• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

8800GT 256mb review

Bioshock is about the only benchmark that shows what your summary claims.

They tested at 1280x1024, 1680x1050, 1920x1200

ET : QW - same
HL2 - same with no AA/AF, 20%, 10%, 30% slower with 4xAA/16xAF (wierd bump at 1680x1050)
FEAR - same
COD4 - same with no AA/AF, 20-35% slower with 4xAA/16xAF at all res
UT3 - same
Bioshock - same except at 1920
 
I'll hold out till I see a reveiw from a hardware site I trust, but if these benches hold true, the ATi 3870 sales are in serious trouble.
 
wait 6 moths for new games, it is gonna get worse.

Memory usage surely is not going down but up.

256MB is not 2008 friendly.
 
Originally posted by: Killrose
I'll hold out till I see a reveiw from a hardware site I trust, but if these benches hold true, the ATi 3870 sales are in serious trouble.
Click to expand...

They are not, people get excited and turned on by 8800GT and then when they can't find it at decent price, they look for next best deal..
 
I bought it because I think its the best option for the ~200 price point at this point in time, which is what I am looking for. I haven't seen a 3870 or 512 GT below 250 anywhere, except for the dell GT thread which seems to be hit and miss for when you will get the card.
 
Originally posted by: quikah
Bioshock is about the only benchmark that shows what your summary claims.

They tested at 1280x1024, 1680x1050, 1920x1200

ET : QW - same
HL2 - same with no AA/AF, 20%, 10%, 30% slower with 4xAA/16xAF (wierd bump at 1680x1050)
FEAR - same
COD4 - same with no AA/AF, 20-35% slower with 4xAA/16xAF at all res
UT3 - same
Bioshock - same except at 1920
Click to expand...

For HL2 you also keep in mind that even though your 20 and 10% slower at 12x10 and 16x10 you still have plenty of performance despite that your only really looking at 19x12 where you find that it is becoming unplayable on the 256MB card.

The only game where I would recommend keeping the 512MB version of the 8800 GT is HL2 at 19x12 AA+AF, Call of Duty 4 with AA+AF across the board, and Bioshock at 19x12. The rest of the situations the 8800 GT 256 is plenty.
 
wow... I can actually justify the 512MB version... for the first time ever I will go for a higher end amount of ram... because its the first time I have a higher end monitor (dell ultrasharp 24 inch 1920x1200 native res).
Having ordered it from dell it is supposed to ship on the 10th, for just a little more then the 256MB version.
 
lucky for me i play at 1024x768 or 1280x1024 max with no aa(mp gamer). i remember this whole year memory was supposed to make a difference, and the year before. will 2008 finally hold true? i still game on my 3200+ xp and 6800 128mb vanilla btw. this will be my next card though along with the 2140.

also low res and no tearing > high res and tearing. i can't stand it.
 
The Call of Duty 4 benchmarks with AA in particular show huge performance differences.

Also keep in mind that if a benchmark shows large differences in actual gameplay it'll be more noticeable since you'll experience hitching/stuttering when data is swapped from RAM to VRAM.
 
all playable for singleplayer. but online you will not notice aa or af. especially for how fast that game is. actually, even in singleplayer its hard to notice unless you stop and stare at things for periods of time. aa is overrated. especially if you're in a higher resolution.
 
Squeeze that 3870 to under 200 dollars.... or
I need that dual slot cooling solution. If they put one on the 256mb version, I am sold.
 
this review is not accurate.

it is of a 8800gt 256mb with 1800mhz memory . that would be the speed the 8800gt 512mb is.


there is one xfx 8800gt 256mb on newegg with the nvidia spec 1400mhz memory. which would be slower than this by a likely significant amount.
 
Originally posted by: DSF
It would be nice if the review showed Crysis performance.
Click to expand...

Do you really want to throw up in your mouth? Just put the game on a shelf and wait until the hardware catches up.
 
This card is proof that you dont need 1024mb or even 640mb of GDDR, you just need raw speed.

A nice Gimmick to keep the kids happy.
 
Originally posted by: SniperDaws
This card is proof that you dont need 1024mb or even 640mb of GDDR, you just need raw speed.

A nice Gimmick to keep the kids happy.
Click to expand...

Yeah, personally I think I want 512MB of RAM because I like to play at 1680x1050 with AA and AF enabled. By the time 1024MB of RAM would make a difference, I will likely want a new card anyway.
 
Originally posted by: hans007
this review is not accurate.

it is of a 8800gt 256mb with 1800mhz memory . that would be the speed the 8800gt 512mb is.


there is one xfx 8800gt 256mb on newegg with the nvidia spec 1400mhz memory. which would be slower than this by a likely significant amount.
Click to expand...

The memory speed will be determined by AIB partners, but there will be some with GT 512 memory speeds as well, without testing we don't know how much slower the 8800 GT 256 with 1.4GHz memory will be.
 
QW:ET equal
HL:EP2 512 pulls ahead
FEAR : PM equal (old school engine, who cares anymore)
CoD4: 512 leads, 256MB is acceptable, probley.
UT3/BioShock: same as CoD4.

Apparently I wasted my money getting a 512MB, oh well, such is life.

(quikah seems to have the same type of left brain as me)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top