DELETED_25227

Smoogels · 12 Dec 2007 at 12:38

The GTX is old, uses a lot of power and gives of an amazing amount of heat + the fact Nvidia are discontinuing them. The sleek new GTS is the only choice.
You'd be stupid to buy the GTX this late in the day. Id even say GT over an un badged GTX.

ten80p · 12 Dec 2007 at 12:56

GTS-512 at circa 800/2000/2200 only uses approx 35W-40W less than the GTX and the heat output is only 3-5 degrees less at those clocks, not too much in the noise either really
As the prices are near on the same it all comes down to whether you want a brand new product or one thats 12 months old
The unbadged OCUK GTX is identical to all badged GTX's too (well the reference ones that is) maybe the 1 yr warranty would put some people off though ?

Macro · 12 Dec 2007 at 12:57

JackRegan said:
Both are great cards now at good prices.

IMO if you game at 1680x1050 or higher with AA then go for the GTX, unless you have already owned one and fancy a change then go with the new GTS.

It's just a shame ATI doesn't have something out now like the new GTS to do battle against the GT/GTX as that would have made pricing very interesting.

Agreed...

Skidder · 12 Dec 2007 at 13:02

Sm00gel said:
The GTX is old, uses a lot of power and gives of an amazing amount of heat + the fact Nvidia are discontinuing them. The sleek new GTS is the only choice.
You'd be stupid to buy the GTX this late in the day. Id even say GT over an un badged GTX.

That seems pretty harsh.

eyetrip · 12 Dec 2007 at 13:06

Skidder said:
That seems pretty harsh.

Agreed. The GTX is still the better card. Old or not.

I miss mine a bit. Whereas the GT is close, the GTX just has that edge over it that was nice.

Am tempted to go back to a GTX at current price... but will stick with my GT until the PROPER new cards are out (Hurry up AMD and NVidia)

ginjaninja · 12 Dec 2007 at 20:26

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2007/12/11/nvidia_geforce_8800_gts_512/1

Suggests to me that

a) VP2 / video acceleration of protected hd content might be an advantage.
b) 'low resolution' (which are still higher than I game at on a crt) gaming is sometimes faster.
c) at 'low resolutions' min framerate is never significantly worse.
d) heat is lower (albeit a minor point)
e) a 2yr warranty for £10 less than the oem card (albeit a minor point)
and
f) forums seem to suggest for ocing the GTS has more headroom.

suggests that the GTS could be recommended if the above apply to you.

AMDPower · 12 Dec 2007 at 21:48

ginjaninja said:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2007/12/11/nvidia_geforce_8800_gts_512/1

Suggests to me that

a) VP2 / video acceleration of protected hd content might be an advantage.
b) 'low resolution' (which are still higher than I game at on a crt) gaming is sometimes faster.
c) at 'low resolutions' min framerate is never significantly worse.
d) heat is lower (albeit a minor point)
e) a 2yr warranty for £10 less than the oem card (albeit a minor point)
and
f) forums seem to suggest for ocing the GTS has more headroom.
suggests that the GTS could be recommended if the above apply to you.

f) that is the most important part, 780mhz+ gts vs 670+gtx...it roughly boils down to this choice and which gives the better performance when overclocked

TheRealDeal · 12 Dec 2007 at 22:07

I don't think it matters what clocks you get upto with a gts if you game at high resolutions and use lots of aa the bus will let it down and the gtx will pull away. If its low to medium resolution with aa would be interesting to see what comes out on top with gtx and gts heavily overclocked.

w3bbo · 12 Dec 2007 at 23:33

easyrider said:
Depends on what resolution.

Running clocks of 800/2145/2200 on a GTS, fornowagain is cutting crysis faster than his GTX.

I'll break 18k with my GTS 512mb hopefully in 06.

At 1680 x 1050 and clocks of 800/2145/2200 the GTS 512 is a fantastic card.

If you are gaming on a small-mid size screen and love the outdated 3d06 glory then yeah the GTS is the card to have atm. Bigger screen and gaming with AA and the choice is simple, go with 'old' technology - the 8800GTX.

Bradmax57 · 13 Dec 2007 at 00:24

My recent rotation of gfx cards has been :-

8800gts 320mb > 8800gts 640mb > 8800 GTX 768mb > 8800 Ultra 768mb > 8800 GTX 768mb > 8800 GT 512mb > ATI 3870 Crossfire and as you should all know......................................................... theres F all in it all have bee run on a Q6600 and 2gb ram obviously some will be fater but really all are playable so stop wasting your money like i do lol!!!!!!!!!! id sell them here if someone didnt ban me lol

All the above are good cards!!!!

Smoogels · 13 Dec 2007 at 01:18

Sm00gel said:
The GTX is old, uses a lot of power and gives of an amazing amount of heat + the fact Nvidia are discontinuing them. The sleek new GTS is the only choice.
You'd be stupid to buy the GTX this late in the day. Id even say GT over an un badged GTX.

Not to mention the size of the things.
I'm sure the Wait and heat of my EVGA AC3 damaged my pci x slot :confused:

ebilcake · 13 Dec 2007 at 01:38

AMDPower said:
f) that is the most important part, 780mhz+ gts vs 670+gtx...it roughly boils down to this choice and which gives the better performance when overclocked

Bare in mind the 8800GTS is clocked higher to begin with and still fails behind the 8800GTX with high settings, so it doesnt take a genius to figure out what happens when the 8800GTX extends that bandwidth advantage and increases the core and shader clock.

Margaret · 13 Dec 2007 at 01:58

Sm00gel said:
The GTX is old, uses a lot of power and gives of an amazing amount of heat + the fact Nvidia are discontinuing them. The sleek new GTS is the only choice.
You'd be stupid to buy the GTX this late in the day. Id even say GT over an un badged GTX.

Stupid amount of heat? Sorry that's the 8800GT you're referring to. :rolleyes:

and how does the GTX use a lot of power? Like **** does it, the fact mine ran FINE on a 24a 500W AKASA for months voids your point.

Also the GTS isn't even that much smaller than the GTX, it's still dual slot.

Edit: For the record I don't own a GTX anymore I have a GT, but still what you said is just way over the top and incorrect.

Smoogels · 13 Dec 2007 at 02:15

Jihad said:
Stupid amount of heat? Sorry that's the 8800GT you're referring to.

and how does the GTX use a lot of power? Like **** does it, the fact mine ran FINE on a 24a 500W AKASA for months voids your point.

Also the GTS isn't even that much smaller than the GTX, it's still dual slot.

Edit: For the record I don't own a GTX anymore I have a GT, but still what you said is just way over the top and incorrect.

The GTX runs hotter that a new GTS: FACT
The GTX uses more power than a new GTS: FACT
The GTX is bigger than a new GTS: FACT

How is that incorrect?

The thread topic is New GTS or GTX

If the GTX was so dam good what are doing with the GT?

+ the fact you can get the new GTS for the same money people were paying for the GT LOL.

Nelly · 13 Dec 2007 at 03:00

Very clevor of Nvidia, they didnt release a GTX version of the G92 at the release time of the GTS G92, so everyone goes & buys a GTS, I bet they will release a GTX version in the new year at a good price. lol

I'ts all about the money. . . !

Von Luck · 13 Dec 2007 at 08:44

gurusan · 13 Dec 2007 at 11:42

I'm not an addict, I can stop any time I want to.....

scamartist · 13 Dec 2007 at 11:50

Went for this one BFG GeForce 8800 GTX OC 768MB

£233 inc vat, ****** bargain...

Merry Christmas to me....

Raves · 13 Dec 2007 at 11:59

Skidder said:
Quite a step up from my 6800gt

Oh yeah, you'll be happy!