graphics card for gaming on 24"

ineed2upgrade · 22 Jul 2007 at 21:29

am looking at a dell 24" widescreen monitor and am wondering what card would be best for gaming at its native 1920x1200 resolution.am i basically best to get an 8800gtx for best results?have read some reviews that the 8800gts 640mb card can cope but will it cope well or will i be upgrading in 6 months as dx10 titles become more frequent?

helmutcheese · 22 Jul 2007 at 21:40

Hard to tell, thats a high res and some new games soon are rapists, go for GTX or Ultra or wait on next refresh.

ineed2upgrade · 22 Jul 2007 at 21:49

waiting for the next set of card is a bit of a no no as i need to upgrade in the next month as my old pc is dying and obsolete.not really wanting to go as far as the ultra as its overpriced when you can overclock a gtx to ultra levels for free

helmutcheese · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:02

No you cant, a GTX is never going to be a ULTRA, all Ultra's has a Rev 3 core (ok story is now some other new build 8800 series cards also have), it also has very expensive Samsung 0.8ns Memory thats 2250mhz DDR stock and will do about 2400mhz without mods, the core on my eVGA Superclock (655mhz) does 700mhz without mods.

- GeForce 8800 GTX core running at 575MHz
- Shader Clock Speed of 1350MHz
- 768MB GDDR3 Memory running at 1800MHz

To overclock without mods to

- GeForce 8800 Ultra core running at 655MHz
- Shader Clock Speed of 1660MHz
- 768MB GDDR3 Memory running at 2250MHz

No chance

, you may hit normal Ultra 612mhz core but not Memory speeds with same timings.

leon4112 · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:10

and the differences in that 40mhz ull notice NOT

unless ure playing a game at 28fps at 612 and now getting 29fps with the 655mhz lol

lay-z-boy · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:13

best bet would be a gtx, ultra if you can but it is poor value for money against the gtx.

Flog it when the replacement for the 8800 comes out, it's hinted at being around 1.2-2x faster

helmutcheese · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:17

Leon dream on, the GTX will fall on its back before a Ultra will in future games, be it stock or overclocked versions running stock or overclocked.

The fact I made remains, a Ultra is not a overclocked GTX, and I did state GTX or Ultra, I would like to see Lost Planet (bad port I know) or BioShock at that res on a 24" screen with a 8800GTS 640.

And the GTX is 575mhz not 612mhz or 655mhz and ram will never reach same speed.

So Leon, what is your actual input to the OP's question ?

leon4112 · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:26

the input is its a waste of money for the ultra as ure never gonna see the money spend over the gtx in real terms the differents in money can go to a raptor or more mem which would be a lot better in terms for gaming!!!

plus anyone who buys a gtx or ultra will only be after 30-60 min on dx10 games as thats all that matters when the gtx has a hard time with dx10 games so will the ultra so it will not make the slightest of differents!!

Hence not worth the price over the Gtx

every review of the ultra as said the same the only point in it is to secure the top spot even further and never gonna produce real time advantages

Sir Random · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:26

A GTX will handle anything out now, but if you've got the cash go for an Ultra.

Crysis, and other new games, will be quite demanding at 1920x1200, so if you want the card to last into next year, get the best you can afford.

lay-z-boy · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:27

You need to stop thinking the ultra is miles above the gtx in speed, it isn't.

If we turn to the much hated car analogy's the ultra is akin to the the slr 722 with the gtx being the standard slr.

On paper the 722 looks better but can you justify the price over the standard?

Craig321 · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:27

ineed2upgrade said:
am looking at a dell 24" widescreen monitor and am wondering what card would be best for gaming at its native 1920x1200 resolution.am i basically best to get an 8800gtx for best results?have read some reviews that the 8800gts 640mb card can cope but will it cope well or will i be upgrading in 6 months as dx10 titles become more frequent?

8800gts might cope alright, but I'd go for a 8800GTX

Craig.

helmutcheese · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:28

leon4112 said:
the input is its a waste of money for the ultra as ure never gonna see the money spend over the gtx in real terms the differents in money can go to a raptor or more mem which would be a lot better in terms for gaming!!!

plus anyone who buys a gtx or ultra will only be after 30-60 min on dx10 games as thats all that matters when the gtx has a hard time with dx10 games so will the ultra so it will not make the slightest of differents!!

Hence not worth the price over the Gtx

every review of the ultra as said the same the only point in it is to secure the top spot even further and never gonna produce real time advantages

You still have not gave him a rec for a card, your original post was a waste of time and trolling IMO.

lay-z-boy said:
You need to stop thinking the ultra is miles above the gtx in speed, it isn't.

If we turn to the much hated car analogy's the ultra is akin to the the slr 722 with the gtx being the standard slr.

On paper the 722 looks better but can you justify the price over the standard?

If you reread the OP's psot, he wants a card that will run that high res on that big screen not just now but in 6months, so since we cant be futureproof totally, I saud a GTX or Ultra and for a fact the Ultra will be playing games with better FPS than a GTX can in 6months, I even suggested he wait on refreshes.

Why cant you simply post your rec card and be done with it.

Least I did input and I did state a GTX in that input, not talk rubbish like you have, you did not even give a card model to him.

leon4112 · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:31

lol well this is from thwg

The introduction of the 8800 Ultra - essentially an overclocked 8800 GTX - relegated the GTX to second-fastest-videocard-in-the-world status. But with the low-priced 8800 Ultras starting at the £430 / €620 mark, who in their right mind would pay that kind of money for an overclock?

ineed2upgrade just get a ocuk gtx and if you really feel the need to grab that extra 5-10fps then oc ure card then just bung on the 3rd party hs on this site and oc ure nuts off

lol i just find it funny u saying that the ultra will last longer than the gtx when it wont just cos uve added 50-6mhz on the mem and core doesn't mean anything when devs boost up the gfx in games anyway

soon as proper dx10 games come out ull be lucky to even run anything in 1650 let alone 1900

helmutcheese · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:34

You really are thick, the card is not a overclocked GTX and again in 3 posts you have not gave a REC of a card, only talked rubbish, so why post ?

Again I gave him 3 choices to think over.

leon4112 · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:36

the differents is the core speeds mem and shader thats it!

what else is so magical about the extra 100 quid?

helmutcheese · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:37

And your now have 4 posts still not REC'ing a card so again why post in this thread ?.

To the OP, I gave you the 1st advise here, 3 choices, if you cant take it then I wont help any more, the GTX is best choice today, but in 6months who know how slow it will be in new games and you told me you can not wait on new cards so all I can say is the Ultra should be looked at, or best of all buy a eVGA then step up when it slows down.

leon4112 · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:39

so me saying this

ineed2upgrade just get a ocuk gtx

and come on i really wanna know the differents that u speak of apart from the core shader and mem speeds

i mean u must tell me im really wanna know why its worth it please tell!!

ure looking at a 10% increase just gotta choose if its worth it or not!

helmutcheese · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:42

I do not need tell you anything, this is a thread from someone asking for recommendations of a GPU, something you aint done yet. :rolleyes:

Learn to use Google and learn something.

leon4112 · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:47

lol i do use Google a lot more than you it looks like as i know the facts from every card thats out and how much better they are over each other as ive done this for 10 years plus

just like everyone price over performance is the bases on everything and im clever enough to know nvidia knows people are stupid enough to pay a extra 100 quid on something that is the fastest card even though not by much

and every major pc mag and online review site knows it 2

and as i said all the reviews say the same!! and thats what someone whos in the market for a new 300+ quid plus card should be reading

helmutcheese · 22 Jul 2007 at 22:49

How can you say you use Google more than anyone?.

Did I actually tell him he must buy a Ultra ?.

When are you going to REC him a card instead of Trolling ?

If I return from walking the dog and your still at this crap, Im going to report you instead of getting myself banned for telling you where to go as your inpit is zero help to anyone.

P.S Do you know there is members here who would say the same to you for buying a Raptor ?, esp the X model.