Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Which card(s) would be best???

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share

What card(s) would be best?

Total: 41 votes (7 blank votes)

  • 2x Nvidia 9600gt 512mb (sli)
  • 0 %
  • 2x Nvidia 8800gt 512mb (sli)
  • 30 %
  • Nvidia gtx260 896mb
  • 15 %
  • Radeon HD 4870 512mb
  • 56 %
September 2, 2008 8:48:19 PM

Hello all.

I'm building a new computer and I am stuck!

My [future] build:

Core 2 Duo E8600 (running stock at 3.33 for now)
eVGA Nvidia nForce 680i sli
4 gigs DDR2 800 OCZ Reaper
500 gig HD @7200 RPM
750watt Corsair PSU (will this be adequate for these cards?)
Samsung 22" LCD monitor
Video Card = ???

I've been researching these cards for awhile now, and I still can't decide which would work best for this bulid. I will use this system for mostly gaming (hl2, bf2, bf2142, cod4, starcraft2, crysis???).

Please help me out with your opinions and suggestions!!!

More about : card

a b U Graphics card
September 2, 2008 9:02:54 PM

The 260 gets an edge due to the extra RAM, and you can SLI it later. Other than that, I would go with one of the SLI setups over a single 4870.
September 2, 2008 9:16:15 PM

The 4870 would be a better option over the GTX260, but if you're planning on going with that SLi motherboard.. either of those first 2 options would be stronger in general
Related resources
September 2, 2008 9:33:22 PM

I should add, I prob wont upgrade for at least a year after this buy...

Would the sli setups be about equivalent to the single card set ups?

Also, I still can't decide which is better, gtx260 or HD4870... I keep reading conflicting view points..... (like above)
a b U Graphics card
September 2, 2008 9:48:03 PM

Get a X48 and 2 4850s in CrossFire.
September 2, 2008 10:33:00 PM

Shadow703793 said:
Get a X48 and 2 4850s in CrossFire.


yeah that 680i will not allow you to crossfire, unless of course you are quite handy, b/c there is a way to crossfire on a nvidian chipset board, it's just not simple or that easy either....

what shadow said is the best way to go, buy a x48, or p45, not a big enough performance loss to go either way anyways, and sell that 680i board, get a 4850 and your good, then later on u can just grab another one and it will still be cheaper than the nvidian counter part while still giving you extremely impressive performance.
a c 107 U Graphics card
September 2, 2008 10:37:47 PM

Right now the 4870 is the best bang for the buck often out performing the 260 and sometimes even the 280. Diamond has an overclocked one with 1GB that I believe is around $300 right now online. If you really want to go with that EVGA board though you may want to go with the 260 since that will allow you to get another 260 later for more performance. If you go with two 8800 GTs now then you will need to replace them both when you want to upgrade your graphic power. Anyway always make sure your power supply can handle it since it would be pretty sad to spend hundreds of dollars in hardware to watch it burn due to an underpowered PSU.
a b U Graphics card
September 2, 2008 11:03:01 PM

Get the 4870, but get an X48 board, so you can crossfire in the future.

The 680i/780i will only allow SLI. If you go this route, get an nVidia card. GTX 260 I would say.
September 2, 2008 11:23:50 PM
September 2, 2008 11:38:05 PM

The GTX 260 is a virtual equal to the 4870, and you have the potential of tri-SLI. Of the listed, the 8800 GT SLI is fastest, followed by the 9600 GT SLI, but neither of those solutions are as "future proof" as the GTX 260, and the 4870 certainly isn't on an SLI board.

On a personal note, your system is very similar to mine. Awesome for you.
September 2, 2008 11:39:48 PM

Keep in mind the 680i is not a good overclocking chipset. It will be fsb limited if you plan to overclock that e8600.
a b U Graphics card
September 2, 2008 11:45:24 PM

If you don't own the mobo already, consider 750i instead of 680i. Other than that, as Dagger and others have said, 8800GT SLI would typically be the most powerful solution you mention.
September 3, 2008 6:32:52 AM

So what I'm understanding is this... 2x 8800gt in sli are the fastest.

But for the future , 260 or 4870 is what I should be thinking...
----> as for the 260 or 4870, this thread is conforming what I've been reading, which is the 4870 kicks the 260's butt!

Being honest though, I've always used Nvidia cards. Readon cards, I've thought, have always seemed to have a little more problems rendering games(like the 3850 had i think). The 4870 is really the first non-Nvidia card I've ever considered... and it's kinda scary for me.... Is it worth it?

September 3, 2008 7:23:46 AM

ur mobo is not a good one......i highly recommend that u look at intel offerings and go with ati card, either sli 4850 or get 4870x2 or if u have time then 4850x2
September 3, 2008 12:58:08 PM

Cf isn't an attractive option if for the best bang for the buck. $100 P45 will bottleneck cf due to lower pcie bandwidth in cf mode.
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1472/7/page_7_benchma...

$200+ x38/48 is the only one that won't bottleneck at this point. But the extra $100 can go a long way if spent on graphics.

The most cost effective combination is $100 p45 motherboard plus $280/$244 ar 9800gx2. 9800gx2 may not be "cool" anymore now that it's cheap, but it's still the second fastest card on market after 4870x2, don't require cf/sli capable motherboard, and gets the job done on the cheap.
a c 130 U Graphics card
September 3, 2008 1:02:38 PM


I agree with pauldh and dagger,

2X8800GT will out perform the other options you have offered.

Mactronix
a b U Graphics card
September 3, 2008 1:49:39 PM

If u can get a P45, u can get 2x4850 also. That's a nice combo too. Or get the single 4870 and the second later on, but like dagger said, the P45 bottlenecks those cards (even the 4850s), so it's a tricky choice for dual cards.

Now, the SLi way: get the 2x8800GT now, or get 1 GTX260 and the second one later. 2x8800GTs play everything that's out atm maxed out with no perf gaps at all. At 1900x1200 they still are very very capable.

Esop!
a b U Graphics card
September 3, 2008 2:14:04 PM

You're all forgetting two factors:

4870 512 MB
260 896 MB

The 4870 is normally the better card, but thats when you compate the 260 against the 1GB model. Of the two listed, the 260 wins, hands down, due to its RAM advantage.

If he had the 4870 1GB model listed, i'd say go for that though...
a c 130 U Graphics card
September 3, 2008 2:25:07 PM


Not on a 22" monitor, Unless you are going to be playing something with an insane amount of textures. The higher memory amounts only really come in when you start getting up to large resolutions like 1920 x 1200 or 2560 x 1600

Mactronix
September 3, 2008 6:04:25 PM

It may be over my budget to buy the proper mobo for the 4870 series videocards. I dont want to bottleneck with a cheaper mobo, cause that defeats the purpose of buying the better card!

im starting to lean towards the 260, cause it would be a lil cheaper. Once you throw in the price of a x38/x48 mobo, it kinda closes the price gap between the 260 & 4870.

BTW, whats wrong with the 680i mobo? I'm thinking of this one...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
a b U Graphics card
September 4, 2008 2:06:25 AM

dagger said:
Cf isn't an attractive option if for the best bang for the buck. $100 P45 will bottleneck cf due to lower pcie bandwidth in cf mode.
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1472/7/page_7_benchma...

$200+ x38/48 is the only one that won't bottleneck at this point. But the extra $100 can go a long way if spent on graphics.

Correct.
a b U Graphics card
September 4, 2008 2:07:44 AM

@noggart: The problem (with 680i) is they arn't very OCing friendly and AFAIK arn't the friendliest when it comes to RAM.
September 4, 2008 6:59:50 AM

Shadow703793 said:
Correct.


yeah but on average the loss is less than 5%...dude p45 is just fine, get that and then get a 4870 if u really want, that will be fine, unless of course u care only really abotu crysis...so yeah, CF on a P45 does not bottleneck significantly enough on 1600*1200 or even 1680*1050, look at the rest of those benchmarks dagger, for games like world in conflict, ut3 and so on and so on, the losses are pretty small, seriously just go with a P45.

A good one BTW for like $150 on newegg, get something like the Asus p5k-e, and get that visiontek 4870, that is like $250, that is a really good combination and leaves u w/ cash in ur pocket and still will play just about everything right now, really well, and not to mention really good performance increases down the road when u decide to get another 4870...
a b U Graphics card
September 4, 2008 11:12:21 AM

^True. Also when Nehalem comes out X48 would drop down in prices so you could get X48 then.
September 4, 2008 6:44:18 PM

Shadow703793 said:
^True. Also when Nehalem comes out X48 would drop down in prices so you could get X48 then.


that's true b/c intel will probably be pimping out the X58 w/ nehalem, a good x48 board should be like the cost of a good p45 board so in the ballpark of $150ish
September 4, 2008 7:17:42 PM

Shadow703793 said:
@noggart: The problem (with 680i) is they arn't very OCing friendly and AFAIK arn't the friendliest when it comes to RAM.


Good to know, no one really mentioned that about this board before (at least in what I've read).

Quote:
True. Also when Nehalem comes out X48 would drop down in prices so you could get X48 then


When is this board supposed to come out? soon???

...cause it sounds like the 4870 is really the way to go, not to mention, it's overwhelmingly winning in the poll...
September 4, 2008 8:33:49 PM

Noggart said:
Good to know, no one really mentioned that about this board before (at least in what I've read).

Quote:
True. Also when Nehalem comes out X48 would drop down in prices so you could get X48 then


When is this board supposed to come out? soon???

...cause it sounds like the 4870 is really the way to go, not to mention, it's overwhelmingly winning in the poll...


680i is bad. It's mentioned a lot, just not recently because people don't buy it anymore.

The new chipset comes out at the same time as Nehalem - near the end of this year.

4870 is not the best bang for the buck. The latest generation rarely is. You should look up benchmarks and prices, then decide on your own based on your needs. Don't be so easily influenced by a poll.
September 4, 2008 10:14:16 PM

I've done my research and looked up a LOT of bench marks over the past months... thats how I formed the original poll list. I liked all the cards listed above, I just couldn't make up my mind.

I'll prob spend the extra $$$ and buy a 260 or 4780, but that will depend on the mobo choose... I figure spending the extra $$$ now will save me money down the road when I want to upgrade.

Thanks for everyone's help! (especially dagger... thanks miss!)
September 4, 2008 10:22:11 PM

Noggart said:
I've done my research and looked up a LOT of bench marks over the past months... thats how I formed the original poll list. I liked all the cards listed above, I just couldn't make up my mind.

I'll prob spend the extra $$$ and buy a 260 or 4780, but that will depend on the mobo choose... I figure spending the extra $$$ now will save me money down the road when I want to upgrade.

Thanks for everyone's help! (especially dagger... thanks miss!)


Have you considered something not in the poll list? 9800gx2 for example. It's around the same price as 4870/gtx260 right now.

Reference model (as tested in benchmarks): $275/$245 after mail in rebates:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Factory overclocked model: $290/$260 after mail in rebates:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

It also has the advantage of not requiring cf/sli capable motherboard.

Benchmarks, including reference model, not oced model.

a b U Graphics card
September 5, 2008 12:59:34 AM

dagger said:
Have you considered something not in the poll list? 9800gx2 for example. It's around the same price as 4870/gtx260 right now.

Reference model (as tested in benchmarks): $275/$245 after mail in rebates:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Factory overclocked model: $290/$260 after mail in rebates:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

It also has the advantage of not requiring cf/sli capable motherboard.

Benchmarks, including reference model, not oced model.


Hey! So does a 4870X2! XD

Joking, joking. But i'd really overlook the 9800GX2 atm, since nVidia kinda wants to get rid of them lowering the price to that point where u think "how come?".

Anyway, there's also another option now that i think about it with a P45/X48: get a 4850X2 (or the 4850 1GB) now, then the other later on. The bottleneck issue would bother you when the games you'll be playing don't put pressure on the video card, wich might change in a couple of years (or months, who knows... Farcry2...). Play it safe with those extra bucks and go for the X48; there will be no "bottleneck" for either card you choose.

I still find the 4870X2 a good choice though... It only uses 1 slot, fastest card atm and u can put it on any motherboard you want (as long as it has a PCIe x16, lol). The thing is the price atm, damn xP

Esop!
September 5, 2008 3:20:33 AM

Quote:
I still find the 4870X2 a good choice though... It only uses 1 slot, fastest card atm and u can put it on any motherboard you want (as long as it has a PCIe x16, lol). The thing is the price atm, damn xP


cha... ~$550 :??: 
September 5, 2008 3:21:54 AM

Noggart said:
Quote:
I still find the 4870X2 a good choice though... It only uses 1 slot, fastest card atm and u can put it on any motherboard you want (as long as it has a PCIe x16, lol). The thing is the price atm, damn xP


cha... ~$550 :??: 


In that case, just go down to the second fastest card for half that much. :p 
September 5, 2008 4:21:22 AM

I agree even though i personally dont care for the card.."GX2" for the price it is the highest performing card! Now all buyers should keep in mind that it wont have some of the features that the newer cards carry though and its life span may be shorter due to last gen tech.
September 5, 2008 12:25:12 PM

Noggart said:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Best-Graphics-Card,...

Great timing!!! I love this website...


I don't like how they make 9800gx2 sound as if its performance is around the same level as 4870/gtx260, when in fact it far outperforms both. :p 

As for dual gpu, games that don't support dual gpu are always 3+ years old and get hundreds of fps anyway, so it doesn't matter.
a b U Graphics card
September 5, 2008 1:13:10 PM

I think only cause it's a SLi card by itself.

They don't say it's "worse" than those 2, but add that it doesn't scale as good as the other 2, maybe thinking about going for a second card or on higher resolutions with eye-candy stuff.

Esop!
September 5, 2008 7:21:39 PM

Yuka said:
I think only cause it's a SLi card by itself.

They don't say it's "worse" than those 2, but add that it doesn't scale as good as the other 2, maybe thinking about going for a second card or on higher resolutions with eye-candy stuff.

Esop!


I think he makes a good point. Sure the gx2 is saving you space, but essitionally its just an sli setup in one slot. A gtx260 sli set up would prob destory a gx2... although it would be nearly twice as much money and take up two slots.

So I guess a gx2 is a good deal for the price and the slot saved... but in the end, the preforance is exactly what is expected of any sli setup. (it just so happens it takes up one slot ;)  )
September 5, 2008 10:10:39 PM

Noggart said:
I think he makes a good point. Sure the gx2 is saving you space, but essitionally its just an sli setup in one slot. A gtx260 sli set up would prob destory a gx2... although it would be nearly twice as much money and take up two slots.

So I guess a gx2 is a good deal for the price and the slot saved... but in the end, the preforance is exactly what is expected of any sli setup. (it just so happens it takes up one slot ;)  )


Performance is definitely poor, although "destroy" is the wrong term to use. Quad sli scales horribly and such a setup is not recommended, as you're not getting much extra performance for the second $275 spent. But having large amount of raw power to start with means it doesn't perform too low even when severely handicapped. See benchmarks, 9800gx2 quad sli still managed to edge out 4870x2 to get higher fps at both 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 resolutions in all but one test (Half Life 2). Of course, it's by a hair's width. Still, it's far from being "destroyed."
http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/ATI-Radeon-HD-4870-...
http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/ATI-Radeon-HD-4870-...
http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/ATI-Radeon-HD-4870-...
http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/ATI-Radeon-HD-4870-...
http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/ATI-Radeon-HD-4870-...

There was an old saying "a camel that's starving to death still has bigger bulk than a mule." It's a matter of raw power.

