Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

7900GS on Crysis

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
November 15, 2007 5:05:26 AM

Anybody have experience with this? how bout with bioshock, call of duty 4 or oblivion?

More about : 7900gs crysis

November 15, 2007 6:11:22 AM

I've played the Crysis demo and I own Bioshock. My 7900GS keeps up plenty well, even for a 22" LCD.

Granted, we all wish we could have an Nvidia 8800 or AMD 3800, but my 7900GS for $100 purchased last June still has plenty of game left.
November 15, 2007 6:12:15 AM

I have a 7900gs, and it runs Oblivion decently. I can't say for the others. I imagine Crysis will bring it to it's knees.
Related resources
November 15, 2007 6:29:50 AM

I have a 7950GX2 and it runs CRYSIS on medium settings at 1680X1050,none too shabbily I might add.Same things goes for BIOSHOCK.A little jumpy at first,but ran very smooth after the initial start up.Have fun.

Dahak

M2N32-SLI DELUXE WE
X2 5600+ STOCK (2.8GHZ)
2X1GIG DDR2 800 IN DC MODE
TOUGHPOWER 850WATT PSU
EVGA 7950 GX2 500/1200
SMILIDON RAIDMAX GAMING CASE
ACER 22IN WS LCD 1680X1050
250GIG HD/320GIG HD
G5 GAMING MOUSE
LOGITECH Z-5500 5.1 SURROUND SYSTEM
500WATS CONTINUOUS,1000 PEAK
WIN XP MCE SP2
3DMARK 05 13,685
November 15, 2007 8:41:54 AM

Patches to the full game and latest nvidia drivers should add 10% I would say to performance compared to the demo with drivers from a month ago.
Medium at say 1152x864 or maybe even 1280x1024 should be within reach.
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2007 11:39:13 AM

neo_weapon said:
Anybody have experience with this? how bout with bioshock, call of duty 4 or oblivion?

There are better cards for the money if you are buying new. An X1950 pro for examaple would be better in all those games.
November 15, 2007 5:54:42 PM

HD3850pro 256mb I think im going to have to say for a basic card...
November 15, 2007 6:30:15 PM

pauldh said:
There are better cards for the money if you are buying new. An X1950 pro for examaple would be better in all those games.



Damn, you are right, but it does cost about 40 bucks more on newegg...
November 15, 2007 8:04:22 PM

neo_weapon said:
Damn, you are right, but it does cost about 40 bucks more on newegg...


$40 bucks? Cheapest 7900 GS is $120 and the cheapest X1950 PRO is $132 on Newegg right now.
November 15, 2007 8:12:51 PM

cleeve said:
$40 bucks? Cheapest 7900 GS is $120 and the cheapest X1950 PRO is $132 on Newegg right now.



there's a rebate for the foxconn, making it 30 bucks cheaper.
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2007 8:12:52 PM

neo_weapon said:
Damn, you are right, but it does cost about 40 bucks more on newegg...

$105 AR is $5 above the cheapest 7900GS also after rebate.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Or a 512MB with quiet cooler for $130 AR which is cheaper than the only 512MB 7900GS on newegg:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


Lets look at the games you mention to see if it's worth the $5.

Crysis: easy victory for the 1950 pro
http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=698&p=2

Call of Duty 4: X1950 pro more than 50% faster than 7900GT even
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/call_of_duty_4_demo...

Oblivion: 100% more performanc ein the most GPU intensive Foliage
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_geforce_8600...

Bioshock: X1950 pro > 7900GT
http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=681&p=8

And throw in UT3 for the final nail in the coffin ;) 
X1950 pro more than 100% better than the 7900GS:
http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=693&p=5

And so you don't think it's a fluke, X1950 pro even beats the 7900GTX:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3128&p=4


Anyway, again, for a $5 difference, a clean sweep victory in the 4 games you mention, you'd be nuts to buy the aging 7900GS. After looking over those charts it should be an easy decison. Once an OC'ed 7900GS = 1950 pro, but that trend is changing quickly in many newer big titles.

Anyway, IMO the HD2600XT is better than the 7900GS too, often crushing it without fsaa. But while it takes a big hit eneabling fsaa, really what new titles can the 7900GS handle fsaa anyway and show a reason to buy it.
November 15, 2007 8:23:38 PM

furthermore, i'm not sure how good gecube is....

foxconn seems more reliable.
November 15, 2007 8:29:14 PM

If I were to save a couple bucks more, I'd skip the 7900 GS and X1950 PRO and pay the $180 for the new Radeon 3850, which is in stock on newegg right now and will tear the 7900 GS and X1950 PRO to shreds... especially on Crysis.

At least until 8800 GT prices/availability changes to the point where you can buy one for under $300, which looks like it may be after christmas.


On a side note, Gecube seems to have an OK rep nowadays. A few years back they weren't considered as good though.
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2007 8:30:21 PM

Quote:
That's the 512MB 1950PRO which cost much more than the $5 differential

Notice the 7900GT is not only a faster card than the 7900GS, but it too has 512MB in that link and the X1950 pro crushes it too. Hey it's your money so go for what you want. I'm just trying to help and keep you from getting crappy performance for your dollar.

IF you just like NVidia, then at least grab the 8600GTS as it's spanking the 7900GS too. If you want to put you first and not a company/brand, grab the X1950 pro.


November 15, 2007 9:14:23 PM

I'm running a 7900GS (500mhz core, 690mhz memory) with an Athlon X2 @ 2.5GHz and 2GB ram pushing a 1360 X 768 LCD. In Crysis with everything at medium I was getting a FPS in the low 20's on average, with it dipping into the upper teens when there was a lot of foliage or action. It looked sweet and it never got to jumpy. I don't think I would play multiplayer at medium settings, but for single player gaming it was fine. Bumping the card up to 579mhz core, 828mhz memory, gets me 3, maybe 4 fps.
a b U Graphics card
November 15, 2007 9:14:43 PM

Quote:

At least until 8800 GT prices/availability changes to the point where you can buy one for under $300, which looks like it may be after christmas.

Yeah, I preordered an 8800GT KO from amazon almost right away and confirmation came back saying shipping 12/31/07 LOL. It's rediculous. I first assumed it was a conservative estimate, but right now I wouldn't expect it before Christmas. But for $279 shipped it would be an ok price compared to the $316 shipped (+tax for me) that newegg wants when they come in stock for a 10 minute window. Good luck finding an 8800GT for $100 more than an X1950 pro is currently, it aint happening this year.

November 15, 2007 9:49:01 PM

pauldh said:
Quote:

At least until 8800 GT prices/availability changes to the point where you can buy one for under $300, which looks like it may be after christmas.

Yeah, I preordered an 8800GT KO from amazon almost right away and confirmation came back saying shipping 12/31/07 LOL. It's rediculous. I first assumed it was a conservative estimate, but right now I wouldn't expect it before Christmas. But for $279 shipped it would be an ok price compared to the $316 shipped (+tax for me) that newegg wants when they come in stock for a 10 minute window. Good luck finding an 8800GT for $100 more than an X1950 pro is currently, it aint happening this year.


I picked an 8800GT at a local Best Buy for $279.99 + tax using the in-store pickup option here: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8594381&st=8800gt&lp=1&type=product&cp=1&id=1190678470708

Almost every store in my area was out but I did manage to find a store that had some left. Maybe there's a store in your area that has them in stock too.
a b U Graphics card
November 16, 2007 10:19:08 PM

Hey thanks. All the stores near me are out of stock. I really want an evga though anyway as I want the option to trade up toward a dual slot G92 based 8800GTS.
November 16, 2007 11:10:17 PM

pauldh said:
Quote:
That's the 512MB 1950PRO which cost much more than the $5 differential

Notice the 7900GT is not only a faster card than the 7900GS, but it too has 512MB in that link and the X1950 pro crushes it too. Hey it's your money so go for what you want. I'm just trying to help and keep you from getting crappy performance for your dollar.

IF you just like NVidia, then at least grab the 8600GTS as it's spanking the 7900GS too. If you want to put you first and not a company/brand, grab the X1950 pro.



8600GTS spanking the 7900GS???? where do you see that? They are pretty even, just about dead even......and the X1950 pro will not be all that much better......for Crysis he should go for a high end card like the 8800GT or the Radeon 3870.....or he could keep his 7900GS and be happy with it a while longer as it does fairly well. It should play Crysis at least at 1280X1024 on medium settings.
a b U Graphics card
November 16, 2007 11:15:54 PM

i got 7900GS

can play Oblivion on Ultra High (i click in luncher) then add 2x AA, and inside game modify shadow and grass settings a bit and with all that i can get 30 min on most intensive screens but mostly 40-70fps.

