7800 overkill?

[dclapps]

I was putting together a build for a friend's friend [so basically i don't know him] and he insisted upon a 7800gtx. In n out doesn't pay me enough to even add it to the cart it seems like, but I had a question. Let's say my monitor is a Daewoo 17inch LCD, with a max resolution of 1284x1024 @ 60hz. My question would be, is there another card that is cheaper that can give me similar frame rates in these resolutions.
I ask because I always see AT testing the newest of the new in resolutions higher than I can count. I understand this practice so as to make the differences shine, however I'm curious if, say for example, a 6600gt can give me 90 fps at native resolution, just as a gtx can, then that would prove the gtx worthless for me, as I can never stress it hard enough.
I've started seeing more and more games born with better quality images all the time, and it's making me think, on my next build, I might actually start turning some AA etc on for the feel as I was an old counterstrike player who enjoyed 8x6 with nothing on. If my monitor were to remain the same as above, [how much]would the gtx be overkill?

 

[imported_Kensai]

Save money and get a 7800GT. It'll be enough for the future.

 

[Rudee]

The 7800GT should practically guarantee you good gaming performance for at least the next 3-4 years.

 

[blckgrffn]

Originally posted by: Rudee
The 7800GT should practically guarantee you good gaming performance for at least the next 3-4 years.

LOL, we can all wish, right? If it is the next 9800 Pro, probably... but lets see how the next UT runs before believing this.

 

[Soccerman06]

If hes got the money, get the 7800GTX, in some cases its faster than SLI 7800GTs, also you should invest some money and get a better screen.

 

[Rudee]

Originally posted by: blckgrffn

Originally posted by: Rudee
The 7800GT should practically guarantee you good gaming performance for at least the next 3-4 years.

LOL, we can all wish, right? If it is the next 9800 Pro, probably... but lets see how the next UT runs before believing this.

It's not like the 7800GT is going to all of a sudden be a dog in the next UT. If so, it's a case of shoddy programming, not insufficient hardware. I certainly don't upgrade my hardware just to play one particular game. Remember all the people who upgraded their hardware to play Doom 3, just to get bored of the game in a matter of a few weeks.

 

[dclapps]

That's just it, I didn't invest any money into this LCD as it was a gift. I would of course like to keep it that way, especially when I'm used to low resolutions [I've never seen higher than 1280 as a matter of fact]. It seems like the difference is 70 bucks on a few cases, so I guess it's enough to future proof me. I wasn't planning on running SLI for the fact that two 6800ultra's are worse than one 7800gtx.

danny

 

[VIAN]

First question: Yes, 7800GT

say for example, a 6600gt can give me 90 fps at native resolution, just as a gtx can, then that would prove the gtx worthless for me, as I can never stress it hard enough.

Not necessarily. If that is the only game you will be playing for a loooong time, then yes, the GTX would be worthless. But if you want to play that and future titles without having to replace the card, then the GTX is very worth it. Although it may be a little too pricy, I'm waiting for a $300 version to come out.

The 7800GT should practically guarantee you good gaming performance for at least the next 3-4 years.

That seems a bit optimistic. I would say at about 2-3 years.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

7800GT should be good for a while,

even though your limited to say 12x10, i would always look at it like this. if a 6800GT gets the same FPS on the same system as a 7800GTX, then id buy the 7800GTX and crank the AA and AF through the roof.

 

[Marsumane]

If you never tend to turn much filtering on, nor game above 12x10 then id reccomend one of 3 cards.

1) x800xt (225ish a week ago and i think some still are left)
2) x800xl (250ish. if the x800xt cannot be found for cheap still)
3) 7800gt (400ish. if you are like the rest of us and after u see what aa + af + high res can do, u cant do w/o)

-The price difference is quite a bit as you have noticed. Personally, I would get one of the top two because they will more then meet what you are used to and will last you quite a bit of time for a little more then 1/2 the cost of the GT.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: Rudee

Originally posted by: blckgrffn

Originally posted by: Rudee
The 7800GT should practically guarantee you good gaming performance for at least the next 3-4 years.

LOL, we can all wish, right? If it is the next 9800 Pro, probably... but lets see how the next UT runs before believing this.

It's not like the 7800GT is going to all of a sudden be a dog in the next UT. If so, it's a case of shoddy programming, not insufficient hardware. I certainly don't upgrade my hardware just to play one particular game. Remember all the people who upgraded their hardware to play Doom 3, just to get bored of the game in a matter of a few weeks.

