• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Whos ditching 8800 GT for new rev GTS?

Big.Wayne said:
Haha I suppose you don't know some high end systems come configured with separate graphics card then?
Click to expand...

Come configured? You say that like I bought it off the shelf? :p
No this was hand crafted by myself. lol
In fact, I have them in seperate mode in Vista and SLI in XP. Wish I had another 3 monitors for Vista tough. :(

Anyway I'm slapping my own wrists for letting this wander way off topic. :eek:
 
easyrider said:
A C2D will eat it for breakfast mate.
Click to expand...

Yes yes, I know everyone in blue will tell me I bought the wrong brand CPU. Go on, lap it up. ;)
I dunno why I like AMD so much, just always have. Or should I fling it on the bay and go intel. Hhhmm.
I know some of the C2Ds eat my CPU alive, but I meant does my CPU limit my GPU performance, as you make out? I.E would the new GTS be whipping my CPU's ass demanding it to run faster, and squeel like a pig? :cool:


edit:
Big.Wayne said:
Oh? . . . you actually picked those components then? :D
Click to expand...

Yes, yes, I chose the green processor, not the blue one. :P
 
dr. sarf said:
Go on, lap it up. ;)
Click to expand...
Lol nice one! :cool:

dr. sarf said:
I dunno why I like AMD so much
Click to expand...
Probably because you have become brand-locked, very easy thing to do.

I like AMD actually, still have a few machines zipping along on Opteron CPU's.

Anyway back on topic before I get told off again lol, I think that owning a pair or 8800GT's is very appealing, don't think the new GTS will be able to compete against that?

or can it?
 
easyrider said:
So unless there is magic with the GTS even though it still has a 256bit bus then if it commands an extra 100 on the GT then it will not be worth it.
Click to expand...

I don't get that, whats wrong with the 256bit bus? Its no worse than a G80 384bit bus as long as the frame buffer vram isnt saturated. That's only a big issue with high res and antialiasing. Bandwidth is still limited on both to 64bit per channel at core clock speeds, 4x64 for G92 and 6x64 for G80. Overall bandwidth the way they like to quote it, is less important. Modern game rendering produces pixels that are resampled and looped, moves much of the storage to on-chip registers and caches. Couple that with the G92's increased number of texture address units TMU, twice the sampling per clock of the G80. Also the G92-GTS if it exists, will have another 8 TMU from the 8th shader cluster, 64 in total. If it has a problem its the number of ROPS, even the GTS will be limited to 16 as they're tied to the memory channels.

Just do the math on the texture sampling rates and shader ops.

G92-GTS
Sampling 650 x 64 = 41.6 GTexels/s
Shader Ops 128 x 3 x 1625 = 624 GFlops

G80-ULTRA
Sampling 612 x 32 = 19.6 GTexels/s
Shader Ops 128 x 3 x 1500 = 576 GFlops
 
Last edited:
fornowagain said:
I don't get that, whats wrong with the 256bit bus? Its no worse than a G80 384bit bus as long as the frame buffer vram isnt saturated. That's only a big issue with high res and antialiasing. Bandwidth is still limited on both to 64bit per channel at core clock speeds, 4x64 for G92 and 6x64 for G80. Overall bandwidth the way they like to quote it, is less important. Modern game rendering produces pixels that are resampled and looped, moves much of the storage to on-chip registers and caches. Couple that with the G92's increased number of texture address units TMU, twice the sampling per clock of the G80. Also the G92-GTS if it exists, will have another 8 TMU from the 8th shader cluster, 64 in total.

Just do the math on the texture sampling rates and shader ops.

G82-GTS
Sampling 650 x 64 = 41.6 GTexels/s
Shader Ops 128 x 3 x 1625 = 624 GFlops

G80-ULTRA
Sampling 612 x 32 = 19.6 GTexels/s
Shader Ops 128 x 3 x 1500 = 576 GFlops
Click to expand...

Well on paper then yes.

But in reality I think we will see miminal gains over the GT.

Of course this could be wrong and your maths are correct.

However its real world gaming that counts.

Its G92 BTW (just a typo matey):)
 
for me it would depend entirely of how it handles crysis and the price. I can sell my 8800GT and get this one, if the price difference isn't too large. And if it just gives 2/3 fps more, its not worth the hassle.
 
I am ditching my Gt for a radeon 3850 pro :D which shall remain my main card until the new generation is out next year.
Gt just isn't worth £197 delivered getting a pro for £109 delivered.
 
easyrider said:
Well on paper then yes.

But in reality I think we will see miminal gains over the GT.

Of course this could be wrong and your maths are correct.

However its real world gaming that counts.
Click to expand...

I think it depends what you call a minimal gain. Numbers are numbers, in applications that use the unified shaders it'll be able to process 15%-20% more pixels per clock and sample 12% more textures. How many fps that translates to I don't know, if I had to guess then around 10%-15%, 4-5 fps in Crysis? Now if they release a 1Gb vram option along with the fast bus clock. That would make the beaste for me, no choking at my 24" res.

My GT overclocks better and is faster than my old GTX (660 core). Whilst I had both, as long as I didn't use too much AA, then in game there was nothing between them. Perfectly adequate until the next gen arrives, as long as you can compromise at high res+AA. Having said that, I'll get a GTS, if only because the GT is for the HTPC. Otherwise I'd not bother, £152 bargain tbh.
 
Last edited:
Yea the GT was only good if you got one early at those low prices never worth over £150 delivered.
Apart from crysis not really much need for anything over the 3850 in the foreseeable future if you don't bother with anti aliasing.
The first revisions hit high clocks the second batch seem to be absolute stinkers capped at 1728 shader clocks.

No i have changed my mind i am just upset that i have paid £197 delivered for a card that i can probably get for £170 delivered in 2 weeks.
I am very scatty when it comes to hardware ordered a 3850 tonight and just canceled i am just going to have to take this one on the chin and accept
a big loss on the resale as by that time the gt will be worth about £110 2nd hand.
 
Last edited:
Why not just buy a card and be happy, some of you guys need to just play some damn games.

C64, how many hours of gaming have you had from that GT?

seriously what is the point if you spend more time on ebay, reading reviews, on forums etc than you do actually playing the games. especially when as you say most games run fine other the Crysis. all this effort for 1 game, and tbh even with my GT I have to drop the settings to Medium anyway on multiplayer to actually win.

Maybe it is just me but unless you going to keep the card for a while then don't buy it, it probably isn't going to be much better and that goes for the new GTS, if you have a GT just wait till the 9000 series. And this is a guy that has a 24" and needs all the power but you are just chasing something that isn't there. Perfection.
 
Last edited:
I tend to agree with "C64" with regards to not being able to his card as high as the earlier ones (I'm assuming its a second batch BFG 8800GT with the shaders limited to 1750?). Its gotta be a bit galling paying more for a card (oc versh) than the lower clocked ones and finding they're getting higher clocks than yours, BUT, that is the nature of the beast with this overclocking lark. Just like cpus, some cards go higher than others, this doesn't make it a bad card and the performance of these 88900gt cards is exceptional when compared to the GTX on a cost/performance ratio.
I've got the same card as "C64" currently at 700/1725/925, a fair bit lower than a lot of ppl here, but in real world performance (gaming) I doubt very much you'd notice the difference anyway.
Anyways, back on topic, if the new GTS is significantly faster than the GT, and is reasonably priced, I'll probably get one and flog the GT. All depends on prive/performance again just like most ppl here I reckon.:)
 
easyrider said:
Why is that when it perfroms on par with GTX?
Click to expand...

I think the issue that C64 has with his card is that basically the shaders don't go above 1750 I believe whereas a lot of the cards from the earlier batch do, plus the high price for them at the moment. Like I said though, even at say £200 for the gt, thats still nearly £100 cheaper than the gtx for nearly the same performance.
 
I cant see the new GTS been called the GTS, I wont be surprised if the rumour I heard is true and its going to be called the GTSX.
 
Doubt i will be, not if its just a GT with an extra 16x streams, and i can't see it being much faster if that is the case, and im only at 1280x1024 so no need for the new GTS, GT handles that res fine, so i can wait till the next lot, the 98's next year. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom