Upgrade to 8800 GT 512 or not?

undeclared

Senior member
Oct 24, 2005
498
0
86
I can't seem to get proper FPS on my new monitor, but since it's a CRT it's not exactly as if i can't play stuff in a lower resolution no problem.

The issue at hand is that, if I have such a great system, I *should* be able to max most games, or get pretty close.

So, the question remains.. grab it or not?
 

conlan

Diamond Member
Jan 27, 2001
3,395
0
76
:thumbsup:


At those resolutions you're gonna want as much videocard as you can afford. The best bang for the buck right now is the 8800GT.
 

undeclared

Senior member
Oct 24, 2005
498
0
86
Hmm, my thoughts exactly..

I am also considering getting an E6850 instead of my Q6600, maybe someone locally wants to trade..

Or I could overclock perhaps, but I hate the headache that comes with overclocking...
 

jdkick

Senior member
Feb 8, 2006
601
1
81
The 8600GT is holding you back. It's performance is similar to my 7900GS and I know I can't play w/ max settings at 1680x1050 and still maintain decent FPS. I have to either drop to a lower resolution or cut back on the settings.

Upgrading to the 8800GT would certainly be an improvement. As for other options, it depends on how much you want to spend.
 

terencek

Member
Nov 2, 2007
70
0
0
Originally posted by: xtwells
Hmm, my thoughts exactly..

I am also considering getting an E6850 instead of my Q6600, maybe someone locally wants to trade..

Or I could overclock perhaps, but I hate the headache that comes with overclocking...

I agree with the others for the video card, but why do you want to go from C2Q to C2D? I mean, I got the same proc you do and I OC'd it to 3.1GHz w/out a sweat! I'm at 1.2625v and runnin' cool on the Zalman. (I can't wait to delv into watercooling).

But this is a video card thread, so yes, get the 8800GT, or at that resolution, if you have the $$, either wait for next gen GTX or get the 8800 GTX now.
 

cputeq

Member
Sep 2, 2007
154
0
0
Your problem lies in your video card.

I'm not trying to be elitist or anything, but the 8600 is a seriously underpowered card for gaming. It's a very large drop in performance from anything in the 8800 realm.

Getting a 8800GT would be a huge upgrade. There's no need to change your CPU, as right now you're definitely being limited by your video card.

Here's a review at Anandtech



 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,829
3
0
I doubt 2048x1536 is the real native resolution of your monitor. They usually rate CRTs higher than what they can actually display.
 

SniperDaws

Senior member
Aug 14, 2007
762
0
0
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
I doubt 2048x1536 is the real native resolution of your monitor. They usually rate CRTs higher than what they can actually display.


You told him! Well done i bet you really pissed him off.

Knobend!

 

undeclared

Senior member
Oct 24, 2005
498
0
86
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
I doubt 2048x1536 is the real native resolution of your monitor. They usually rate CRTs higher than what they can actually display.

I actively use 2048x1536@75Hz as my desktop resolution.

Screenshot available when I get home.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: xtwells
Originally posted by: Throckmorton
I doubt 2048x1536 is the real native resolution of your monitor. They usually rate CRTs higher than what they can actually display.

I actively use 2048x1536@75Hz as my desktop resolution.

Screenshot available when I get home.

I don't think he is debating whether it can display that res, he's merely debating that its the "native res".

Which games are you playing? All of them at 20x15?
 

undeclared

Senior member
Oct 24, 2005
498
0
86
Anything source engine works fine, but anything else is absolutely crap in terms of frames per second, heh.

I never actually called it my native res heh.. I just play it in and use it as my desktop resolution.

So maybe it's not the "native res" but how about it's the resolution I'm always using :)
 

error8

Diamond Member
Nov 28, 2007
3,204
0
76
Well that resolution is a video card destroyer, so maybe is better to try playing games at a lower one. You do need another video card, but not even the 8800 Gt can keep this resolution on newer games.
 

CP5670

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2004
5,660
762
126
The "native resolution" concept is meaningless for CRTs, unless you're talking about the phosphor dot pitch which is typically close to the max supported resolution anyway.

And yes, an 8800GT is a good option. It's way faster than the 8600GT and your monitor can obviously take advantage of it even if you can't use 20x15 in everything. I'm in a similar position in that my monitor that does the same resolution nicely, but my X1900XTX will only play older games comfortably at that setting. I'm only holding off buying something because I won't have much time to play games until after my exam in January and there is supposed to be that D9E coming soon after that.
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
you need the 1GB 8800GTSv3 when it comes out. For that resolution even 512MB of vram is not enough...

If you are willing to lower the res some to 1920x1080 or something then it will work a lot better with a 8800GT...

The 8600GT is not even enough for 1024x768 resolution. It simply doesn't perform... I think the GT is more then 3 times faster.
 

undeclared

Senior member
Oct 24, 2005
498
0
86
well, I can max out almost any game in 1280, so dont' tell me it's not enough for 1024.

1600x1200 in medium on crysis, no aa no af, but pretty freaking nice looking.

it's not that terrible, but I think I need a push..

In the source engine, I can go 2048x1536 16x 16x w/ HDR high on everything and get about 40 fps.

Other games I simply can't. Crysis and Oblivion to name a few. I can't put them in high res.

I get 30 fps in oblivion with HDR on, in a much lower resolution, etc..
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
Are you are telling me the 8600GT is maxing out crysis in 1600x1200 with reasonable framerates? (ie, above 30fps min frame rate)
 

undeclared

Senior member
Oct 24, 2005
498
0
86
It's not maxing out Cryiss, but 1600x1200 on medium is pretty freaking nice, and yes I would estimate 35 fps based on the stability of it.
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
ok.... when I said not enough for... i was talking about maxing... or near to maxing... medium is not even CLOSE to this game's max quality. Nor is it close to the amount of calculation power it needs. Other new games right around the corner (and recently released) have the same requirement. Considering you have a Q6600 system putting a little bit more for a video card shouldn't be a problem, and give you much better results in game then the quad vs dual choice.
 

undeclared

Senior member
Oct 24, 2005
498
0
86
Nope, I can't max out Crysis.

I suppose I will get an 8800 GT.. but I may consider getting the 9800 GTX when it comes out, assuming it literally is as advertised or hyped to be 3x as fast as an 8800 GTX..