Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Should I Get it

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
March 8, 2009 3:42:10 AM

I'm currently using my good old 7600GT and I want to get a 9800GTX+ and I was looking at this, seems to be a good deal http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E1681...
now my rig runs a AMD Athlon 5000+ 65nm with 4Gb DDR2-6400 I'm planing to run the Windows 7 Beta 64bit so I can make full use of my 4Gb of Ram but I also have Vista Home prem 32bit. So far the windows 7 beta seems perfectly fine for a gaming point of view so I'm gonna go for it. Now that you know my setup will my 5000+ bottle neck the GPU I would assume it will but I'm hopping not drastically like 30% decrees, should I get it I'm not entirely worried about Bang for my buck as long as even with the bottleneck its gonna run at least 20% faster than a 9800GT. Now the game I play most is WoW but I also play Crysis I want to Beable to least play most settings set to very high no aa at only 1440x900 will this do it?

More about : question

March 8, 2009 3:46:49 AM

Oh I would also like to add when I do get the extra cash I will be changing the CPU what would be the most effective CPU to run a 9800GTX+ I'm willing to go Intel if its not gonna cost me much more to get new mobo+CPU and please keep it professional no fan crap.
a c 165 U Graphics card
March 8, 2009 4:16:40 AM

$200 for a 9800GTX+? $220 for the GTX260? The 9800 is horribly overpriced, the GTX260 isn't to bad. Still a bit pricey seeing as its the 192SP model. I'd still look at getting the 4870.

Speaking of which, WTF happened to the prices of those cards? You used to be able to find the 1GB 4870 for $199, now the price is through the roof. You can barely find the 512MB for that price. I'd wait a bit and see if the prices come back down, then grab the 4870.
Related resources
March 8, 2009 4:24:46 AM

I would either recommend the ATI 4870 for almost the same price. It is faster then the 9800GTX+ and it beats the GTX 260 in some games if you do not want to go ATI then got with the GTX 260 it is a faster card then the 9800GTX+


as far as CPU's go I would recommend AMD Phenom 2 for overclockablity not to mention it can use your memory you have now unlike the new I7 which requires DDR3
March 8, 2009 4:30:14 AM

Ya I was thinking of the G260 but I'm gonna need a new PSU for that and I would love to get a 4870 but I Currently have a Nvidia Chipset Now I don't like going for minimum PSU I have the minimum 500wat required for the G260 and adding another PSU to my list is juts another expense if the G260 does end up getting underpowered will it still outperformed the GTX+? Plus the cheaper G260 have significantly lower clocks than the normally priced G260 so I'm not sure if it gonna perform like the benched G260 Plus the GTX+ Model I'm looking at is Super Clocked
March 8, 2009 4:52:41 AM

Also I've been looking at Benched Results and The G260 does't beat the GTX+ in everything and the things it does are not huge differences and the areas in witch it does beat most is higher resolution i have a 19inch monitor so the extra memory on the G260 doesn't concern me on Lower Resolution GTX+ Outperforms the G260 even in Crysis. Now Keep in Mind The GTX+ Model I'm looking at is Superclocked and the G260 model that's Benched is the 216SP version witch does cost more and even so the GTX+ still outperforms it on lower res

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-char...[2252]=on&prod[2062]=on
March 8, 2009 6:43:37 AM

tomshardware graphic cards charts are horrible do not follow those the gtx 260 beat the 9800gtx+ and i no because i upgraded from a 9800gtx+ to a gtx 260
March 8, 2009 7:28:20 AM

moof said:
I'm currently using my good old 7600GT and I want to get a 9800GTX+ and I was looking at this, seems to be a good deal http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E1681...
now my rig runs a AMD Athlon 5000+ 65nm with 4Gb DDR2-6400 I'm planing to run the Windows 7 Beta 64bit so I can make full use of my 4Gb of Ram but I also have Vista Home prem 32bit. So far the windows 7 beta seems perfectly fine for a gaming point of view so I'm gonna go for it. Now that you know my setup will my 5000+ bottle neck the GPU I would assume it will but I'm hopping not drastically like 30% decrees, should I get it I'm not entirely worried about Bang for my buck as long as even with the bottleneck its gonna run at least 20% faster than a 9800GT. Now the game I play most is WoW but I also play Crysis I want to Beable to least play most settings set to very high no aa at only 1440x900 will this do it?


I'd wait for the new GTS 250... It'll be MUCH better! (roflmao)

Since 'bang for the buck' is no concern, why not the the GTX295...

Anandtech recently had some GPU reviews, look for 'multigpu...' in video reviews. Derek always does a thorough and fair review.
March 8, 2009 4:38:06 PM

The Reason Why i said Bang for Buck is no big deal is so that people would not tell me to get something more suitable for my 5000+. G295 would Kill my 5000+ if i had a i7 id definitely go for it but i have no intentions of getting one anytime soon, not to mention i don't have the PSU for and i don't want to get another one plus i play at lower resolutions id be wasting the G295 Power. Now the G250 does seem interesting ive looked at its specs but cant seem to find any comparison charts that include it and so far every chart Ive looked at the GTX+ still beats the G260 192SP and even the 216SP Version doesn't make a huge Difference at lower Resolutions so to me its not worth the extra cost not to mention my PSU would Underpower it anyways. And from what AnandTech is telling me the G250 isn't gonna be any better in fact he states "For all intents and purposes, this thing should perform like a 9800 GTX+" so to me the G250 Just looks like a smaller possibly consume less power remake of the GTX+ and its price point is gonna be almost the same as GTX+ is now.
March 8, 2009 5:10:29 PM

So far from what i can conjure up form the internet the G260 doesn't seem to appealing GTX+ beats the 192SP version in almost every aspect even power consumption and the performance gain from the 216SP version isn't impressive for the extra cost. So either every chart is lieing to me or the G260 is Horribly overpriced. The only way to change how i think of the G260 is for someone to show me some hard evidence that the G260 192SP (Due to similar price of GTX+ 216SP is out of the Question) in fact is better than the GTX+ and even if so if its not atleast 20% faster i still wont bother due to the fact my PSU will under power it and getting another PSU is just another Expense. The way it looks to me the reason why the GTX+ is better than the G260 192SP is due to its Higher clocks and 55nm architecture so even spec wise its better.
March 8, 2009 5:13:58 PM

Don't know where your getting that info from since the 192 is just slightly worse than the 216 and the 216 is in 4870 territory.

