8800 320mb GTS Feb 12th.

Tute · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:30

easyrider said:
You forgot about 16AA and lashings of AF with no slow down

Yep, done.

Only problem I have is that my PSU has started playing up. But I was warned...

Tute · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:34

Big.Wayne said:
I've been using a 24" screen for two years now (1920x1200) although I have never really been able to do a lot of gaming at that res with phat graphic settings, with the Radeon9800Pro I finished Far-cry but that wasusing upscaled 1024x768 still it was really good. X850XT was better but got the odd laaaag in some games at 1920x1200. The X1950 Pro seems a lot happier running games at 1920x1200 although it still needs a bit of 'minor' tweakage to get it just so.

I'm guessing the 320MB 8800GTS is roughly twice as fast as the stock x1950Pro? I just can't see how this new card would have problems running games at 1920x1200 let alone lower resolutions?

Its nice to have every single graphics option set to full but me myself I'm not prepared to pay an extra £100-£300 quid just to see hairs on the chin of the guy I'm about to frag!

There seems to be information going around that the Dx9 cards are "old" and "past it" which is quite frankly NOT TRUE.

I can't see how they're past it when there are no DirectX 10 games! And the only manufacturer to have a DX10 card has no solid drivers for Dx10 either.

There is nothing wrong with having a Dx9 card at all, as i've said if you're not gaming on a big screen it's just overkill. Worth it for people upgrading from X800/6800 and older/slower, but not the X18**/78**/X19**/79** owners.

I see Dx9 as the big, mature daddy, and Dx10 as this child struggling to find it's feet. It will, in time, but for now it's far too young.

Combat squirrel · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:34

Had 5 mins of free time today and have made a dire attempt at humor:

Its ok I can post this as I use nvidia cards

Dark_Angel · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:37

While most of you guys are upgrading from the X1x00 series, I am currently using a 6200 TC 128MB! and before that an X800XT! so hopefully, I will see a bit more than twice the speed

Tute · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:38

Dark_Angel said:
While most of you guys are upgrading from the X1x00 series, I am currently using a 6200 TC 128MB! and before that an X800XT! so hopefully, I will see a bit more than twice the speed

Good point, missed that in my post. Edited.

Tute · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:39

double post, sorry

easyrider · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:40

Big.Wayne said:
Its nice to have every single graphics option set to full but me myself I'm not prepared to pay an extra £100-£300 quid just to see hairs on the chin of the guy I'm about to frag!

its not though.

people paid 150 for their x1950's you paid 126 so its like 70 quid for double the performance

mishima · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:41

Loadsa has been gone for rather a longer time! :|!

Tute · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:42

easyrider said:
its not though.

people paid 150 for their x1950's you paid 126 so its like 70 quid for double the performance

I thought we'd been over this.

To some, £70 is a lot of money, I understand it's not to you, but if it gives good enough performance for someone with a strict budget, the X1950 Pro is a fantastic card, as is things like the 7600GT etc.

Big.Wayne · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:43

Tute said:
There seems to be information going around that the Dx9 cards are "old" and "past it" which is quite frankly NOT TRUE

No its just one teenager who is posting that, but he posts it so much that it gives the impression of a lot of people saying it lol!

I've heard of people having 'purchase justification reflex' but that kid just takes the biscuit. Anyone who thinks DX9.0 is dead really needs to get out more and not be so uptight about their hardware!

I wish these forums could get back to being more friendly as they used to be, far to much 'rudeness' going on :rolleyes:

easyrider · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:43

mishima said:
Loadsa has been gone for rather a longer time! :|!

What are you waiting for?

Benchmarks?

Loadsamoney is hardly the man to ask.

He runs everything at stock

mishima · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:46

Waiting for the good news that the installation was a success!! and whether he is impressed or not

easyrider · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:46

Tute said:
I thought we'd been over this.

To some, £70 is a lot of money, I understand it's not to you, but if it gives good enough performance for someone with a strict budget, the X1950 Pro is a fantastic card, as is things like the 7600GT etc.

Im not disputing the fact.

when these cards hit 170 ,the no name ones, are you saying the x1950 pro for 150 is the card to get over a 8800 GTX 320mb?

easyrider · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:47

mishima said:
Waiting for the good news that the installation was a success!! and whether he is impressed or not

He will not see the full potential due to his cpu bottleneck.