Except there will probably be more games with the UE3 than there seem to be with the Doom 3 engine, and they might be out fairly soon after UT2007, while things like Quake 4 still seem to be a fair while away this long after the Doom 3 release.
Upgrading for a game is different to upgrading for an engine, or a generation (also there's things like Elder Scrolls: Oblivion and AoE3)

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: VIAN
First question: Yes, 7800GT

say for example, a 6600gt can give me 90 fps at native resolution, just as a gtx can, then that would prove the gtx worthless for me, as I can never stress it hard enough.

Not necessarily. If that is the only game you will be playing for a loooong time, then yes, the GTX would be worthless. But if you want to play that and future titles without having to replace the card, then the GTX is very worth it. Although it may be a little too pricy, I'm waiting for a $300 version to come out.

The 7800GT should practically guarantee you good gaming performance for at least the next 3-4 years.

That seems a bit optimistic. I would say at about 2-3 years.

How about adding a second 7800GT to make SLI to last you for the 3~4 years then?

 

[Tanclearas]

I got myself a 7800GTX even though my monitor is also an LCD that runs 1280 x 1024 @ 60Hz. Honestly, I'm shocked that many review sites are claiming that the 7800GTX is only for people wanting to run resolutions of 1600 x 1200 or higher. Anyone that believes that has not tried running F.E.A.R. at 1280 with all (or even most) of the graphical features enabled.

Also, enabling transparent SSAA on the 7800GTX makes games look amazing, but there is definitely a performance hit. As far as I'm concerned, the 7800GTX is perfect for playing every game out there now at the highest possible graphical settings at 1280, and enough to play upcoming games at high settings.

 

[ArchAngel777]

If you are going to spend $400 on the GT, just buy the MSI OEM 7800 GTX for 479 @ www.newegg.com. That is the card I have, and it runs great. Clocks at 493/1350 stock cooling.

 

[sparklemotion]

does it clock at that with coolbits?

 

[Bona Fide]

Originally posted by: sparklemotion
does it clock at that with coolbits?

Don't bother with the GTX. I have no doubt that you'll be able to find a 7800GT for less than $400. And if you're just gonna play at 1280x1024, then it will last you for a good 3 years or so. The GTX is overkill.

 

[ArchAngel777]

400 or 480... Not much difference in my book. When you are only 80 bucks from top of the line, it is hard not to just go with it. But, if you can find them cheaper, more power to you.

Yes, it clocks at that with coolbits.

 

[Valkerie]

Originally posted by: Rudee

Originally posted by: blckgrffn

Originally posted by: Rudee
The 7800GT should practically guarantee you good gaming performance for at least the next 3-4 years.

LOL, we can all wish, right? If it is the next 9800 Pro, probably... but lets see how the next UT runs before believing this.

It's not like the 7800GT is going to all of a sudden be a dog in the next UT. If so, it's a case of shoddy programming, not insufficient hardware. I certainly don't upgrade my hardware just to play one particular game. Remember all the people who upgraded their hardware to play Doom 3, just to get bored of the game in a matter of a few weeks.

Unreal Engine 3.0 will run at good settings with a 7800GT. But at the time of the 3.0 Engine's release, there will be a card that will take heavier advantage of the program engine. It's all too obvious. Because right now the 9800 Pro isn't a bad card, it can play Doom 3, BF2, UT2004. But what came out, a 6800, then a 7800. There will always be a newer release of a graphics card that will be much faster than it's half-decade-ago cousin. Thank you and farewell 9800 Pro... (I wanted it so bad, but I didn't have the money).

 

[johnnqq]

nothing is overkill. look at f.e.a.r. just wait for the next unreal tournament...

 

[ArchAngel777]

nothing is overkill. look at f.e.a.r. just wait for the next unreal tournament...

The fact that F.E.A.R. brings our hardware to its knees does not mean the game will be awesome, or even released in that crappy coded state. CryEngine looks better than F.E.A.R already and it was released over 1 year ago... F.E.A.R. certainly does not look bad, but for the performance it offers, it sucks donkey ballz

 

[Valkerie]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

nothing is overkill. look at f.e.a.r. just wait for the next unreal tournament...

The fact that F.E.A.R. brings our hardware to its knees does not mean the game will be awesome, or even released in that crappy coded state. CryEngine looks better than F.E.A.R already and it was released over 1 year ago... F.E.A.R. certainly does not look bad, but for the performance it offers, it sucks donkey ballz

FEAR just has sucky programming, period. Unreal Engine 3.0 will look way better, and far faster in everyway imaginable.

 

[dclapps]

Anyone got an ETA on the next Unreal?

 

[MiranoPoncho]

2006 q1-2