-
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.
second x2 review
- Thread starter Gerard
- Start date
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,080
- Location
- In a house
Looks like ill be sticking with me GT. 
You reading the same review as me?
I thought that meself, but loadsa's sig shows a GTS 512, and going by that second reviews don't half show a single GTS 512 doing well.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,080
- Location
- In a house
You reading the same review as me?
Yup, hammered in Crysis, hammerd in Bio, not much faster in others, im hoping the proper review sites show it better, i at least thought more than a few frames here/there in some, and not whooped of single cards in some.
*Awaits the, its the drivers posts.
I thought that meself, but loadsa's sig shows a GTS 512, and going by that second reviews don't half show a single GTS 512 doing well.
Ive a GT, still lets see what the pricings like, but it doesn't look worth going to from the GT/GTS/GTX/Ultra.
Last edited:
I was really hoping this card was going to be awesome, i've been waiting for it for a month.
TBH - From what i've seen of the last two reviews (both painting very similar pictures), the card is up and down like a brides nighty, and apparently very noisy.
I honestly can't see the card comming out less then £280, and prolly closer to £300.
The performance you gain over a GTS that costs £200 for your extra £100 doesn't seem worth it.
TBH - From what i've seen of the last two reviews (both painting very similar pictures), the card is up and down like a brides nighty, and apparently very noisy.
I honestly can't see the card comming out less then £280, and prolly closer to £300.
The performance you gain over a GTS that costs £200 for your extra £100 doesn't seem worth it.
200 watts full load
Yup, hammered in Crysis, hammerd in Bio, not much faster in others, im hoping the proper review sites show it better, i at least thought more than a few frames here/there in some, and not whooped of single cards in some.
*Awaits the, its the drivers posts.
Ive a GT, still lets see what the pricings like, but it doesn't look worth going to from the GT/GTS/GTX/Ultra.
My mistake there, I was reading without me glasses and mistook the 5 for an S
Yup, hammered in Crysis, hammerd in Bio, not much faster in others, im hoping the proper review sites show it better, i at least thought more than a few frames here/there in some, and not whooped of single cards in some.
*Awaits the, its the drivers posts.
Ive a GT, still lets see what the pricings like, but it doesn't look worth going to from the GT/GTS/GTX/Ultra.
I would say its worthwhile changing to from a gt, gts maybe in certain games at some res. The gt is being hammered by it in fear for example as well as tf2 by sizable amounts. Its also the only card that can comfortably handle call of juarez.
Ain't worth going from a GT and up to the X2, no games out now or in near future need much more than GT, the X2 ain't even that more powerful going by reviews, yeah sure, if you game at high rez it maybe worth it, for the rest it ain't, wait for some decent next gen hardware.
Well for a start they did use Vista for their results and they seem a strange as that 3D Mark score of 13k sounds a bit odd considering what we have been hearing so far. Is it not supposed to hit 17k-18k at default settings? Also AMD Vista Sample 8.45 RC4 , not blaming the drivers or anything but just saying there are some huge gaps in scores from what we have been seeing