All it is is a 8800GTS 640mb with half the ram.

mishima · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:48

m8 are you on redbull?

Tute · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:51

easyrider said:
Im not disputing the fact.

when these cards hit 170 ,the no name ones, are you saying the x1950 pro for 150 is the card to get over a 8800 GTX 320mb?

Certainly not, but if you're going to compare, at least compare the cheapest X1950, which is £117. What difference is the extra VRAM going to make to an X1950? We've already seen that not even the G80 suffers from lack of VRAM, otherwise this thread wouldn't exist!

And no "cheap" 320MB GTS cards have appeared yet, either way I wouldn't recommend buying from anywhere apart from OcUK, as i'd take the peace of mind thanks.

That makes it £80 difference, for a card which is still quite quick, and would give good framerates up to and including 1600x1200. Sure, you might have to turn the odd detail off, but when blasting stuff on HL2, do you really stop to admire how well rendered their "pearly whites" are?

Dark_Angel · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:52

I see it like this.

If you have an older system (athlon 64 for example) then an X1950 is perfect. But if you have a Conroe, or a Athlon 64 highly overclocked, then a 8800 GTS is perfect.

I think easy is being a bit harsh by saying DX9 is dead, but at the same time, he is right, when the "non clocked" versions of the card appear, assuming they are 170 - 180, it makes more sense in a future proofing way to get this card.

Sure not everyone can afford the extra bit of money, but I would rather save up for a few more weeks to get a card that will last me longer, or even if the same amount of time, lots better performance.

Sure, DX10 doesnt have anything to write home about, but does that matter when DX9 performance is the best. I fail to see why people are arguing what card people buy.

It seems to me like the 8800 GTS owners are saying "haha, you wasted money on your card" and the ATI owners are saying "haha, you spent money on a card uses technology that isnt needed".

I am curious, if twice the performance from an X1800XT isn't worth the upgrade, then what is? that is about the performance that people got from a 9800 PRO to an X800 series (not the X850's though).

Either way, this thread is getting mighty off topic. Lets talk more about the good things (and bad things) about this card, rather than anything else.

*EDIT*

BTW, re-reading this post again, it does seem a bit biased. I am just saying, if you are able to save up a bit more, the 8800 GTS 320 is a better buy IMHO. Luckily, I have the money on thursday for this card, and so I will grab one, if not, then the cheapest X1950 would be mine.

LoadsaMoney · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:53

Right shes in there, but i aint got a clue about the control panel, went to advanced 3D, and ive got a big list of all me AA/AF settings, clamp this etc... whats the best settings for a benchie, and man shes quiet, i cant hear her at all.

easyrider · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:56

Tute said:
Certainly not, but if you're going to compare, at least compare the cheapest X1950, which is £117. What difference is the extra VRAM going to make to an X1950? We've already seen that not even the G80 suffers from lack of VRAM, otherwise this thread wouldn't exist!

And no "cheap" 320MB GTS cards have appeared yet, either way I wouldn't recommend buying from anywhere apart from OcUK, as i'd take the peace of mind thanks.

That makes it £80 difference, for a card which is still quite quick, and would give good framerates up to and including 1600x1200. Sure, you might have to turn the odd detail off, but when blasting stuff on HL2, do you really stop to admire how well rendered their "pearly whites" are?

You have lost me..
the x1950 pro will not cut it at 1600x1200 dont even suggest it does.
The 8800 offers more than twice the perfromance DX10 and the ability to run 16AA for 50 quid more than a 512mb x1950 pro,

The reason i didnt compare the 256mb version as that simple is not a widescreen gaming card.Period

Dark_Angel · 11 Feb 2007 at 15:57

LoadsaMoney said:
Right shes in there, but i aint got a clue about the control panel, went to advanced 3D, and ive got a big list of all me AA/AF settings, clamp this etc... whats the best settings for a benchie, and man shes quiet, i cant hear her at all.

Now this is more the stuff I want to be reading.

I guess just turn off all the AA/AF stuff, and leave all the image quality settings at default.

Then just run 3d mark... / whatever games you play. It doesnt have to be an accurate test, actually you know what. Try this:

Turn off AA/AF, Texture Filtering Quality, Verticle Sync, off. Then leave all other settings as default. For reference (DONT LAUGH) I get around 10000 points in 3d mark 2001 with a 6200 Turbo Cache on a E4300 at 3300 MHZ and 2GB of ram.