all the games before Crysis play well, like Supreme commander, Fear, Age of Empires 3, Lord of the rings online, WoW on maxx everything. can play Crysis demo on med to low settings ok ~20+ fps

i also can overclock my 7900GS adding +100 to memory and GPU. to 550/760. and max my card went was 580/780 thats without any artifacts but i bring it down to round +100 :)  adding ~10fps on most games

7900gs is great card and served me well for a year now, planing on keeping it for year longer or more
a b U Graphics card
November 16, 2007 11:41:49 PM

itotallybelieveyou said:
7900GS is a great card. Get it


Look at those links I posted and tell my why the 7900GS is a great card when the X1950 pro for $5 more crushes it in his games. Hey, I still have a 7800GT CO and have bought a couple 7900GS's which were best bang for the buck at the time, but IMO they are aging badly and getting spanked in too many new games to be good in their current price range.
November 16, 2007 11:53:58 PM

pauldh said:
Look at those links I posted and tell my why the 7900GS is a great card when the X1950 pro for $5 more crushes it in his games. Hey, I still have a 7800GT CO and have bought a couple 7900GS's which were best bang for the buck at the time, but IMO they are aging badly and getting spanked in too many new games to be good in their current price range.



Here are the reasons..........

1. He has a great card and can OC to get a few more frames.....the card is still more than adequate for most games
and ok for newer games.

2. IMO the X1950pro is not that much of a major increase in fps to justify throwing away 100 bucks. I would not say
it crushes it. Those are strong words. The 8800GT crushes his card the X1950pro is a moderate increase...now
maybe I would agree with an upgrade to a 1950XT...but at this point in the game he should just keep the
7900GS.

3. A more appropriate upgrade would be a 8800 card or a 3800 card.
a b U Graphics card
November 17, 2007 12:00:27 AM

caamsa said:
Here are the reasons..........

1. He has a great card and can OC to get a few more frames......


You are missing the fact he does not have a 7900GS he is looking to buy a 7900GS!!!! Why buy a card for $5 less that loses bigtime in the games you want to play?????? Look at the OP and my links above and you shall see more clearly.

and, 50-100% (UT3, Oblivion, COD4) isn't a crush too you? For the same price it's a pummeling IMO.


BTW, yeah I would never recommend anyone upgrade from a 7900GS to a X1950 pro. HD3850 or above would be a nice boost though. But I am amazed how many people keep recommending buying the 7900GS now, they seem stuck on old benchmarks/games and not looking at the recent reviews of newer cards that include a 7900GS or GT in the review.
November 17, 2007 12:15:11 AM

LOL now that changes everything. Yes the X1950pro would be great....my bad......thought he already had one :??: 

I think if he can manage a few more bucks the 3850 would be nice. It is going for around 170 bucks.

a b U Graphics card
November 17, 2007 12:20:14 AM

Yeah, 3850 would be sweet. Anand's revie shows it's about 100% faster on average than a 7950GT and despite half the memory the lead grows at higher res. Seeing the once mighty X1950XTX struggling vs. a $179 card is pretty amazing site. http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3151&p=9
November 17, 2007 12:30:57 AM

pauldh said:
Yeah, 3850 would be sweet. Anand's revie shows it's about 100% faster on average than a 7950GT and despite half the memory the lead grows at higher res. Seeing the once mighty X1950XTX struggling vs. a $179 card is pretty amazing site. http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3151&p=9


Hey are you picking on my 7950GT...... :cry: 

Yea there is always some thing better just around the corner. I paid $270.00 for my 7950GT....nice card, runs cool, it is quiet as can be, saves power and does decent in games. I can play the crysis demo at 1280X1024 with settings on high and it runs fairly well. Just wish I had waited a little longer and got the X1950XT but I wanted a card and the 1950XT cards were not out yet......O well.....
November 17, 2007 1:42:56 AM

I was in the same position 4 months ago.

I choose the 512MB X1950PRO and im glad i did

I run COD 4 @ 1680x1050 on high detail and get between 30 - 60 frames. (oc of 600/1400 on passive cooler)

I was expecting id be pushing it trying to get it to run at medium lol and with 4xAA it drops me down to 25 - 45 frames so i disabled that.

Oblivion runs better on ATi cards of the generation is question (x1900 / 7900) and has a MUCH better MINIMUM frame rate outdoors making ATi cards of that era overall beter for that game.


I havnt tried crysis yet, on purpose.
I dont want to play it on any less than high detail. Ill wait to theres a good 300 card that will do this for me.

BTW play call of duty 4....u wont regret it. The graphics on a big screen......lets just say they some talented 3D modelers working for activision....


X2 4200@2.5
2gig RAM
a b U Graphics card
November 17, 2007 3:07:44 AM

caamsa said:
8600GTS spanking the 7900GS???? where do you see that? They are pretty even, just about dead even......and the X1950 pro will not be all that much better.......


Right in the links I provided, did you look at them?

The crysis link I posted shows the 8600GTS averaging 34.8 vs 25 fps for the 7900GS. That makes it 39% faster, which is far from dead even.
http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=698&p=2

Move onto Oblivion, it's 30.5 fps for a factory OC'ed 8600GTS vs 13.8 for a 7900GS, which is a 121% lead for the 8600GTS OC.
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_geforce_8600...

UT3, 44.7 fps for the 8600GTS, vs 20 fps for the 7900GS, making for a 123% lead for the 8600GTS.
http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=693&p=5

I don't have a Call of Duty direct comparison, but we can see the 8600GTS matches the X1950 pro in that one, http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/amd_rv670_performan... ,which in turn has a 62 % lead on a 7900GT from the same site in this review: http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/call_of_duty_4_demo...


Anyway, these links were listed above, but it's pretty clear that in these new titles, the 7900GS is way behind the X1950 pro and 8600GTS. Simply no contest and a massive OC wouldn't change a thing either to erase 39%, 121%, 123%, and 62% sized leads. Anyway, I've said it long ago, but people need to rethink where the 7900GS and 7900GT actually stack up now, they are not dead even, not even OC'ed. They are equal in older games, keep up in some new games (especially without fsaa), but get crushed in many new games by the X1950 pro and 8600GTS. Shoot, there IQ (AF and texture shimmering at default driver settings) and feature set(no fsaa+HDR many games) is worse too.

Anyway IMO X1950pro >= 8600GTS > 7900GS and anyone buying a 7900GS for about the same prices as these is getting ripped off.
a b U Graphics card
November 17, 2007 3:20:02 AM

caamsa said:
Hey are you picking on my 7950GT...... :cry: 
Nope, you can't always help changing situations(games, drivers) and if it was good for the price when you bought it, and served you well, you did well buying it. But way back when Oblivion and NFS:Carbon came out we did discuss the trend of the X19xx architecture really shining and how that it may very well be a sign of things to come. (Grape, Cleeve, GW, etc. would remember these talks here).

But, Like I said, I bought two 7900GS's at great prices(for testing and builds) and had an evga 7800GT CO in my main gaming rig for a short while (until seeing it blew at Oblivion so I quickly moved it to a spare rig and bought a new card). I can tell ya, having spent alot of time in Oblivion on a 6800U, 7800GT, X1800XT, X1950XT, and 8800GTS, the jump from 7800GT to X1800XT was huge. Much much bigger than from 6800U to 7800GT.

Anyway, before calling it a night I wanted to add this for other people reading this....... (currently at Newegg) With X1950 pro at $105 AR, 8600GTS $115 AR, HD2600XT $85 AR, And 7900GS $100 AR, the 7900GS is my last choice of the 4 offering the worst bang for the buck for the games mentioned in the OP. And yeah, if you can swing an HD3850, 3870, 8800GT, then go for it.
November 17, 2007 1:04:35 PM

pauldh said:
Nope, you can't always help changing situations(games, drivers) and if it was good for the price when you bought it, and served you well, you did well buying it. But way back when Oblivion and NFS:Carbon came out we did discuss the trend of the X19xx architecture really shining and how that it may very well be a sign of things to come. (Grape, Cleeve, GW, etc. would remember these talks here).

But, Like I said, I bought two 7900GS's at great prices(for testing and builds) and had an evga 7800GT CO in my main gaming rig for a short while (until seeing it blew at Oblivion so I quickly moved it to a spare rig and bought a new card). I can tell ya, having spent alot of time in Oblivion on a 6800U, 7800GT, X1800XT, X1950XT, and 8800GTS, the jump from 7800GT to X1800XT was huge. Much much bigger than from 6800U to 7800GT.

Anyway, before calling it a night I wanted to add this for other people reading this....... (currently at Newegg) With X1950 pro at $105 AR, 8600GTS $115 AR, HD2600XT $85 AR, And 7900GS $100 AR, the 7900GS is my last choice of the 4 offering the worst bang for the buck for the games mentioned in the OP. And yeah, if you can swing an HD3850, 3870, 8800GT, then go for it.


Ok I will give the card its due in newer games but if you look at Tom's VGA charts they do not show the 8600GTS doing that well in Oblivion with the same settings that you posted. Now I am not sure if they are exactly the same but it is the same resolution with 8xAF. What do you make of the big difference in the benchmarks?

Also Tom's has the 7900GS listed in their best gaming graphics cards for the money list along with the X1950 pro.

Direct quote from Tom's in their November guide.

"With no high-performance DirectX 10 cards under $200 to compete against it, the relatively powerful X1950 PRO is having a field day. Yes, the 8600 GTS is a DirectX 10 card, but it's more expensive than the X1950 PRO, and isn't in the same performance league when higher resolutions are used."

"The card's other competition is the 7900 GS. The X1950 PRO will usually beat the 7900 GS in most benchmarks at stock speeds, but the 7900 GS has a reputation for overclocking. The only other competition is its X1950 GT brother, which has an identical GPU, but slightly lower clockspeeds. It's difficult to recommend the GT, when it's only about $10 cheaper."

Now I admit I don't always think these guides are all that great esp the prices they quote. So does Tom's have it all wrong?





a b U Graphics card
November 17, 2007 1:31:16 PM

The Tom's charts are IMO somewhat useless. I'd rather base an opinion on many reviews from different sites rather than look at a huge chart that probably is a grouping of performance from various driver versions over time. They can be helpful if used right, but not as an only source. What drivers were they using for the 8600GTS? But really, from what I see they show an 8600GTS way ahead of a 7900GS in Oblivion(lol and my old X1800XT I bought just for Oblivion beatin' both): http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics_2007.html?modelx...



As far as the best cards for the money guide, I do like that guide. And it's very rare even on the forums, but I don't agree with the auther on the 7900GS being lumped with the X1950 pro anymore. I think that time has gone. He does explain the X1950 pro is generally ahead though (which to me is looking at games like Fear)and mentions the OC potential that made the 7900GS a nice option. But I think it should be updated to take into account that in new games like COD4, Crysis, UT3, etc. the X1950 pro is much better. He may very well do that in a future guide as those guides are written in advance and take time to be posted. Some of the reviews we have now he didn't have access to when he wrote that november guide. He goes by what he knows at the time he writes the article, and explains that prices and things can change. So I don't fault him, his guide is way more valuable IMO than the Tom's charts.

Also, he doesn't include rebate prices and takes the best price without considering rebates from newegg at the time of writing his article. But keep in mind, he can't put todays prices from the day you read the article into an article he wrote a month ago.
November 17, 2007 1:56:04 PM

Yea looking at that chart it is ahead. I think it is strange on the firingsquad site they run it at 1280X1024 with 8XAF and get approx 30 fps then in the tom's chart they have the same setting and only get about 16 fps. Both look like the same test to me with the same settings but that is a big difference in the fps. I can imagine the OC version doubles it performance. from 16 to 30 fps. Any ideas? Maybe better driver version...?

I was looking at the Best Buy add this morning and they have a BFG OC version of their 8800GT for $250.00 no rebates. That is actually a pretty good deal considering a lot of places are selling them for close to $300.00.

a b U Graphics card
November 17, 2007 2:58:37 PM

yeah, typically it's either differnt settings and/or a different benchmark area of the game. We definately can't compare numbers directly between reviews. For FS to average 30 fps in the foliage, I'd think they reduced the settings. I wish they would state more clearly the settings used in every game but there intent is to just compare the cards. Given that it's a midrange card review, it's understandable they reduced settings. But who knows as they don't tell ya. I could check the comments section. Typically after a review like this if you ask brandon int he comments, he is helpful to answer them.

edit: I'd say they are still using max details comparing their results here to that newer review:
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/oblivion_high-end_p...
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_geforce_8600...

Look at 7900GT in one vs 7950GT 7900GS in the other. Also X1800XT and X1950 pro are close in Oblivion.
November 17, 2007 6:34:45 PM

caamsa said:


Now I admit I don't always think these guides are all that great esp the prices they quote. So does Tom's have it all wrong?


I write those guides, and they have to last a month or so, so I try to include cards roughly on the same tier in case price fluctuates.

The X1950 PRO and 7900 GS are close, but at a $5 difference I'm with paul all the way here. The X1950 PRO is a better choice by far.

Having said that, if crysis is theis fellow's target, he'd be crazy not to spend an extra $40 for a 3850...

a b U Graphics card
November 18, 2007 1:38:58 AM

When do you get your hands on a 3850 or two Cleeve? ;) 
November 18, 2007 1:03:15 PM

cleeve said:
I write those guides, and they have to last a month or so, so I try to include cards roughly on the same tier in case price fluctuates.

