Is a GeForce GTX 260 896MB too much card for 1366 x 768 resoulution?

Hello,
I'm building a new PC for Fallout 3 (leaning toward Nvidia for video card purchase - but I am open to suggestions)

My monitor will be a 32" LCD @ 1366 x 768 maximum resolution

I want to enable all the eye candy ( Antialiasing, view distance, HDR, etc...)

I'm considering the GeForce GTX 260 896MB, but my monitor only has a MAXIMUM resolution of 1366 x 768 Is this card a waste of money? Too much power for that resolution?

BTW, here is:

Fallout 3 Recommended System Requirements:

* Intel Core 2 Duo processor
* 2 GB System RAM
* Direct X 9.0c compliant video card with 512MB RAM (NVIDIA 8800 series, ATI 3800 series)
_______________

thanks,
- client_9

4580 or 9800GTX+ would be otimal for you I think.

If you want to use AA, then you're better off with current generation ATI cards.

Basically agree with the poster above. Even a standard 260 would be more beneficial than the 4850. I have a 4870 and a 260...... 260 wins.

Hello there.

I Have a 32" sony bravia with the same resolution and I alredy have a 8800GTX and when I activate 8X or even 4X
supersampling in some games the FPS drops to 40 or 30 In crysis to 20, so I want to buy a GTX260 216ShaderCores
to play games at full filter without drop my fps. Also I going to buy the Sony 32xbr6 1080p
so I will be playing at 1920*1080 and I buy nvidia because a dont like the brands that fabricate ati's.
The only one is visiontek that has lifetime warranty and they dont have the 1gb version,

and I love EVGA is a very good brand

Sorry for me english Im from Venezuela

----------------------------------------------------------------------

So would a Radeon 3870 or the GeForce 8800GT still allow me to run all graphic settings maxed , I wonder.

Maybe I'll wait till Fallout 3 is released, then read the forums.

Thanks everyone for the input.

Any P45. Nvidia motherboard are crap. But I still suggest the HD 4850. $180 before rebate, and $160 after. Also, it's not the cheapest, but I went for a dual-slot cooler.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814161244

Bethesda develops and optimizes their games on nVidia GPU's which is one of the main reasons I went for the GX280.

HD4850 in your resolution is the best bang for the buck

+1. Also consider a 9600GT. There is one on newegg for $80 after MIR.
See:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814121242

Or wait for the 280 GTX+

naw the 4870 or the 260 GTX wouldn't be overkill at all at those resolutions, just look at Crysis and Stalker, they kill cards @ 1280x1024.....so I don't kno why people haven't learned from this. Far Cry 2 is hitting shelves on the 22 or 23 I beleive and that games looks like Crysis demanding. I find myself struggling Crysis with TRI 280 @ 1280x1024 in heavy ares.

Plus people with smaller res have a higher chance of maintaining playable frames more than ppl with higher res screens.

the 4870 or the 260 GTx would do you perfect, I mean you could go less and have around the same results, but it won't be true come a couple of months

Spend the extra few dollars and get the better card if you have comparable hardware.

there not exactly the same price. the "old" gtx260 is for around 200$ now. slightly cheaper.
=]

and where exactly can you find a gtx260 for $200? i'd like to know. the lowest price i was able to find anywhere online in north america was $240 after a mail-in-rebate.

never heard of newegg?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6814127361
pny also had it for 200$ the other day.
i believe there were promo codes as well making them cheaper then 200$.

The thing is some people just want to have max detail without having to pay for at least an HD 4870 X2 (And regardless of what some people say, running games at 30fps at 1920x1200 is NOT a satisfactory experience, so a single GPU card is out of the question).

Also, if you sit a few feet away from the screen the difference in picture quality isn't really noticeable, and you get the added benefit of having a big screen that doubles up as a TV.

While I support the OP on his decision to use his TV (Mainly because I am planning to do the same as soon as I get some funds), I disagree on getting a Geforce card at the moment above the 8800GT/9800GT/GT 140/Whachamacallit range, since ATI currently offers better performance and value on their cards, especially if you're planning to use high AA and AF.

I'm in a somewhat similar situation, I have a 32" LCD HDTV with a native resolution of 1366x768. I going to be getting a high end gaming PC and I want to use it for a monitor. I'm pretty sure you can just stick with the native resolution and be happy with solid 720p. I will at least, and UltimaSlayerVII.... when you say,

"This is why monitors are way better than LCDs" .... um do you realize that LCD is Liquid Crystal Display. Which is a only a type of display, tv monitor, they both have LCD and you probably use an LCD. I think you mean monitors are way better that TVs. But's that's all dependent on your setting and use of it.