Trying to keep a friend from wasting his money on a 8800GTS 640

[KingstonU]

Ok, so he doesn't understand why 8800GTS 512 is better and cheaper than the 8800 GTS 640

And he doesn't understand how 8800 GTS 512 is >>>>> 8600 GTS 512 when they have same amount of RAM


Ok my explanation:

VideoCard RAM: It seems there are 2 things that require lots of RAM on your video card (otherwise it makes almost no difference) :

- The resolution you set your screen at (higher resolutions need more ram)
- And an effect called AA, I don?t know what this is but it is supposed to make games prettier

The sweet spot to make it good for today and future games is supposed to be at least 512Mb


Next part:


OLD Nvidia cards (2006) have G80 core which is 90nm process = 8800 Ultra (768Mb), 8800GTX (768Mb), 8800GTS (640Mb), 8800GTS (320Mb)

NEW Nvidia cards (2007) have G92 core which is 65nm process (laws of physics, smaller process = faster, less heat, needs less power and costs less to make) = 8800 GTS (512Mb), 8800 GT (512Mb), 8800 GT (256Mb)

Performance BEST ----> WORST:
8800 Ultra (768Mb) > 8800 GTS (512Mb) > 8800 GTX (768Mb) > 8800 GT (512Mb) > ATI 3870 (512Mb) > 8800 GTS (640Mb) > 8800 GT (256Mb) > 8800 GTS (320Mb) > ATI 3850 (256Mb) >>> 8600 GTS (512Mb)



And with the prices:

8800 Ultra (768Mb) = $600 - $800+
8800 GTS (512Mb) = $349+ (estimate) <------------------ I would consider this
8800 GTX (768Mb) = $500 - $600
8800 GT (512Mb) = $299 - $349 <------------------ Or this
8800 GT (256Mb) = $219 - $229
8800 GTS (640Mb) = $450
8800 GTS (320Mb) = $270
8600 GTS (256Mb) = $140 - $199

ATI 3870 (512Mb) = $250 <------------------ Or this
ATI 3850 (256Mb) = $179


Best link I've found with up to date charts on all of this in one place: Tom's Hardware Review

Any part of this incorrect? Does any of this change being in Canada?

Thanks

 

[Jules]

Originally posted by: KingstonU

Performance BEST ----> WORST:
8800 Ultra (768Mb) > 8800 GTS (512Mb) > 8800 GTX (768Mb) > 8800 GT (512Mb) > ATI 3870 (512Mb) > 8800 GTS (640Mb) > 8800 GT (256Mb) > 8800 GTS (320Mb) > ATI 3850 (256Mb) >>> 8600 GTS (512Mb)

Pretty sure the GTX is still a faster card.

 

[Mech0z]

Well I do not know about prices, but unless he has a 650/680i and already have a 8800gts 640 and want to go SLI then yes its a very stupid buy. But it depends, if he can get a second hand card for a lot less then it might not be that stupid. But it kinda needs to be cheaper then 8800gt and hd 3870 which I doubt you will find.

 

[Syntax Error]

IMO, SLI is only for people who can afford TWO cards when they purchase...getting one card with the intention of another after six-eight months after the first one generally doesn't yield the performance boost as a better high-end card from a new generation of cards yield.

 

[imported_Scoop]

Originally posted by: MyStupidMouth

Originally posted by: KingstonU

Performance BEST ----> WORST:
8800 Ultra (768Mb) > 8800 GTS (512Mb) > 8800 GTX (768Mb) > 8800 GT (512Mb) > ATI 3870 (512Mb) > 8800 GTS (640Mb) > 8800 GT (256Mb) > 8800 GTS (320Mb) > ATI 3850 (256Mb) >>> 8600 GTS (512Mb)

Pretty sure the GTX is still a faster card.

Nope, that order is the same on the AnandTech article, first page.

 

[SniperDaws]

Just tell the stupid tosser to read this forum.


OI NOBBY your mate is right so listen to him you silly arse before you spend more money on an inferior card.

Buy the 8800GTS 512mb it IS faster and Cheaper!!!!!

