8800 gts vs 7950 gx2

hmm, i have looked at all the charts and it seems the 7950 gx2 is better than the 8800 gts is there any reason to go buy the 8800 gts then? since the 950 gx2 is faster and cheaper?

http://www23.tomshardware.com/grap [...] &chart=318

Well, you'd be giving up DX10 support to go with that 7950GX2 AND you'd have to deal with the complexities of an SLI video card setup... yes, I know it's one physical card, but that'll still be treated as an SLI setup. Compatibility issues, performance issues, etc.

I know where my money would be.

Well, you get what you pay for. Just be sure to look over benchmarks for the games you're wanting to play that show SLI results. Some games have shown tremendous benefits from an SLI setup while others have been a bit more disappointing. At some point DX10 support will become recommended then mandatory... so that's just something else to keep in mind. Even at those price points, I'd still be looking to the 8800 series.

Again, you need to look at the benchmarks for the games you're interested in playing and make your determination from that as well as the price. The ATI card has made considerable improvements since its initial release thanks to some pretty amazing driver updates. Will it keep getting better forever? Nah... is it at least competitive? Yes. If I absolutely HAD to buy a card right now it'd probably be a 320 MB GTS... but that's just me.

can you save your cash and wait a bit for the g92 cards to come out? you will NOT be dissapointed! in fact save a few bucks every day and you got it.

I made the mistake (perhaps) of getting the 8800 gts 320 too early (7 months ago) and my only choice for an upgrade was another for SLI...$450 CDN...ouch!

8800gts 320mb doesnt even do very well in DX10, if you've seen benches lol. It dies!
I purchased the 7950gx2 originally over the 8800gts 320, because at that point it was near £20 cheaper, beat it, and Dx10 wasn't anywhere near out.

Besides, theres hardly no screen quality difference between dx9 and dx10 yet and I doubt there will be for at least a year.

Even though I have an 8800gts 320MB and it runs every game (including Bioshock in dx10) maxed on my 1440x900 LCD, I would still recommend 640MB. I'm a little worried that 320MB might not be able to handle some upcoming games (Crysis) with max textures. Hopefully I'm wrong though.

As for people saying that the 8 series sucks in dx10, refer to my statement above regarding Bioshock in dx10 mode. I seriously have noticed no difference performance wise between dx9 and dx10 on this card, even with FRAPS. Most people are basing their opinions of these cards on crappy dx10 benchmarks such as Call of Juarez or Lost Planet. I have no doubt that future dx10 games will be much better optimized.

Oh and waiting for g92 isn't a bad idea, but there's no guarantees as to when it will be out, no matter what fudzilla says.

I agree, 8800GTS 640MB would be the min. DX10 card. Also, you get HDCP on the 8800, so eventually you can play Hi-Def stuff on your comp when it falls in price, unless the 7950 has HDCP in it. But if you are only buying for DX10, you are wasting your time for this hardware generation, way too wimpy.

i have seen many that say 8800 performs poorly in DX10 mode , as nhobo said forget DX10 ,

1_It will take 2-3 years for game to be fully DX10
2_There are many driver problems for DX10 patch for some games
3_If u see the screenshots , in most situations they dont have a lot of difference

All 8800 models , perform awesome in todays game in dx9 mode ,

The next time my 8800 GTS 320 disappoints me will be the first.

Any game, any demo, any res up to 1680x1050 (I can't go higher).

I $%& you not. Why even mess with that older card? If the memory concerns you just buy a 640.

I couldn't have put it better myself.