Also chipset doesn't matter, you could run a 4870 on a 780i chipset and you would see no performance difference, but you wouldn't be able to use dual gpu's.
March 8, 2009 5:21:04 PM

Your telling me that a 4870 would work on a nforce 570 chip set this is the first Ive herd of this. I have asked this question before cause i do prefer the 4870 and everyone either said it will not work or they strongly recommended to go with a Nvidia card for they may be critical problems or severe performance reduction. And Ive asked technicians and Tiger Direct aswell. Also you all say that the G260 is better but no one is showing me Ive searched all night looking at charts and they all say otherwise.
March 8, 2009 7:20:36 PM

The reason for my laughter on the G250 part is that it is (again) mostly a re-badged 9800+. It does have a cooler, lower power PCB, but that's about it.

I still highly recommend that you read Derek's multigpu review on Anandtech, particularily this one...

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3517

Derek doesn't review a res as low as yours, but if you check out the cards at the three res's he does review you'll get the drift...

For all of us, at some point the 'buck' does become an issue.
March 8, 2009 8:01:45 PM

croc said:
The reason for my laughter on the G250 part is that it is (again) mostly a re-badged 9800+. It does have a cooler, lower power PCB, but that's about it.

I still highly recommend that you read Derek's multigpu review on Anandtech, particularily this one...

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3517

Derek doesn't review a res as low as yours, but if you check out the cards at the three res's he does review you'll get the drift...

For all of us, at some point the 'buck' does become an issue.


This is a very good chart and i looked at it very thoroughly and Ive come to a final conclusion that at lower resolutions the 9800GTX+ and the G260 192SP are pretty mutch neck and neck with only differences of 1frame. One thing did catch my attention though that the G260 runs very well on farcry2. Although in my situation i still believe the 9800GTX+ to be the better choice for one i don't have proper PSU for G260 and the model I'm looking at is Super clocked. And although i did say bang for buck is not a big concern the 9800GTX+ did very well in price/performance
March 8, 2009 8:16:38 PM

Another point That I took away was that unless one uses a res of 2560 x 1600 or greater, a multigpu card or set of cards is just not worth it. I had my heart set on a 4850 x2, 2GB card. But the performance gains over a 4870 1GB card just weren't there. I'd get a 30" monitor in a heartbeat - but my workspace just physically does not have the room for it.
March 8, 2009 8:38:37 PM

So i hope i help u

i had a 9800gtx+ it was good.....but...it wasnt so good as i toughted....so i prefer you the 4870 or the 4850 from ATI
March 8, 2009 8:41:30 PM

Geforce 9800 series should have been Geforce 8900 series. They are rehash or refresh of the old Geforce 8800 series. The GTS 250 is also another rehash of Geforce 8800 series. They all use the old G92 architecture so I would not even consider them to totally be a new generation. The GTX+ is only a die shrink of G92 core but it is still old G92 architecture.

NVIDIA GT200 family is the newer generation: GTX 260/GTX 280/GTX 285/GTX 295.

ATI R700 family is also a newer generation: HD 4000 series.
March 8, 2009 8:41:58 PM

croc said:
Another point That I took away was that unless one uses a res of 2560 x 1600 or greater, a multigpu card or set of cards is just not worth it. I had my heart set on a 4850 x2, 2GB card. But the performance gains over a 4870 1GB card just weren't there. I'd get a 30" monitor in a heartbeat - but my workspace just physically does not have the room for it.


Yeah its always been that way thx for the charts even though ultimately i believe the 9800GTX+ to be my best choice due to some circumstances the G260 is not at all a bad card, never thought it was, still think its a bit pricey though.
March 8, 2009 8:44:46 PM

Techno-boy said:
Geforce 9800 series should have been Geforce 8900 series. They are rehash or refresh of the old Geforce 8800 series. The GTS 250 is also another rehash of Geforce 8800 series. They all use the old G92 architecture so I would not even consider them to totally be a new generation. The GTX+ is only a die shrink of G92 core but it is still old G92 architecture.

NVIDIA GT200 family is the newer generation: GTX 260/GTX 280/GTX 285/GTX 295.

ATI R700 family is also a newer generation: HD 4000 series.


Thx I'm well aware of that and ultimately i think the 4870 is the best but I have a Nvidia 570 chip set so I'm not gonna take any chances
March 8, 2009 9:03:10 PM

There is enough anecdotal info concerning nvidia chipsets vs. ati cards running around various websites that I'd be nervous as well. Personally, I think a BIOS update would cure most of these issues, but that leaves you at the mercy of nvidia / MB mfg's. I personally ran a pair of nvidia 6800 ultras in sli for years on a nforce chipset (nf4) and would to this day but for a tragic 'accident' by the US TSA... So I replaced the pair with one 4850. I've had no issues, but now I do tend to stay away from nvidia or amd based chipsets. Intel based chipsets, to my knowledge, have no issues of this sort.
!