 

[Jules]

Originally posted by: Scoop

Originally posted by: MyStupidMouth

Originally posted by: KingstonU

Performance BEST ----> WORST:
8800 Ultra (768Mb) > 8800 GTS (512Mb) > 8800 GTX (768Mb) > 8800 GT (512Mb) > ATI 3870 (512Mb) > 8800 GTS (640Mb) > 8800 GT (256Mb) > 8800 GTS (320Mb) > ATI 3850 (256Mb) >>> 8600 GTS (512Mb)

Pretty sure the GTX is still a faster card.

Nope, that order is the same on the AnandTech article, first page.

Benchmarks say otherwise.

 

[imported_Scoop]

Originally posted by: MyStupidMouth

Originally posted by: Scoop

Originally posted by: MyStupidMouth

Originally posted by: KingstonU

Performance BEST ----> WORST:
8800 Ultra (768Mb) > 8800 GTS (512Mb) > 8800 GTX (768Mb) > 8800 GT (512Mb) > ATI 3870 (512Mb) > 8800 GTS (640Mb) > 8800 GT (256Mb) > 8800 GTS (320Mb) > ATI 3850 (256Mb) >>> 8600 GTS (512Mb)

Pretty sure the GTX is still a faster card.

Nope, that order is the same on the AnandTech article, first page.

Benchmarks say otherwise.

The benchmarks don't even have GTX results, only Ultra.

 

[jonks]

I'm not sure your friend should be blowing over $300 on a graphics card unless he will appreciate what he's getting. Honestly, if you friend and you don't know what AA is, you're not going to miss it if you don't use it. Has anyone ever heard someone who didn't know what AA was complain about "jaggies"?

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: sirjonk
I'm not sure your friend should be blowing over $300 on a graphics card unless he will appreciate what he's getting. Honestly, if you friend and you don't know what AA is, you're not going to miss it if you don't use it. Has anyone ever heard someone who didn't know what AA was complain about "jaggies"?

I agree with this to a point... but, there was a day that none of us knew what AA was. The best way to appreciate superior image quality is to experience it firsthand.

 

[Denithor]

Just have him look at the comparison of the 8800GTS-512 to the 8800Ultra on this page. They go back and forth but too close to call, and since the 8800Ultra is undeniably faster than either the 8800GTX and (hands down) the 8600GTS-512 there should really be nothing else to consider.

And he can get the EVGA 8800GTS 512MB Crysis Edition with Crysis included from NCIX.com for $360CAD.

ANY MORE QUESTIONS?

 

[KingstonU]

Thanks for all your posts!

Also, what are the best card makers? Is EVGA a good one?

 

[betasub]

Originally posted by: KingstonU
And he doesn't understand how 8800 GTS 512 is >>>>> 8600 GTS 512 when they have same amount of RAM.

Huge difference in GPU core performance: G92 >>>>> G84 core (8600).
Huge difference in memory bandwidth: 256bit >>>>> 128bit vRAM.
(Even if clocked to similar MHz).

Before spending $300, I think he needs to understand what the important factors are graphics card performance.

 

[Spook]

Its not all about the amount of ram. Sure, the 640Meg is more... but what about the speed of the ram, the 512Meg is faster. Also the new 8800GTS's have considerably more pipelines, 128 as apposed to 96 of the older model. Of course thing size of the die, you already mentioned, and the cost.

Someone might ask why the new boards are so much cheaper, and provide better performance. Well the speculation I've seen around the boards, is that A) Nvidia is testing the new die size on a known architecture(Not unlike Intel with the Penryn Core), and B) The next gen high end boards are just around the corner. Maybe Spring?

This release of 8800GT, and GTS is a strange release... I don't believe Nvidia has ever transposed a new model card on top of their old gen card like this. Its a strange move becuase they completely undermine the value of the previous gen cards. Then again i suppose they HAVE done this before, except they called them 7900, instead of the 7800's... it was a refresher model as well. Maybe it would have been better to call the new 8800GT, and GTS 8900GT, and 8900GTS. At least then there is a distinction.

