GeForce 8800 GTS 512MB to cost $299-349

[taltamir]

I thought the G92 is the midrange geforce 9 (currently dubbed 8800Gt and new 8800GTS to keep selling ultras to ignorant people) while G96 is the high end, and the G98 is the LOW end for the geforce 9 series... I might be completely wrong about this though.

What I meant was get a non CF/SLI card... the X2 video cards are always horrible... You waste half the ram, you need more finicky drivers, and you have all the drawbacks of dual video cards with the exception of needing an exclusive mobo (you can use an X2 video card on any mobo regardless if it is SLI or CF).

And yea, corsair and crucial don't make chips, they make modules and sell them to you, and give you warranty... It really matters very little as long you don't overclock... I was just saying that he is was making a point to say he is upgrading from corsair to crucial.. as if it is some big improvement...

 

[Syntax Error]

I say, sit on an 8800GT for the next year and see what 2008 offers in terms of HD3800 series and Geforce 9-series cards. I don't think it's wise to spend $350-400 on the new GTS, if you can get a great deal on an 8800GT near MSRP ($225-250 like places such as Dell and you can be PATIENT) then that should hold you over 'till next year.

I've considered stepping-up from the 8800GT to the new G92 GTS, but after seeing some initial benchmarks, the extra performance boost isn't worth an extra $100 for me.

 

[JPB]

Worse upgrade plan I have seen in a while...

I didn't ask your opinion. :roll:

The phenom is overpriced and underpowered right now. This choice of processor means you get two extra cores, but not extra power PER core (so duel or single threaded apps will be the same as before)

This one I would probably agree on. I decided on this, because I just wanted to stay with AMD. But I did not completely rule out the option of getting a Q6600

The X38 is overpriced and was determined to give undetectable benefits over the X35. Not to mention it is an intel board...

I know its an Intel board. It was way too early in the morning when I changed my sig. Just for the fact that I had a X38 listed in the sig at first, means I was considering it. Where can I find this proof that the X38 offers nothing more than the X35 ?

The suggesited replacement the 790FX is gonna cost alot, and is a 4 slot PCIE2 16x board.

If I stay with AMD, it will be the 790FX because I *want* 4 slots for graphics.

You are much better off getting the 780 which is a two slot, or the 770 which is a one slot. Save a few hundred dollars, since you seem to be planning on using only one slot.

Money wont be an option when I buy these, so why not ? Especially since I want the extra slots.

The R680 X2 is a crossfire card with two processors. Which is really a horrible waste like all CF/SLI "solutions". You would be better off getting a G96 based card when those come out

And you know it will be a horrible waste how ? Since no one knows how it will scale with games ?

2 gigs are not enough, get 4. And I think corsair is better then crucial.

I have already decided on 4 gigs.

750watt psu is WAY Too much... your OCZ 450watt should be enough as it is and require no upgrade.

Yes, I agree, the PSU I have now would be enough. But...since my current PC is going to my wife...and I will need a new one I decided on this one. And the way I see it, too much is better than having not enough.

The 24 inch dell monitor is the only thing I can get behind... I am using an ultrasharp 24inch WS monitor right now and it is awesome...

Still not sure about the Dell, I may go with the 24" Westinghouse.

 

[JPB]

I was just saying that he is was making a point to say he is upgrading from corsair to crucial.. as if it is some big improvement...

LOL...that is funny. Upgrading from Corsair to Crucial ?

Its upgrading from 1 gig to 4 gig. Since my wife is getting my current 1 gig of Corsair. So I decided on Crucial this time around.

Amusing how people assume things.

 

[TC91]

imo they should have called the 8800gt the 8850gt, and the new g92 gts should be called the 8850gts just to be less confusing to the average joe.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: JPB

Worse upgrade plan I have seen in a while...

I didn't ask your opinion. :roll:

Good point... you put it in your sig not in the actual thread, Oops


The reason I was saying you should go with a double or single slotter is because you indicated wanting to buy two R680 (isn't that one gonna be two the X2 video card... Thats a single slot with two GPU card. But maybe you meant buying TWO R680 cards? Thats a different animal all together and means I misunderstood.

I can see why you want to stay with AMD... that is, supporting the company so it gets over its problems and keeps the market competative. Kudos to you.

And yea, if you give the old computer to your wife you need to buy a new psu anyways... and if you are buying 2 video cards with the option to upgrade to 4 cards and money isn't an issue then 750watts will be needed eventually after all

Originally posted by: TC91
imo they should have called the 8800gt the 8850gt, and the new g92 gts should be called the 8850gts just to be less confusing to the average joe.

They should have called it the geforce 9500. Like the chip numerals indicate.

But then grandma and granpa buying a video card to their little gamer wouldn't be spending 700$ on an ultra would they? I was just at frys... a total shopping frenzy... the only 8 series left in stock were 3 paltry 8800GTS 320MB GTS cards...
And two weeks ago the shelfs were full.

 

[Syntax Error]

Originally posted by: taltamir
They should have called it the geforce 9500. Like the chip numerals indicate.

I think Nvidia would save the "9-series" brand name for something big, the 8800GT was pretty much a stopgap, partly to steal the thunder from AMD's HD3870s.

I do agree they should have named the 8800GT something like 8850 or 8900, like they did in the 7-series cards.

 

[bryanW1995]

8900gt would have actually made sense. it's surprising to me that nvidia has blundered this badly on this recent intro. It's not like they didn't have an ENTIRE FREAKIN' YEAR to come out with a competitive midrange card.

They have completely dropped the ball thus far with no sub-$200 "midrange" offerings. What we're basically seeing is an 8800gts upgrade but still very close to 8800gts prices for nvidia, while amd actually has a couple of very nice cards at competitive prices. When I first read the reviews on nov 15 I was like "ho-hum, another boring amd screw-up", but now it appears that they're not the ones screwing up. amd's market share for Q4 is going to skyrocket b/c they now have good cards for the masses of midrange gamers, and, just as importantly, the oem's are likely to choose amd for most mid-range gaming rigs for the next several months.

Nvidia needs to figure out a way to get more boards out ASAP or they might slip below the $1 billion profit figure for Q4!!

 

[TC91]

i dont think the g92 should be a 9x00 series card, but calling it the 8850 or 8900 would have been a better idea on nvidia's part. they better get their availability problems fixed, but i kind of hope they wont, just so that ati/amd wont get beaten up too much more as they have already taken a huge beating from intel/nvidia.

 

[taltamir]

what availability problems? both AMD and nVidia are churning out cards at massive rates with absolutely no hiccups... they are just selling out as soon as they are done since its been over a year and a half since the last refesh and that one didn't include a single mid range card... only low end and high end cards. (the gts was still a high end at 350$... and the 8600 was a LOW end card at mid range price, being outperformed by the 7900GS...)

I just ordered a 8800GT... to replace a 7900GS.

What we are seeing here is simply very high demand due a badly needed product finally arriving...