I read the 8800GTS can handle any game on highest detail/shaders and 1280x1024 with a low/no AA.

I got the Thermaltake shark case (pretty big) and I have a 400W power supply.
August 20, 2007 7:42:38 PM

with either one your 400 watt psu is doomed (not that I know what u have, I haven't been spying on you....)
a b U Graphics card
August 20, 2007 7:52:57 PM

Yeah the 400W PSU may be a problem unless it's a bullet-proof model like PC Power & Cooling, and even then, I'd say you may run into trouble. It's worth testing briefl, but I doubt it'll handle a GF8800GTS-640 (or 320).
August 20, 2007 7:58:45 PM

umm ape? it was a joke I have no idea who he his or what his psu is
August 20, 2007 8:31:25 PM

InfiltratorSF said:
So my question is why the heck is GTX so costly when I can't see so much improvements on benchmarks except in 1600x1200 resolutions?


You answered your own question: the GTX is only for people who play at super-high resolutions.

For them, it may very well be worth it.
a b U Graphics card
August 20, 2007 8:40:05 PM

spuddyt said:
umm ape? it was a joke I have no idea who he his or what his psu is


Well he put 400W PSU above your post, so I was replying to that, not just yours, just agreeing if that is the case 400W is going to be tight unless it's bullet proof. If only you'd mentioned it and not him, I proabbly would've ignored it until confirmed.
August 20, 2007 10:47:27 PM

Thanks for the info guys, I guess I'm gonna have to toss in a PSU to my total (as I'm upgrading my mobo, processor, ram and gfx).
August 20, 2007 11:41:35 PM

omg that was blind of me, I didn't spot the above post!
!