Oh well, marketing can be funny...

 

[jeffw2767602]

Originally posted by: Spook

This release of 8800GT, and GTS is a strange release... I don't believe Nvidia has ever transposed a new model card on top of their old gen card like this. Its a strange move becuase they completely undermine the value of the previous gen cards. Then again i suppose they HAVE done this before, except they called them 7900, instead of the 7800's... it was a refresher model as well. Maybe it would have been better to call the new 8800GT, and GTS 8900GT, and 8900GTS. At least then there is a distinction.

Oh well, marketing can be funny...

This is terrible marketing in my opinion. I guess you can afford to have a marketing team stricken with downsyndrome when you have a product as good as the 8800GT.

 

[Denithor]

Yes, nVidia really screwed up the naming of this refresh of the 8800 series.

Many people who don't know any better (like the friend in the OP) are going to look at the two cards on the shelf and think "320-bit 640MB MUST be better than 256-bit 512MB" and buy the old card (probably at a higher price, too).

*****

On a side note, I wonder if any of the card makers will make a SSC/XXX/etc version of the 8800GTS with GDDR4 at say 2.4GHz? That would go a LONG way toward fixing the neutered bandwidth of these cards versus the 8800GTX/Ultra.

8800GT 512 @ 1800MHz --> 57.6GB/s
8800GTS 512 @ 1940MHz --> 62.0GB/s
8800GTS 512 @ 2400MHz --> 76.8GB/s
8800GTX @ 1800MHz --> 86.4GB/s
8800Ultra @ 2160MHz --> 103.7GB/s

 

[hooflung]

The problem is that people are benchmarking games that a lot of people will put down after 40 hours. The 320bit 640 has its place. Granted, the 320mb is completely obsoleted. However, if you can get an OC version of a 640 then AA will hold up on these boards ok. It might be a shame to get it over a 512 GT but meh, an OC 640 isn't that bad if you consider Widescreen gaming.

A big thing to consider is how many older games will they play on this card where 320bit memory bus will let you crank up AA a bit better at lower resolutions like 1280x1024. Until benches on older games come out... its all really speculation. I'd say these benchmarks really need to include Unreal 2.5 engine based games.

Basically, if he can't get a 8800GT for under 300 bones and he can get a 640 it really depends on if he wants to wait. If he can spend 370 then he needs to get the 512GTS. Any of the cards will probably suit him fine and noone on these forums can tell him how much happiness he'll get without actually knowing him and his game collection.

 

[Jules]

Originally posted by: Scoop

Originally posted by: MyStupidMouth

Originally posted by: Scoop

Originally posted by: MyStupidMouth

Originally posted by: KingstonU

Performance BEST ----> WORST:
8800 Ultra (768Mb) > 8800 GTS (512Mb) > 8800 GTX (768Mb) > 8800 GT (512Mb) > ATI 3870 (512Mb) > 8800 GTS (640Mb) > 8800 GT (256Mb) > 8800 GTS (320Mb) > ATI 3850 (256Mb) >>> 8600 GTS (512Mb)

Pretty sure the GTX is still a faster card.

Nope, that order is the same on the AnandTech article, first page.

Benchmarks say otherwise.

The benchmarks don't even have GTX results, only Ultra.

Yep already seen that. I was looking at the HardOCP review and it shows the 8800GT, GTS 512mb and GTX.

 

[dgevert]

Originally posted by: Scoop

Originally posted by: MyStupidMouth

Originally posted by: KingstonU

Performance BEST ----> WORST:
8800 Ultra (768Mb) > 8800 GTS (512Mb) > 8800 GTX (768Mb) > 8800 GT (512Mb) > ATI 3870 (512Mb) > 8800 GTS (640Mb) > 8800 GT (256Mb) > 8800 GTS (320Mb) > ATI 3850 (256Mb) >>> 8600 GTS (512Mb)

Pretty sure the GTX is still a faster card.

Nope, that order is the same on the AnandTech article, first page.

It's neck and neck until you get to extreme high resolutions and settings, at which point the 8800 GTX pulls away (probably because of the increased frame buffer)