Cheaper 8800GTS with less memory?

titaniumx3 · 12 Jan 2007 at 00:29

vairo said:
so 8800GTS 320 mb would it beat best ATI 1950XT?

Unless 320mb ram makes a mammoth of a difference, definitely yes (and by big margin too!).

peetee · 12 Jan 2007 at 00:44

ok, well done nvidia, thats me sold then, i was very tempted to get a pro, but obviously the GTS will destroy it performance wise. the only reason i didnt want to spend all the money on a GTS is that 1280x1024 is my max res at the moment. and sumtimes i hook it up to a 720p tv. This at £150-£170 mark for me is EXTREMELY tempting for a new build

easyrider · 12 Jan 2007 at 09:59

This is gonna flatten the x1950 pro range.

melbourne720 · 12 Jan 2007 at 10:28

easyrider said:
This is gonna flatten the x1950 pro range.

It'll flatten the XT range for sure, I think the Pro will be the last to go. I see these going for £175-£200 and selling like hot cakes.

Gibbo, when are you getting these in??

Dutch Guy · 12 Jan 2007 at 12:43

sargatanas said:
If its a 320MB card, wont that mean a 160bit bandwidth? hmmm

A normal 8800GTS has 10 64MB memorychips connected to a 32bit bus each so that is 320bit.

This 8800 will have 10 32MB chips connected to the same 32bit memorybus each.

So the same bandwith but haldf the memory size.

-Nick- · 12 Jan 2007 at 13:39

i was going to get a 7950GT 512MB for 210 quid, would getting one of these be better, probably work out aroudn the same price.

it's the 320mb that would worry me

peetee · 12 Jan 2007 at 13:45

I would have thought this would compete against the pro range at around £160-£180, the XT range will get flattened in the process, this needs to compete with the pros since ATI will only go and drop their prices if this is against the XT at same price

melbourne720 · 12 Jan 2007 at 14:04

-Nick- said:
i was going to get a 7950GT 512MB for 210 quid, would getting one of these be better, probably work out aroudn the same price.

it's the 320mb that would worry me

Much better, it would eat it for breakfast. Also, I'd get an x1950 XT over a 7950 GT. £210 is a lot to pay for a dx9 card.

melbourne720 · 12 Jan 2007 at 14:15

peetee said:
I would have thought this would compete against the pro range at around £160-£180, the XT range will get flattened in the process, this needs to compete with the pros since ATI will only go and drop their prices if this is against the XT at same price

x1950 Pro's on PCI-E start at £125, soon even less:-

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-064-CO

peetee · 12 Jan 2007 at 14:21

yea but this nvidia card will have more ram, and its roughly going to be £150 in the states, so £160 is a decent estimate for price here, which would put it in direct competition against the pros at the moment, the 512s atleast.
Its all good anyway, prices driving down, more choice in the market again

melbourne720 · 12 Jan 2007 at 14:41

peetee said:
yea but this nvidia card will have more ram, and its roughly going to be £150 in the states, so £160 is a decent estimate for price here,

I hope so, but going on previous experience £200 is more likely

peetee said:
which would put it in direct competition against the pros at the moment, the 512s atleast.
Its all good anyway, prices driving down, more choice in the market again

A card with an 8800 GTS core will decimate the x1950 pros, I'd say a something more like the x1950XT upwards was the target. I think a 8600 GT type card will be positioned to take on the Pros.

But this is just my opinion, no better informed than a 'The Inquirer' article

peetee · 12 Jan 2007 at 14:46

Better hurry up and get them out or else its Pro for me unless the half memory GTS is sub200

melbourne720 · 12 Jan 2007 at 14:48

peetee said:
Better hurry up and get them out or else its Pro for me unless the half memory GTS is sub200

Which Pro would you get - could you wait till next tuesday for this Connect 3d one?

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-064-CO

That is a really good price for such a powerful card - nice looking cooler for a change as well!

peetee · 12 Jan 2007 at 14:53

im not building a new rig till end of the month, im just anxious for the market to hurry up and settle back down a bit again, i want to get everything for the best possible price. I was tempted by a GTS 640, but at only 1280x1024 i think it could be a bit wasted, and they are quite pricey still, this half memory version seemed a lot more attractive. Otherwise itll be a pro.

melbourne720 · 12 Jan 2007 at 15:06

peetee said:
im not building a new rig till end of the month, im just anxious for the market to hurry up and settle back down a bit again, i want to get everything for the best possible price. I was tempted by a GTS 640, but at only 1280x1024 i think it could be a bit wasted, and they are quite pricey still, this half memory version seemed a lot more attractive. Otherwise itll be a pro.

I'm going to be using my GTS at 1280 x 1024. I hadn't really budgeted for it, but I shaved a little off the cost of the case (P180 instead of an Akasa Eclipse) and got some memory that was on special at the time, and didn't buy the fan controller I didn't really need, and decided to get it. I was mostly going to be using it for games, so there was little point on compromising there.

If games are a priority, then I would seriously think about it. A GTS and an e6300 would be faster in games than a e6600 and a x1950 Pro or XT.

Juxax · 12 Jan 2007 at 16:38

I bought the ASUS 22" Widescreen, bfg 8800gts, and it's with a athlon 64, 3200 at 2.0ghz, 1.5g ram.

And i can max out Vanguard, Saga of Heroes, and get a steady frame rate on 1680x1050 resolution.

peetee · 12 Jan 2007 at 16:47

games are a priority really, i wasnt going to get a 6600 anyway, id rather get a 6400 or 6300 and overclock it, as i'll be getting one of the beasty aftermarket coolers and a decent board, ds3 probably, and then some geil ram, or that 10yr anniversary stuff people have been ranting about

iv got a few thousand i can spend, but obviously i dont want too. And it wouldnt be worth buying all top of the range stuff for me because im not that serious about games, i enjoy them but ill take playability over the eye-candy anyday. Besides, my mates dont have brilliant pcs so we still play the oldies together aswell.

the GTS is tempting, but right now i dont see it as value for money, im looking for value for money parts that will get me the best performance possible.

melbourne720 · 12 Jan 2007 at 16:55

peetee said:
games are a priority really, i wasnt going to get a 6600 anyway, id rather get a 6400 or 6300 and overclock it, as i'll be getting one of the beasty aftermarket coolers and a decent board, ds3 probably, and then some geil ram, or that 10yr anniversary stuff people have been ranting about iv got a few thousand i can spend, but obviously i dont want too. And it wouldnt be worth buying all top of the range stuff for me because im not that serious about games, i enjoy them but ill take playability over the eye-candy anyday. Besides, my mates dont have brilliant pcs so we still play the oldies together aswell.
the GTS is tempting, but right now i dont see it as value for money, im looking for value for money parts that will get me the best performance possible.

Fair enough, I likes me retro games too. x1950 Pro for the win.

titaniumx3 · 12 Jan 2007 at 17:27

I still think the people who bought the X1800XT/X1900XT 512mbs when they were 'hot' are in the best position because even today games are still not pushing them to their limits and I can still play virtually every game with 4xAA/16xAF on my X1900XT.

By the time I need to play at 1024x768 with no AA for a smooth framerate (which means upgrade time for me) I'll have the R600, G80 Refresh and a crap load of mid/budget range cards to choose from, just in time for the wave of new DX10 titles. :cool:

peetee · 12 Jan 2007 at 17:29

end of the day it depends on ** res i guess