http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnLMJUDl0Qw

Although they did use hl2 for run the comparison and steam games due to favor ATI cards, seems like a valid review to me. Thoughts?

Hm, interesting... I think some of the stuff was exaggerated a bit, but still interesting.

Yeah, but looked like a legit review.

The differences in the 8800gt and the gtx are dramatic in his testing. Also, i thought every other benchmark showed the ati's taking a big hit when aa was enabled.

Good review though, not sure on its accuracy.

After watching the review where he says it rivals a gtx when oc'd, i dont buy it anymore.

No reason to fake benchmarks, unless it's a payed review...which I doubt it is.

i new 3870 was better from the beginning

Yes these reviews from tigerdirect are legit.

Meh, just another company trying to sell a product. Use the benchmarks from the site your posting on rather than the limited benchmarks posted by a retailer (probably at whatever resolution and level of AA and AF that makes the game look the most appealing.) So far, via Tomshardware, it looks like the 3870 gets a small whomping by the 8800gt by 14%.

My money has a home atm, and its not ATi.

IMO crap review, the guys reading specs without knowing what they mean to anything.

"It's a 256bit card , so the bandwidth on this thing is insane" Jeez guess he never heard of 512bit, 386bit, 320bit cards with similar clocks.

'when you turn the filters on it runs faster'

I've seen those benchies elsewhere (I remember the charts but not the sitename [but the results are similar to those of Computerbase's 8X results) and really that's cherry picking. Running at 8X is very high and really only playable at 1280x1024, so it's not an option most people would use since they'd likely be running at higher res with lower AA if they're selecting a card like this. Also it depends on the game, look at the different benchies in the computerbase review and you see when the games are more texture bound or shader bound as well.

IMO this guy is reading some other (non-telegenic) guy's benchmarks and picking the things that will make the card look good and worth talking about so people will buy them. Being based on TigerDirect I'd say treat this guy like a car salesman, he's probably have told you how great the GeforceFX or XGI Volari V8 Duo was if he or his overlords thought it would sell more of them from their site.

edit: updtd computerbase link

That's when going to 4XAA, 8XAA is a different story though and alot of the cards flip-flop because then the GF8 cards start to hurt their dedicated hardware advantage by increasing the demands and the bottleneck for AA moves from the R6 series shaders to the GF8's ROPs.

But like I sad, it's an unusual situation where someone would care about 8X AA versus higher res, especially in new games (HL2 being used while arguably "one of the best games out there" it's nowhere near as stressful as many), but if you're stuck on an old 19-20" LCD maybe that's your sweet spot, but I don't think it has wider application where I'd draw any global conclusions from that. There's no way you're going to get 8X AA on 1600x1200 in any of the more demanding titles.

Why not? At 860mhz core 1375(2750)mhz memory I could see it rivaling the STOCK GTX in the same way that when OC'ed the GT beats the GTX.

But like I said, cherry-picked results to put the product in the best light, but no significant information, it's like watching the equivalent of the PR description on the side of a product box pointing out all the good and ignoring anything remotely underwhelming.

somewhere around 30-34th second of the "review"

"they released a new card based on the 55nm process so it's a SMALLER CARD"

LMAO

Crappy review, probably not paid by ATI, but made by a fanboy.

And he had no idea what specs ment xD

Those results are not cherry picked. Go to any forum about OCing the hd 3870 and people get to those OCs and faster all the time. It's not cherry picked like the Phenom. Those cards really do OC that fast, that easily. I am fixing to have to leave for work, but when I get back, I will throw you some links to back up what I am saying.

The "cherry picking" TGGA was talking about wasnt because of OCd frequencies. Im not even sure how to explain it... since it cant really be explained any further than it is. re-read what he was saying.

Edit: just watched that POS video.

My thoughts: its like something i would expect from a newegg review. "PCIe 2.0 and DDR4.. this thing is FAST!"

Here we go again ... arguing if this or that test is biased because a certain company made the card ... stop it ! Do ya notice when ATI wins ya get all this b*llsh*t from nvidia fanboys . Ape you're the guru genious .... put the trillions of dropped frames back into the video output of the benchies on nvidia's and see what the tests show ! And then the NV trolls cry when someone runs the speed up on the ATI ram and bawl all over the forum . Then they cry like babies when they"re overclocked .... as NV cards are all maxed on OC"ing . Like I said put back the millions upon millions of dropped frames ..... NO YOU CAN'T ... You say .... then don't even try to compare the companies . Christ if anyone could eliminate trillions of frames in any test .... any lousey card could win a framerate test and you know it ! I don't know if these experts are dumb or can't realize what NVIDIA is doing to trick people . Tell the D*M truth ..... Our programmers said it's like having a race and one team eliminates hundreds of laps or miles from it to win "NVIDIA " and the other has to run the whole mileage to win " ATI " ..... NO race ... No win ! False .... phoney statistics . Those benchmark tests and any whatsoever are a joke . Tell the truth .... stop backing up an inferior company . What are you saying the guys at Tiger are liars ??? I'd trust them more than a so called guru here . And they did'nt even mention the dropped framerate issue .

Stop making your sell look like an ignorant fool. nvidia doesnt "drop frames". Thats just slightly retarted.

Why would tigerdirect fake benchmarks? It has to sell both the 8800 GT and the 3870, so why would it promote the sale of one over the other? I believe those benchmarks are true. I'm not a fanboy either, I'm the owner of a 9800 Pro and a 7900 GS. I believe the reason why the 8800 GT has higher performance is because it sacrifices picture quality. Between my old x850xt and my 7900 GS, clearly my x850xt has a much better picture quality that is very noticeable, to me at least.

The 3870 also runs cooler, is a better investment, and based on a smaller die process (hence why it runs cooler). IMO the 3870 is a better card...but that's just my opinion.

I think you're very retarded idiot .... " skittle " they do and it's a known fact . They do have inferior quality video and that's a known fact .... and NO they did'nt fix the problem ! Name calling can go both ways .... seems that's all you get in the way of response from these dim witted kids . That red dye in those skittles is rotting your brain .... let alone causing cancer . Now I've lowered myself to his standards ....

Skittle...on the tomshardware review of the 3870 vs the 8800 GT, it STATED that the 3870 had better picture quality than the 8800 GT. Not only that, but on other reviews as well.

trooper1947 and skittle, please don't start a flame war here, be nice please.