Although personally, I still wouldn't consider adding a second 9800gx2. It's twice the money for far less extra performance. Diminishing returns. :p 
September 6, 2008 5:39:35 PM

dagger said:
Performance is definitely poor, although "destroy" is the wrong term to use. Quad sli scales horribly and such a setup is not recommended, as you're not getting much extra performance for the second $275 spent. But having large amount of raw power to start with means it doesn't perform too low even when severely handicapped. See benchmarks, 9800gx2 quad sli still managed to edge out 4870x2 to get higher fps at both 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 resolutions in all but one test (Half Life 2). Of course, it's by a hair's width. Still, it's far from being "destroyed."
http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/ATI-Radeon-HD-4870-...
http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/ATI-Radeon-HD-4870-...
http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/ATI-Radeon-HD-4870-...
http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/ATI-Radeon-HD-4870-...
http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/ATI-Radeon-HD-4870-...

There was an old saying "a camel that's starving to death still has bigger bulk than a mule." It's a matter of raw power.

Although personally, I still wouldn't consider adding a second 9800gx2. It's twice the money for far less extra performance. Diminishing returns. :p 


I ment 2x gtx260 vs 1x 9800gx2. i think there would be no contest in that battle...
September 7, 2008 5:16:02 AM

ZOMG! WTF i cant believe it! 8800GT SLI beats EVERYTHING except dual gpu cards such as the 4870X2 and the 9800GX2! obviously it beats the 9600GT cos the 8800GT is better than the 9600GT...

8800GT SLI beats a GTX280 so i t most definitely rapes a GTX260 and a single 4870! wtf is everyone on about?
September 7, 2008 1:34:56 PM

V3NOM said:
ZOMG! WTF i cant believe it! 8800GT SLI beats EVERYTHING except dual gpu cards such as the 4870X2 and the 9800GX2! obviously it beats the 9600GT cos the 8800GT is better than the 9600GT...

8800GT SLI beats a GTX280 so i t most definitely rapes a GTX260 and a single 4870! wtf is everyone on about?


You see, the bandwagon jumpers want to look "cool." Old stuff is not cool. :na: 
September 7, 2008 2:11:48 PM

Shadow703793 said:
Lets see....

2*8800GT = $220

A good SLI board (780i) = $220

Total: $440
=========

ATI 4850= $150

Good P45 board(P45-DS3L) = $100

Total: $250
=========
Pick your poison.

8800GT SLI benchmarks:
http://firingsquad.com/hardware/nvidia_geforce_8800_gt_...

^Btw, according to those benchmarks the 8800GT SLI is bit better than a 8800GTX

Benchmark link posted by:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/245760-33-8800gt-perf...


UT3 with no aa is maxed out at 100+ fps. Besides, that one year old benchmark is done using old beta drivers with no sli profile.

You should look at benchmarks done this year, with current drivers.
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=13
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=14
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=15
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=16
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=17
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=18
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3341&p=19

The price comparison is also flawed. Dual 8800gt will wipe the floor with a single 4850 in terms of performance. And that $100 p45 motherboard does not allow crossfire, so you're limited to a single 4850. A x48 motherboard cost $200.

Seriously, anyone with half a brain will realize something is amiss with a benchmark showing single 8800gtx outperforming 2 8800gt. Same with the price comparison. Please don't take everyone else for idiots, it's insulting. :sweat: 
a b U Graphics card
September 7, 2008 3:12:09 PM

^I stand corrected on 8800GT vs 4850 benchmarks (lol should have checked the date). But, unless you plan to not OC and willing to get a 750i go for it. Imo, 750i is a bad chipset for OCing, hence a 780i. P45 single card 4850 should be fine for most of the people so that's that.

Also don't forget X58/Nehalem! Which should be at reasonable prices by Summer next year.
a b U Graphics card
September 7, 2008 8:57:07 PM

Shadow703793 said:
^I stand corrected on 8800GT vs 4850 benchmarks (lol should have checked the date). But, unless you plan to not OC and willing to get a 750i go for it. Imo, 750i is a bad chipset for OCing, hence a 780i. P45 single card 4850 should be fine for most of the people so that's that.

Also don't forget X58/Nehalem! Which should be at reasonable prices by Summer next year.

750 isn't all that bad and not much higher priced than P45. You can get one as low as $110 AR on newegg. It(8x/8x sli) will perform roughly the same as 780i sli when talking G92 cards. Firingsquad shows no difference at all:
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/evga_nforce_750i_sl...

And really, while nv chips aren't oc'ing champs anymore, there are some decent overclocks on 750i mobos. Check out the P7N SLI platinum review links below. I've seen this mobo for $125 AR and wouldn't hesitate to buy one at that price.

3.9GHz Q6600:
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews.php?/cpu_mainboard/m...

4.7GHz e8500 doesn't set records, but is hardly a poor overclock.
http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&number=4&ar...

475 MHz fsb is not uncommon in reviews for something like the MSI P7N SLI Platinum.
http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/view.php?id=2474&c...
a b U Graphics card
September 7, 2008 10:38:38 PM

^Good to know that 750i dosen't have much problems now. :) 
a b U Graphics card
September 8, 2008 12:11:45 AM

^ Well they are not known to be as solid all round as the Intel chipsets, and there are legitimate beefs against them. Mostly I think it's blown out of proportion though. But they sure can be stable, OC and offer decent(maybe not top notch) performance in most areas as those reviews show. Personally I have had good luck with a few P6N SLI platinum(650i) builds and (based on that and reviews) I would not hesitate to buy a P7N SLI platinum for myself or even a customer given the need/desire for SLI.

edit: I will say, the HD4850, 4870 and cheap 9800GX2 prices have taken some of the sweetness out of 750i SLI. A 9800GX2 for $250-280 AR and a P45 is quite potent near the price of a pair of 8800GT and a 750i. Before that though, what could touch a pair of 8800GT for the money even if we factor in $50 more for the mobo over a cheaper P35. Even with the HD4850 being so sweet for the money, I'd like to see how a pair of 8800GS stack up against it. Actually I have the cards and just need to test them. I suspect they would more often than not put a spanking on the 4850.
a b U Graphics card
September 8, 2008 6:32:55 PM

^8800GS/9600GSO in SLI? Should be interesting. Those cards are like $80.
September 8, 2008 7:41:42 PM

gamerk316 said:
You're all forgetting two factors:

4870 512 MB
260 896 MB

The 4870 is normally the better card, but thats when you compate the 260 against the 1GB model. Of the two listed, the 260 wins, hands down, due to its RAM advantage.

If he had the 4870 1GB model listed, i'd say go for that though...

"Hands-down" is a misleading statement. The RAM size doesn't really show much of a difference until you hit around 1920x1200 with x4 AA... Removing the AA means that 512MB is apparently enough.

The original poster mentioned a 22" LCD... And I believe those have a native resolution of what, 1680x1050? (or 1600x1200 if it's non-widescreen) That means that 512MB should be plenty enough memory for any game out in now, or even really in the foreseeable future, even with AA and AF piled on.

dagger said:
I don't like how they make 9800gx2 sound as if its performance is around the same level as 4870/gtx260, when in fact it far outperforms both. :p 

Only when you run without anti-aliasing in the case of the 4870. In Crysis at 1680x1050, turning on AA to x4 results in you shifting from a 21.9% lead in favor of the 9800GX2 to it being bested by 11.5%. Similarly, at 1920x1200 the lead is erased to an amount where they are effectively the same, (1.9%) and it appears the only reason why it doesn't favor the Radeon is that at that high a resolution with AA, having only 512MB of video RAM starts to hurt it, a problem that the 9800GX2 partly tackles through the brute force of using two GPUs.

V3NOM said:
8800GT SLI beats a GTX280 so i t most definitely rapes a GTX260 and a single 4870! wtf is everyone on about?

The problem with 8800GT is that it's fairly pricy compared to the alternatives, due to it locking you into an SLi motherboard, which means getting an nVidia chipset... And nVidia's chipsets tend to be more expensive than Intel's, while pretty much invariably being worse, even if only by a small amount. 680i and 750i boards certainly aren't like the nForce 4 SLis were back a few years ago...

Plus, of course, again the 8800GT's lead over the 4870 is erased when you switch on the AA. Remember that 8800GT SLi is worse than a 9800GX2, given that while they run at identical clocks, the latter has all 128 SPs and 64 TMUs enabled, instead of a respective 112 and 56.
!