I wouldn't totally agree with you there. I have a GTX since the day of release and I generally game at 1280 on my 19' TFT, having never got around to actually buying the new monitor I swore I would!
Occasionally I break out the old CRT and go at 1600*1200. (thats slightly more than 1650*1050) Despite what the benchies say, there's a noticable framerate difference in real world playing. At 1280 everthings a touch more, well, slick.
I've tried 1920 on the CRT - for me, it's still a borderline no-no on a lot of games, even with a GTX. Some people would be happy, it's a matter of personal opinion (which I realise doesn't really count for much around here) and how much AA/AF you like to use.
When it comes down to $/framerate, I'd totally agree with you, a GT would be a better buy, but for pure ease of gaming the GTX is still a cracker on any display, and a very viable enthusiast purchase if you can afford it.
We'll see about the new GTS when it arrives, but at this point I'm looking ahead to the next-gen
I see no reason to downgrade to a GT to raise cash, all the 8800's will nose-dive in value once the next gen is on the shelf.
yeah i agree ive had mine now since last nov when i got my first gtx so had it way over a year and since the gt boys have only just got theres and its still not faster than 1 year old tech thats fine but when this happends :
NVIDIA also claims that the upcoming G92 is set to break the 1 Teraflops barrier. The 8800 is capable of about 330 Gflops, which means the green team is suggesting that the 9800 could be three times more powerful. Keeping in mind that ATI's R600 can deliver 450 GigaFlops, this would be an outstanding generation leap for NVIDIA, as it usually makes its updated generations two times faster than the previous ones.
the 8800 gt is gonna find its self near low end and nowhere near the top!!
9900 gtx will be on order and the ultra will be going in my mates pc (free upgrades he loves em!!)