I know there is a lot of talk about the 8800 320mb vs 640mb. Most say that there isn't much of a difference unless you are playing at 1600x1200. Well, I have a w2007 monitor running at 1680x1050 and I want to know if I should pay the extra money for the 640mb or stick with the 320mb version. I am wanting to play games like Unreal Tournament 3, Bioshock, and Crysis on High settings in DX10.
I know people have the mp beta for crysis. How are the cards listed above working at my resolution? How about Bioshock since it has been released?
My system is:
----------------------------
Case - NZXT Apollo Black
MB - Gigabyte P35-Ds3R
CPU - q6600 (not overclocking)
RAM - 2gb Corsair XMS2 DDR2
PSU - 700w OCZ Gamexstream
Heatsink -Tuniq Tower
HD - 250gb Seagate Barracuda 7200rpm SATA
DVD - Sony/NEC DVD Burner SATA
OS - Windows Vista Business 32bit (free through the school)
Monitor - HP W2007 Monitor (1680x1050)
GPU - ????????????????????????????
I have seen many people saying it's dx9 (that are playing beta). And it is not optimized, if you can wait 5 days, the single player demo of Crysis will be out (and run smoother I hope).
PS I got a somewhat similar system (q6600, 2 GB DDR2, Vista 32bit) and only a POS place holder vid card, waiting for SP demo of crysis and my budget to determine which card I will get.
Bioshock ran on high with my Pentium IV AGP beast! LOL.. albeit I was playing at 1024 x 768 (bought a PC xbox controller and used my crappy 32" TV).
I dont know if this helps, but I play Bioshock @ 1440 x 900 with an 8800GTS 640 OC'd to 575/900 on a e6300 @ 2.33 on XP. I average 40-50 fps with everything maxed. I ran it at 2x and x16 AA with overide on and I didnt see much difference in fps. I still run it at 2x AA.
---------------
XPS M1730,IntelCore2Duo T9300@2.5GHZ,2x8800MGTX in SLI,4GB DDR2 667 RAM,DUAL 250GB 7200 RPM,VISTA HP with SP1,17" with 1920x1200 resolution
I think your best bet is to wait and see as it's so close now. If the 320MB version tanks compared to the 640MB, than it would be money well spent. And for the price of the 640MB version you could get a HD2900XT, which could destroy the 640MB GTS or it could be much worse. If you want the best crysis card for your budget, t's just too close IMO to buy now without knowing for sure. While with the retail game (& patches) and driver updates, it will be a while before we know the bi picture on Crysis, but at least demo performance (as was mentioned) would be a start in the right direction toward picking a card.
hey wait a minute , they have erased it from there , !!!
---------------
XPS M1730,IntelCore2Duo T9300@2.5GHZ,2x8800MGTX in SLI,4GB DDR2 667 RAM,DUAL 250GB 7200 RPM,VISTA HP with SP1,17" with 1920x1200 resolution
Message edited by Maziar on 09-20-2007 at 10:08:37 PM
---------------
XPS M1730,IntelCore2Duo T9300@2.5GHZ,2x8800MGTX in SLI,4GB DDR2 667 RAM,DUAL 250GB 7200 RPM,VISTA HP with SP1,17" with 1920x1200 resolution
I know there is a lot of talk about the 8800 320mb vs 640mb. Most say that there isn't much of a difference unless you are playing at 1600x1200. Well, I have a w2007 monitor running at 1680x1050 and I want to know if I should pay the extra money for the 640mb or stick with the 320mb version. I am wanting to play games like Unreal Tournament 3, Bioshock, and Crysis on High settings in DX10.
You did not skimp on your other components, they're all very good and not cheap. I'd say you should spend the extra money for the 640 MB or even an 8800 GTX. It will cost more but it will last longer and bring better performance. In some games the GTS 320 MB or GTS 640 MB will be good enough, so a GTX would be a waste, true, but in some games you will wish you had a GTX. At least that's how I thought when I got my PC recently.