The X1950 PRO and 7900 GS are close, but at a $5 difference I'm with paul all the way here. The X1950 PRO is a better choice by far.

Having said that, if crysis is theis fellow's target, he'd be crazy not to spend an extra $40 for a 3850...



Cleeve I enjoy your guides. I just find the prices in the video card guide seem to be off so it has the appearance of being old information and not up to date.

I wonder what you think of the 8600GTS VS the 7900GS>>>>???? I understand the 8600GTS is better in some of the newer games than the 7900GS, but at this time both cards are probably not a good choice as the newer cards seem to be getting better and better and cheaper and cheaper.

I would like to see some of these cards tested on a single core cpu just to see how they perform especially in Crysis. You did a guide a while back where you tested single core cpu's with a XP 2500+ up to a single core 3200+ I believe. Those were good articles since a lot of people still have single core cpu's but may be running a high end card. Any chance you will be doing any updates on those previous guides?






November 19, 2007 1:58:51 PM

8600 GTS vs. 7900 GS? When the 8600 GTS was newer it was an easy call, the 8600 GTS was wayy too expensive. Today, at $150 the 8600 GTS still looks to be $20 more than the 7900 GS.

It's a closer call now, but honsetly the 3850 makes the question irrelevant. For $30 more, the 3850 shows incredible gains over an 8600 GTS, something that performs in the range of the 2900 XT and 8800 GTS 320MB.

For the 8600 GTS to be viable, it's going to have to hit $125 to give it the price spread it needs from the 3850.


As for a single core, I might do another AGP review if the Ati brings out 3x00 cards for AGP, and if I do I'll probably include a few PCIe cards too, all on an Athlon64 3400+.
November 19, 2007 8:20:25 PM

cleeve said:
8600 GTS vs. 7900 GS? When the 8600 GTS was newer it was an easy call, the 8600 GTS was wayy too expensive. Today, at $150 the 8600 GTS still looks to be $20 more than the 7900 GS.

It's a closer call now, but honsetly the 3850 makes the question irrelevant. For $30 more, the 3850 shows incredible gains over an 8600 GTS, something that performs in the range of the 2900 XT and 8800 GTS 320MB.

For the 8600 GTS to be viable, it's going to have to hit $125 to give it the price spread it needs from the 3850.


As for a single core, I might do another AGP review if the Ati brings out 3x00 cards for AGP, and if I do I'll probably include a few PCIe cards too, all on an Athlon64 3400+.


Cool, I am sure a lot of people would like to see how Crysis does with a single core cpu and a 8800GT. Thanks for the response.
November 19, 2007 10:28:44 PM

I got Crysis yesty... I have e6600 and 7900GT with Dell 2407 and at 1920x1200 (native) its a slide show... to get anything decent it has to be set to medium with low res. and ive seen an 8800GT doing it easy at 1920x1200
a b U Graphics card
November 20, 2007 1:10:35 AM

I'll be playing crysis on an 8800GT and FX-55 pretty soon. Also plan on popping in a X2 4200+ for comparison.
November 20, 2007 2:06:58 AM

pauldh said:
I'll be playing crysis on an 8800GT and FX-55 pretty soon. Also plan on popping in a X2 4200+ for comparison.


Would like to hear what your results are.....esp with the 4200+.
November 20, 2007 2:27:20 AM

Im actually running on a fx-55 with a 7900gs overclocked. Runs pretty well at 1440x900 with all medium settings.
December 18, 2007 2:29:45 AM

cleeve said:
8600 GTS vs. 7900 GS? When the 8600 GTS was newer it was an easy call, the 8600 GTS was wayy too expensive. Today, at $150 the 8600 GTS still looks to be $20 more than the 7900 GS.

It's a closer call now, but honsetly the 3850 makes the question irrelevant. For $30 more, the 3850 shows incredible gains over an 8600 GTS, something that performs in the range of the 2900 XT and 8800 GTS 320MB.

For the 8600 GTS to be viable, it's going to have to hit $125 to give it the price spread it needs from the 3850.


As for a single core, I might do another AGP review if the Ati brings out 3x00 cards for AGP, and if I do I'll probably include a few PCIe cards too, all on an Athlon64 3400+.


yes id love to see what you get. im on a 3500+ venice,nec 17"crt and a 7900gs...i average 21fps low 11 highest 41 on low at 800x600. lol
!