Hardest GPU decision EVER!

[papasmurf211]

8800 GTS (G92) 1024 mb 730 mhz core 369.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814261006&Tpk=8800%2bgts%2b1%2bgb

9800 GTX 512 mb 675 core 329.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130339

8800 GTX 768 mb 289.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130072

Im willing to overclock, i will be running 1680 x 1050 and would like to raise AA and AF which is why i like the higher amounts of vram. Basically from what i can see in terms of performance the Palit GTS 1 gb would be the best choice, now i just want to know what u guys think.

 

[satanpro]

hmm, I never knew they made a gts g92 with 1024mb ram

 

[San Pedro]

I personally haven't seen a review of a 8800gts 1gb model, so I'm not sure how it compares to the 512mb model.

I think that $290 for a GTX is pretty good though, and EVGA is a great manufacturer.

 

[Lord Gornak]

That Palit card is beautiful...
I'd wait for more benchies though.

 

[pchoi04]

I would go 8800GTS 512MB. The 1GB memory will be bottle necked by its 256bit memory interface, so even at high resolution... difference is minimal.

I think the GTX is a good value at this point so for less than $300 I would also say go for it. But between a GTS G92 and a GTX G80 again the differences would be pretty minute.

 

[zeuseason]

If you are lookign longer-than-this-year term, I'd go with the 8800GTS 1GB.

If you are lookign for a time killer till better cards come out this year, I'd go 9800GTX and save a few dollars.

 

[Thinker_145]

That gts is a scam and it cannot use that much VRAM due to it's 256-bit bus.

Get the 8800GTX.IMO it's still the best single card.

 

[4745454b]

That gts is a scam and it cannot use that much VRAM due to it's 256-bit bus.

Uh? How do you figure that?

1680x1050 isn't very high, so you don't need lots of Vram. The 9800GTX would be overkill as well. Getting a nice 512MB GTS would probably be the best bet. (unless you have money to burn.)

 

[invisik]

I would go with the 9800gtx personally it is roughly comparable to 8800ultra and surpasses if overclocked. These cards can overclock mad i have heard. If your on a budget get the 8800gts g92 512! 1gig is useless 256bit bottlenecks it, resulting in any improvement.

 

[marvelous211]

8800 GTX if you want high resolutions with AA.

9800gtx if you want better raw performance.

Forget the 8800gts 1gb card.

 

[aznstriker92]

8800GTX or a vanilla 88000GTS (G92)

 

[4745454b]

Someone care to educate me? How is the 256bit bus a bottleneck? As I said, he doesn't need the 1GB card because he isn't playing at a res high enough to need that much Vram.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/683/3/

Here is a review with a 1GB GTS. Thankfully, they are smart enough to run these cards at 2560x1600. (AA levels seem to change depending on the game.) The first benchmark shows a nearly 64% increase in frame rates over the 512MB GTS. While not all games show increases like this, I don't see the 256bit memory bus holding this card back. As I said, he doesn't need it because he isn't gaming this high. There is a need for 1GB video cards at 2560x1600, not so much at 1680x1050.

 

[papasmurf211]

well heres why i do need more than 512 mb. If i run crysis with at say 1680 x 1050 with 4x aa on high settings i noticed that in reviews GPU's with higher vram seem to get increased performance because of how close crysis is closing in on 512 mb. Yes ive seen that legit review of it and if someone can base their opinion on that it would be cool.

 

[dostanio]

9800gtx!

 

[Shadow703793]

That gts is a scam and it cannot use that much VRAM due to it's 256-bit bus.

Get the 8800GTX.IMO it's still the best single card.

:lol: I have seen 8600s with 1GB RAM.

 

[San Pedro]

Even at the extreme resolution, the performance difference between the 1gb gts and the 512mb gts were minimal, except for call of juarez.

 

[invisik]

well with 1 gig of ram u only can utilize some of the ram due to the narrow bit interface. i looked at benchmarks and the fps not significant i was evening talking to an xfx tech about this and he said it really wouldnt help much due to the narrow bit interface. The 9000 series would benefit more with the 1 gig of ram due to there efficient way to compress data.

 

[babybudha]

From the recent 9800GTX review, it seems that the 8800GTX tends to do better with AA and AF on.

So I personally would go with the 8800GTX, and then hopefully the 9900GTX will come out within 90days, and you can use the eVGA step-up program.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Im with 474 on this one. 1 Gig on the GTS and the new 9800GTX will show in higher res, and Im thinking on the 9800GTX, itll show even better

 

[4745454b]

@smurf, I haven't looked at crysis benchies with different sized Vram cards. If this is the case, I'd get the 8800GTX. Less then $300, and has the memory you need to play. (realize however that crysis tends to play poorly no matter what.) If you can afford it, you might want to just get the GTX anyways. If you are looking to save a few pennies however, grab the 512MB GTS.

well with 1 gig of ram u only can utilize some of the ram due to the narrow bit interface.

Huh? That makes no sense. You can use all the ram, the bus width won't prevent you from being able to use it. You should care about two things with respect to the memory on a video card. The bus width, and the speed of the chips. These two things will dictate the memory bandwidth of the card. Having a low memory clock speed, or a low width means it will take longer for information to reach the CPU. It won't prevent you from being able to use any of the memory. Look at this.

http://www.vr-zone.com/articles/64_Shader_Processors%3A_NVIDIA_Geforce_9600GT/5575.html

At these clocks, the GTS is almost tied for second. (behind only the GTX and older GTS.) Thats all the bit width is, how fast can the card retrieve something from memory. It can utilize all of it, not some.

 

[invisik]

sry for the error i read that somewhere.
thanks for correction 4745454b.
anyway in my opinion go with the 9800gtx. if u have the extra cash or if on budget 8800gtx came down as low as 290$

 

[dokk2]

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=715&p=0
this is a review of the asus 1g video card,check it out...

 

[4745454b]

Dokk, I find it odd that my link showed a huge increase in some games, while yours showed hardly any. (was actually slower.) Difference between the setups include mine used a quad core while yours was a dual. Mine used windows vista, while yours was XP. (both of ours actually used 169 series drivers.) Mine ran on an Nvidia board, yours doesn't say.

I believe my card was overclocked, while yours was not. My link doesn't say if the 512GTS card used was stock. How much does an extra 512MBs really make?

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

I have the 1 GB GTS, runs at 810/2025/2200. So basically its a 9800 GTX with twice the vram.

 

[cisco]

If you go the 1GB route this would be my choice:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130336

The Akimbo has excellent cooling and can be easily overclocked. The 512 version runs at 720/1944 factory settings. I would be willing to bet it can overclock higher than the Palit.

I think the 1gb models are worth the extra in the new G92, that is where they are lacking. Why they decided to reduce the ram is beyond me. I know it was to save money, since ATI is no real threat right now. I would like to see some benchmarks against the 8800GTX. I have been seriously considering this card myself, in fact there is a good chance I will get it. The 1GB and Akimbo cooling is just too enticing even if it costs as much as a GTS the extra ram will help with maxed out settings. Of course most people have made a good point about the 256 bit. I was also looking at the 9800GTX since I can't bring myself to pay almost as much for a matching 8800GTS 640mb to run in SLI.
According to this review the extra 512mb did make a difference in some games.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=2255