Most appropriate card at this time?

[Xenoxide]

Hey guys.

I'm looking at buying a new system. Essentially the specs are a Q6600 with 4GB RAM. What would be an appropriate mid-high end graphics card to go with at the moment?

I've been looking at the 8800 GTX or Ultra's, but I hear that the Geforce 9 series is due out sometime in the Jan-Apr timeframe. This is making me a bit hesitant to spend £350-400 on a high-end graphics card just to upgrade when the 9 Series comes out (Which I WILL be upgrading to). As a poor student at the moment p) I really can't afford to buy two high-end graphics cards in such a small period of time.

Would it be better going for an 8800GT at the moment? Or even a Radeon 3870? Any thoughs?

Cheers.

 

[killer_uk]

All depends really, at what resolution will you be playing at? And do you generally use huge amounts of AA/AF? If you can't really afford to upgrade when the new cards come out, then I would probably get a GT. Although, the cheapest GTX card is the OcUK one which is a bargain at £244.

It's hard to say when the new cards are going to appear though, but from rumour, we believe they will be out around the beginning of the second quarter (hopefully).

 

[Xenoxide]

Ah, sorry about that. I'll be going with a Dell 24" LCD so the resolution will be 1920x1200. AA and AF - I'll put it up to max if I can, I love my games to look the best.

The system has to be future proof without upgrades (Bar the 9 Series card) for a long time as I doubt Ill have the opportunity to upgrade in a while.

 

[Alexrose1uk]

Well, you'll probably want an OCUK GTX, or a GT at a pinch for now then, unfortunately that res with AA means the GTX beats the GTS 512 by a bit, so if you can afford the extra, you may as well go GTX (although the GTS is more powerful with shaders), whereas the GT is a cheap and cheerful option, but may need you to be more limited with the AA/AF/FPS. There's about 10-20% performance difference between the GT and GTS at higher resolutions and AA, but the GTX pulls ahead over the GTS slightly with AA due to having more bandwidth.

 

[gurusan]

I'd snap one of these up while they're in stock


**B Grade** Leadtek GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB GDDR3 HDTV/Dual DVI (PCI-Expre (GX-094-LT)

 

[jubei]

I'd snap one of these up while they're in stock


**B Grade** Leadtek GeForce 8800 GTX 768MB GDDR3 HDTV/Dual DVI (PCI-Expre (GX-094-LT)

What exactly is meant by b-grade though, could you simply be sent a faulty card? :|

I am in same position as the op, looking to upgrade today but will not have the opportunity to do so again for a good couple of years, bar the move to 9800 when it comes out.

Cant find any good benchmarks for crossfire 3870s vs the gtx, nor anything really comparing gtx/gts/gt anyone got a link to good benchies? cant find on anandtech.

 

[misterPK]

What exactly is meant by b-grade though, could you simply be sent a faulty card? :|

B-grade means it is fully working, but not in mint condition. This can mean anything from the box has been opened, to a returned and refurbished item missing cables and manuals. At the end of the day you get what you pay for, so typically the cheaper it is the more that is missing.

PK!

 

[jubei]

dont think i have ever enabled aa or af in a game as it always gave mad performance hits, same with resolutions tho, highest i have had a fps game is like 1024 and that was for a slow game like counterstrike, always used 800x600 for quake games.

Stuck in that mindset that need lower res for higher fps and refresh rates etc.

Looking at various benchmarks the GTS seems to be outperforming the GTX on the ones i have seen. Also the 3870XT seems to be right up there with them aswell.

If you were to buy a card today, considering a 22" or 24" monitor for mainly gaming, what would you purchase? max £250.

 

[MHayes]

dont think i have ever enabled aa or af in a game as it always gave mad performance hits, same with resolutions tho, highest i have had a fps game is like 1024 and that was for a slow game like counterstrike, always used 800x600 for quake games.

Stuck in that mindset that need lower res for higher fps and refresh rates etc.

Looking at various benchmarks the GTS seems to be outperforming the GTX on the ones i have seen. Also the 3870XT seems to be right up there with them aswell.

If you were to buy a card today, considering a 22" or 24" monitor for mainly gaming, what would you purchase? max £250.

It goes ATI 3870 < GT < GTS < GTX

GT is best bang for buck, better than the ATI card and not much more, the GTS still has the crappy memory bus and just a few more shades yet is quite expensive, the GTX has come down in price loads recently so get that as it will be much better at higher resolutions and AA enabled.

I think it depends if you want to keep the card for a while or if it is a stop gap, if you want it to last get the GTX, if it is a stop gap then get the GT, you will lose less money whent he new 9000 series are out and if you are crazy get the new GTS.

 

[Alexrose1uk]

if you are crazy get the new GTS.

There's a little more to it than that - current high prices making the new GTS only about £20 more than a lot of the GTs, much better and quieter cooling solution by all accounts, lower heat due to improved cooling, less reports of card failures due to heat, higher performance at stock clocks, and can overclock further in general Despite not being a huge amount in it, the GTS DOES perform substantially better in some titles at high resolutions and settings, or thats what the benchmarks say.

Oh, and you can get them easily, regardless of brand, GTs have been like hotcakes, and thier prices have risen slowly since they came out becaus of it.

Yes, it costs just over £200, but if you can't afford the GTX, it's still the best card out right now, and should last a fair while, plus given the cooling issues with that 8800GTs and the death rates, I can see it holding it's value better.