Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

8800 GT vs 8800 GTS (G92) at 1680x1050

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 5, 2008 7:35:36 PM

I'm perpetually shopping for a new computer. For the longest time I have been switching between the 8800GT and GTS(G92) not deciding which one is the better card. I was initially going for a 1600x1200 or 1900x1200 resolution, but have since settled down to a 22" 1680x1050 monitor. I have been trying to compare reviews for the GT and GTS, but I can't find a direct comparison between the two at this resolution (benchmarks are usually jump from 1280x1024 to 1600x1200, leaving me to wonder about that gap). I'm trying to build an economically feasible machine while maintaining top gaming performace at 1680x1050 resolution (I can't afford the quality of picture and framerate I demand on a higher resolution). So my question is this; how do the GT and GTS compare at the 1680x1050 resolution? Can anyone find a head-to-head comparison at this resolution? Thanks.

March 5, 2008 7:41:05 PM

Whatever the case is, 8800GTS 512 will always beat 8800GT
Related resources
March 5, 2008 7:52:11 PM

It doesn't beat it by much. But does have the better dual slot rear venting cooler too to justify the extra money. Until MSI came out with the Quad pipe 8800GT, I was all for people going for the GTS for the cooler alone. The reference 8800GT cooler is to be avoided IMO (replaced both of mine with VF900's).
a c 171 Î Nvidia
March 5, 2008 7:57:30 PM

review_benchmark_hun said:
Whatever the case is, 8800GTS 512 will always beat 8800GT

Not true, if the contest was 'which has the loudest cooling fan?' or 'which costs less regardless of performance factors?' then the GT wins :kaola:  for the res the OP is asking about I would/have chosen the GT.
March 5, 2008 8:00:23 PM

Most people with the GTS because as pauldh said it has a better cooler.
March 6, 2008 4:35:59 AM

Pauldh, thanks for the link. That was exactly what I was looking for. From looking at that, the GT and GTS are practically identical at 1680x1050. I suppose the question now is; does the improved cooler of the GTS really worth the extra $60-$80 price differential? I thought I read that the cooler on the GTS gives it a much higher overclocking ceiling, although I'm not much of an overclocker.

Thanks for the feedback. Keep it coming if you have anything else.
March 6, 2008 4:42:56 AM

Ok, I just looked at the MSI quad pipe version and that seems the way to go. Does anyone know if it is as effective as the GTS setup? If so, it looks like I just shaved $100 off the new computer! Now if I only had around a grand to buy it right now...
March 6, 2008 8:04:30 PM

i've the same problem... and i think i'll go with the Zilent MSI 8800GT that is slight oc to 660Mhz with Zalman cooler(quad pipe). some ppl push it to >700.

with that cooling i think the GTS is not worth the extra $ for that resolution.
March 6, 2008 8:18:12 PM

Wait I don't see what the problem is...8800GTS G92 is a better product, period. Of course it costs more, but I've seen some very minor differences. This issue has been scrubbed pretty thoroughly in some other posts around here as well....
March 7, 2008 6:27:08 AM

The OP asks for an economically feasible card. I assume he means the price/speed ratio here.

In that respect the GT is the clear winner. You can get the 8800GT 512 MB for as little as 180,- € right now, in Germany at least. The GTS is 270,- € or more.

Sure, the GTS may be a tad faster, but if we're talking economics, a few percentage points at the end of the scale do not matter. The performance difference is very small compared to the price difference.

I can't comment on noise since I replace the coolers of my video cards with water cooling anyway.
March 7, 2008 6:58:36 AM

review_benchmark_hun said:
Whatever the case is, 8800GTS 512 will always beat 8800GT


The 8800GTS will do it all much cooler as well do to the dual slot cooler. The 8800GT has the worst GPU cooler to date!
a b Î Nvidia
March 7, 2008 11:52:27 AM

what I have advised people is, if you don't mind the extra for the GTS, get it. if your budget is in the GT range, get one with a good cooler. Like the MSI card with heatpipe cooler. stock vs stock the GTS has a very slight advantage, but not that much. Stock vs stock the GTS will run cooler and OC higher. The GT with a good cooler will overclock just as good as a GTS with stock cooler. It's really your call. Just stay away from Gt's and stock coolers, they run hot and the fans get loud.
March 7, 2008 12:14:22 PM

what to buy is decided by the game you play , not the benchmark score your had seen.

actually, when you play common games ,GT=GTS .


March 7, 2008 12:32:10 PM

I have the gt with a 22inch monitor and use the 1650x1050 widescreen........Everything plays great......Crysis is the only exception as I have to used medium settings for absolutely no lag....it still looks great though
March 7, 2008 12:33:22 PM

Ooops......I have gt......too
March 7, 2008 1:13:16 PM

jay2tall said:
what I have advised people is, if you don't mind the extra for the GTS, get it. if your budget is in the GT range, get one with a good cooler. Like the MSI card with heatpipe cooler. stock vs stock the GTS has a very slight advantage, but not that much. Stock vs stock the GTS will run cooler and OC higher. The GT with a good cooler will overclock just as good as a GTS with stock cooler. It's really your call. Just stay away from Gt's and stock coolers, they run hot and the fans get loud.



I second all of that. Note that he is a GTS owner and I'm a GT owner ;) 
!