• 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.

280 vs 8800gts 512

GJ02

GJ02

GJ02

Soldato
Joined
30 Nov 2007
Posts
6,419
Location
.
with my current system of a gts 512 and amd 6000 x2
would a 280 upgrade make much of a difference ?
or to clear things up
what should i get that will give me a better gamming performance
 
Last edited:
It would make a lot of difference, however i think your CPU could hold it back. Not completely up to speed on the AMD X2's, but it could limit the speed of the 280?
 
mosleypup said:
with my current system of a gts 512 and amd 6000 x2
would a 280 upgrade make much of a difference ?
or to clear things up
what should i get that will give me a better gamming performance
Click to expand...

What resolution do you game at? If you're considering an upgrade then don't even look at the 280 series as the Radeon 4870 is close to the same performance for well over £100 less.
 
mosleypup said:
with my current system of a gts 512 and amd 6000 x2
would a 280 upgrade make much of a difference ?
or to clear things up
what should i get that will give me a better gamming performance
Click to expand...

It would definitely make a difference, but your CPU will be holding it back. The X2 chips, even when clocked as high as yours, really do get beat by the C2D chips. C2D has a lot more instructions per cycle, we're talking 20-25% more power from each hz, so you can imagine that makes a lot of difference at the clocks that the C2D chips run at, espically the Penryn chips. What i would suggest you do is get one of the new graphics cards, but maybe a 4870, and then upgrade when Nehalem comes out?
 
The amd 6000 is fine & will be fine.
Unless you want to play at a very low res & need 200-300 fps even tho your monitor wont render more than 60fps & the amd 6000 will drive the 280 to that no problem.
 
Guys if he's only playing at a low res like 1280* then a GTX280 would be a complete waste. He would be better off buying a 4850/4870.
 
see this is were it gets confusing now
final8y thanks dude you say im ok, yet a few of the others say the 6000 will be a possible issue ? were do i go ? ? ? lol
all i need to know is will i notice a vast improvement over the 8800gts
 
Hello mosleypup, it's not really weather you will see an improvement or not because I think it's fair to say that you will. However, will spending £400 on a new graphics card justify the performance increase you will get? In my opinion, no it won't.

Now, I would personally think very closely about purchasing a new monitor instead, maybe a nice 24inch screen. The Nvidia 8800 GTS 512 that you already have would also be absolutely fine for playing the latest games with very reasonable settings at the native resolution of a 24inch screen (1920x1200). I think everyone that has bought a 24inch screen would say to you that it's a very worthy purchase. At least I know, it's one of the best purchases I have ever made. :)
 
Last edited:
fire wizard
wise words, you sound like my dad lol and he is a good man
many thnaks i will take your advice and i think it is the most sensible option, just needed someone to tell me
many thanks all
 
At low res the 280 is currently overkill, but it will shine in newer shader heavy games or when you bump up the res.
I agree about the monitor, 24" is very nice. Hazro24" \o/.
 
Richdog said:
Guys if he's only playing at a low res like 1280* then a GTX280 would be a complete waste. He would be better off buying a 4850/4870.
Click to expand...
Totally agree, I would even say the 4850 would be very sufficient for that resolution.

The AMD CPU will definitely hold a GTX 280 back, but not a 4850 (or at least no where near as much as the 280). You can remove some of the bottleneck by using higher graphical settings and anti-aliasing, since the card is now needing to do more work therefore it's spending more time creating a frame,
 
Last edited:
bobert50 said:
Name any monitor that won't render more than 60fps? :p
Click to expand...

95% of LCD monitors have a 60Hz refresh rate.
It does not matter that your card can pump more to the screen.. the monitor will basically skip frames.
At 120fps the monitor will skip half of the frames.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom