• 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.

Might get the 8800 GTS

Sunrunner said:
Hmmmm, can follow that link :( . Its saying I don't have access
Click to expand...

Quoted from the FAQ,

The members market is provided as a free service to active and contributing forum members. OcUK are not liable for any deals that are done in the Members Market, you are free to buy and sell at your own risk. Please read the rules of the Members Market before you proceed to make your first sale.

Access to the Members Market forum requires two things. Firstly, you will need to have over 250 posts and have been signed up for at least 90 days. Please note that this does not mean you spam the forums simply to increase your posts, as this action will result in posts being deducted, and if you continue this behaviour, your account will eventually be banned/suspended. Once you reach 250 posts, you will need to activate your trust. This is either found in your UserCP, or you can press the trust button that appears at the bottom of all your posts.

Once you satisfy both of these criteria, Members Market access will be granted within 24hrs. Please do not post on the forums asking why you cannot access the members market, if you have any queries, email one of the forum Dons/Admins. The contact addresses are available in the FAQ.
 
Ok thanks, one more question instead of starting a new thread.

Whats the advantage of having more MB on a Graphics Cards some say if you have a big screen you need more, others say the more MB you have, the quicker things can load eg the maps can be loaded onto the memory then displayed on the screen straight after.

Could someone please clear this up?

If you look at the link below it dosent make any sence?

It saids that th 8800 320 outperforms the ATI cards but by the charts the ATI beats the 8800?

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=364&type=expert&pid=8
 
Last edited:
If you have a 20" monitor, then basically you should be fine.

My 320MB card is enough for HDR in Oblivion, AFx16 and whatever else and all goes at 50FPS a second. Supreme commander, 2 monitors both at 1680x1050 and runs that perfectly too.
 
Well i have a 19inc widescreen monitor.

And what about that link i showed you could you explain that to me, it saids at the bottom that the 8800 320 beats the ATI cards but by looking at the charts the ATI cards seem to be getting higher FPS?

And what does everyone think about the Nvidia 7950 X2?
 
stickroad said:
Well i have a 19inc widescreen monitor.

And what about that link i showed you could you explain that to me, it saids at the bottom that the 8800 320 beats the ATI cards but by looking at the charts the ATI cards seem to be getting higher FPS?

And what does everyone think about the Nvidia 7950 X2?
Click to expand...

Read closer,at 1600x1200 the GTS punishes the ATI cards. at 2048 then the ATI cards are about on par. But your monitor has a max resolution of 1440x900. (which is lower than 1280x1024). The card will massacre the ATI card.
 
I don't get those CoD2 results, gota be wrong there as im running CoD2 maxed out in 1280x1024 with 2xAA/16xAF with Supersampling on and High Quality Textures, and my GTS cuts through it like a knife through hot butter, and at a lot higher frames than my old x1800 XT 512mb. :confused:

GTS is faster than any ATi card out.
 
Deffo summit wrong there as heres the standard GTS in CoD2 here , as you can see its faster than the x1950 XTX, and the BFG 320mb GTS will be slightly faster than the standard one as its overclocked out of the box. :)
 
seems that review concentrates on some pretty extreme resolutions. How many people game at 2560x1600? If you can afford a monitor that can display that, I'm guessing you could afford the GTX. I don't think that anyone here would recommend a 256 or 320MB card for that kind of res.
 
I really cant get my head around this card.

IMO the reviews dont blow me away when comparing them to the 1950 xtx and xt.

Still thinking weather to get it or not?
 
Bottom line is, EVEN if the performance was EXACTLY the same as the ATI cards, they are DX9. You may as WELL get the DX10 cards.

Before any fanboys jump in, there might not be DX10 now, but in the future it will happen.

The cards are FASTER in the resolutions up to 1600x1200 than the ATI cards in the same price range. You would be SILLY to buy an ATI card. Even at 1920 it is the same as the ATI 512MB cards.

I am using it to play Supreme Commander on two monitors @ 1680x1050, everything maxed with AA, and it runs nicely. Oblivion, Quake 4, HL2 Lost Coast, everything max, with AA, AF and HDR if the game supports it. Looks amazing, all runs silky smooth.

There is no reason to not get the card. I am not a Nvidia fan either, I have owned the following cards:

ATI Rage Pro Turbo, Voodoo 2, Voodoo 3, GF2 MX, GF4 MX, GF 5700, ATI 9800 Pro, X800XT, and now the 8800 GTS 320MB. It is simply better value for money at the moment.
 
I went with the 8800 GTS for a few reason:

1. The NV refresh will happen in 3 months or so.

2. Unless you have a massive screen, the GTX is a bit overkill.

If you have the money to buy the GTX, save it, get the 320MB GTS, then if the new NV cards (or ATI R600) is much faster, you could sell that on MM, and buy the latest and greatest with the money you saved and so on.

I think that is a better solution. It really is up to you at the end of the day, your money, and your final decision :)
 
Yeah good point dark thanks ill go with the GTS :)

Ill be gaming on a 19inc widescreen monitor probably at a res of 1280x1024
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom