$100 worth it for 4 more pipelines?

[grimlykindo]

The only big difference is the 20 vs 24 pipelines-

So what do you guys think? Are those extra pipelines worth the $100?

 

[VIAN]

no

 

[lavaheadache]

At resolutions of 1680x1050 and above I'm sure youd be wishing you had 4 more pipelines

 

[Maetryx]

Don't foget that in the eventual SLI you set up, that will be 8 more pipelines. The way I saw it was that I was already spending a boatload of money. Why not go the extra mile (or $100 in this case) and get the undisputed top of the line?

Plus, I got the eVGA that came with Battlefield 2 which I did not already own.

 

[wanderica]

I think you'll hear plenty from both sides of this argument. Bang for the buck, 7800 GT rules, but personally I wanted the best, so yes for me it is worth it. Especially with my 2405.

 

[goobernoodles]

Why not stash the 100, and put it toward an upgrade in the future? Buying top of the line is never practical.

 

[CraigRT]

not worth it, IMO.. But that depends on how much money you have to burn, e-penis status, etc.

OC'd 7800GT's bench at same speeds of GTX's in many cases...

I love my 7800GT!

 

[niggles]

Originally posted by: goobernoodles
Why not stash the 100, and put it toward an upgrade in the future? Buying top of the line is never practical.

I totally agree, it's like buying a new car, it depreciates 10% the second you drive it off the lot. I buy about 2 steps behind leading edge so I can get the best price point. I buy the games the same way. By the time I'm playing the game and bought the GPU they're about half what they cost initially and I get all of the fun. Only multiplayer games are worth buying and playing new... it means BF2 doesn't look as pretty as it will for me in about a year.

 

[Elfear]

Originally posted by: CraigRT
not worth it, IMO.. But that depends on how much money you have to burn, e-penis status, etc.

OC'd 7800GT's bench at same speeds of GTX's in many cases...

I love my 7800GT!

True, but how does it compare to an oced 7800GTX?

OP- Remember that the 7800GTX has better memory too. Most 7800GTs ship with mem@1000-1070MHz and oc to ~1150-1200MHz, wheras 7800GTXs ship with mem@1200-1300MHz and oc to 1300-1450MHz.

 

[Fallengod]

How do people not know this yet. The GTX is about 5-15fps max faster than a GT. Definitely not a better buy. Who pays $100-$200 more for 5 whole fps. These should answer your question.


Firingsquad Quake4
Firingsquad F.E.A.R.
Firingsquad HL2

AT F.E.A.R.

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: niggles

Originally posted by: goobernoodles
Why not stash the 100, and put it toward an upgrade in the future? Buying top of the line is never practical.

I totally agree, it's like buying a new car, it depreciates 10% the second you drive it off the lot. I buy about 2 steps behind leading edge so I can get the best price point. I buy the games the same way. By the time I'm playing the game and bought the GPU they're about half what they cost initially and I get all of the fun. Only multiplayer games are worth buying and playing new... it means BF2 doesn't look as pretty as it will for me in about a year.

I bet BF2 still looks pretty dang good on the X800XL tho... It looked great on my 6800GT!

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: modempower
How do people not know this yet. The GTX is about 5-15fps max faster than a GT. Definitely not a better buy.

:thumbsup:

Now, if the GTX had 512mb ram to go with it, then it might be a different story for $100 more.

I'm having a real hard time justifying upgrading at the moment. I have SLI 6800GTs and a 7800GT would be a step down for me. A single GTX would be pretty much equal at the settings I game at most of the time (16x12 4x/8x... except FEAR of course).

I think I need to wait to see if a 7800U is going to be released with faster speeds and more memory. If not, it's next gen for me most likely, unless I can find a cheap way to upgrade to SLI 7800GTs (like $100 out of pocket or something after selling my cards).

 

[aldamon]

A GTX wouldn't fit in my case so the decision was kind of made for me. My GT presses up against my water pump. Even if I had the space, I probably would have gone with the GT.

 

[grimlykindo]

hmmm...

maybe I'll go for the $350 7800gt with the free copy of COD2. Thats almost like paying $300 if you already plan on buying the game. Maybe not...

I still can't decide...

 

[vikingblade]

well...my take on this topic is this... it isnt really how much better does the gtx perform on the current games necessarily..5-15fps, but how much better will it handle upcoming games. as it is...even the most recent games like fear, tax the gtx. how well will the gt do with the new games 6 months from now. id imagine the fps difference between the gt and gtx will get larger and larger.

so, for me, its a question of do i spend an additional 100 bucks to future-proof my card a bit more. is it worth the xtra cash?? i still dont know. i guess im kinda waiting for the gtx prices to drop after the 1800xt comes out...hopefully.

i think if you wanna be able to play new games pretty well 6 months down the road, and dont wanna invest in a new video card for a year or more, the gtx may be the only choice. but, the gt is definately best bang for the buck right now. too bad right now ends tomorrow.

 

[xtknight]

Not worth it. Get a 7800GT now and put the $100 toward a next generation card.

 

[mOeeOm]

Bleh, wish I had the article again, compared GTX to GT on almost all games. Anyways at 1280x1024 the GTX was faster than the GT by 1-3fps, sometimes (ironically) the GT was faster. But at 1600x1200 it was more like 5-15fps higher for GTX...beyond 1600x1200...GT was left in the dust.

So decide what resolution you want to play at.

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: mOeeOm
Bleh, wish I had the article again, compared GTX to GT on almost all games. Anyways at 1280x1024 the GTX was faster than the GT by 1-3fps, sometimes (ironically) the GT was faster. But at 1600x1200 it was more like 5-15fps higher for GTX...beyond 1600x1200...GT was left in the dust.

So decide what resolution you want to play at.

GTX vs GT @ 2048x1536 4xAA/8xAF High Quality in Quake4
GTX wins by 7 fps

Ultra Quality, same settings
GTX wins by 7 fps again

GTX vs GT @ 16x12 4xAA/8xAF in FEAR
GTX wins by 3 fps

I don't think I would say that the GTX leaves the GT in the dust. Those are 2 of the newest, most graphically demanding games out there (until we see some benches for the final COD2). If these 2 games are an indication of most next gen games, I don't think the extra $100 is worth it at this time (especially in light of the recent deals on the GT making it sub-$300).

 

[Fallengod]

I definitely wouldnt say it leaves it in the dust. Theres no way in hell it does. Although, of course the margin is going to get larger the higher res you go.... Who plays games past 1600x1200 anyways. Shoot, I have a BFG 7800GT, I dont play ANY game past 1024x768 and usually more along the lines of 800x600. Who plays a game at a whole 15-20 fps at resolutions like 2048x1536 . I always make sure I have at least 100 fps. Less than that is NEVER acceptable to me.

 

[1Dark1Sharigan1]

Originally posted by: modempower
I definitely wouldnt say it leaves it in the dust. Theres no way in hell it does. Although, of course the margin is going to get larger the higher res you go.... Who plays games past 1600x1200 anyways. Shoot, I have a BFG 7800GT, I dont play ANY game past 1024x768 and usually more along the lines of 800x600. Who plays a game at a whole 15-20 fps at resolutions like 2048x1536 . I always make sure I have at least 100 fps. Less than that is NEVER acceptable to me.

7800GT @ 800x600? LOL

No need for GTX unless you need 1920x1200 (high-end WS LCD) . . . and well if you do then you can afford GTX . . .

 

[Aeridyne]

I like the 3Dfuzion 7800 Gt for 300 at newegg personally. Ive got my eye on that one when i finally get the bucks to swing one my way, unless a better deal surfaces before then.

 

[niggles]

Originally posted by: CraigRT

Originally posted by: niggles

Originally posted by: goobernoodles
Why not stash the 100, and put it toward an upgrade in the future? Buying top of the line is never practical.

I totally agree, it's like buying a new car, it depreciates 10% the second you drive it off the lot. I buy about 2 steps behind leading edge so I can get the best price point. I buy the games the same way. By the time I'm playing the game and bought the GPU they're about half what they cost initially and I get all of the fun. Only multiplayer games are worth buying and playing new... it means BF2 doesn't look as pretty as it will for me in about a year.

I bet BF2 still looks pretty dang good on the X800XL tho... It looked great on my 6800GT!

Sorry, don't take that the wrong way, I just want to turn everything including AA all the way up. "it goes up to 11..."
Everything looks fantastic, but in large open spaces in large valleys when I have the distance turned to 100% it can choke at times on 64 player servers. It's got waaaay too much to think about.

 

[toyota]

Originally posted by: modempower
I definitely wouldnt say it leaves it in the dust. Theres no way in hell it does. Although, of course the margin is going to get larger the higher res you go.... Who plays games past 1600x1200 anyways. Shoot, I have a BFG 7800GT, I dont play ANY game past 1024x768 and usually more along the lines of 800x600. Who plays a game at a whole 15-20 fps at resolutions like 2048x1536 . I always make sure I have at least 100 fps. Less than that is NEVER acceptable to me.

that doesnt make any sense. why the hell did you even buy a 7800gt?? the 7800gt will turn in about the same fps below 1280x1024. you really want get any better fps at 800x600. Fear would be the only game i would play at 1024x768 if i had a 7800gt. if you are not playing past 1024x768 then you defeated the whole point of having a 7800gt in the first place.

 

[biostud]

I got the GTX but over here the prices are $500 and $600, so i decided to go for the GTX. But probably also because I was shelling out $2500 for my new setup I didn't feel like skimping the $100 on the videocard.

 

[Sonikku]

Originally posted by: 1Dark1Sharigan1

Originally posted by: modempower
I definitely wouldnt say it leaves it in the dust. Theres no way in hell it does. Although, of course the margin is going to get larger the higher res you go.... Who plays games past 1600x1200 anyways. Shoot, I have a BFG 7800GT, I dont play ANY game past 1024x768 and usually more along the lines of 800x600. Who plays a game at a whole 15-20 fps at resolutions like 2048x1536 . I always make sure I have at least 100 fps. Less than that is NEVER acceptable to me.

7800GT @ 800x600? LOL

No need for GTX unless you need 1920x1200 (high-end WS LCD) . . . and well if you do then you can afford GTX . . .

Not if the bad@ass mofo monitor in question broke the bank...