Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

8800GT 256MB better buy for UT3? II

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • replied
    Originally posted by cel4145 View Post
    Just received my EVGA 8800GT 256MB from Newegg and installed it. Great performance improvements in FPS. I used to run at 4/4 with an Asus 8600GTS, and now at 5/5, game play is much more often hitting the 62 FPS cap at 1400x1050. I can highly recommend this card. I can't imagine the 512MB offering any significant difference. Save your money and get this if you are on a budget unless you have an obscenely high resolution monitor.
    The 512 card enables a person to run at a hi res with AA turned on and no performance hits. I run with 4xAA and I still stay in the 60 fps range. If you are not going to run the game at super hi res or with AA then you are correct ... get the 256 MB card. But I just feel that for few dollars more you get more memory but do you what you feel is best for you. In the end that is what a person has to do ... follow their first mind.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Just received my EVGA 8800GT 256MB from Newegg and installed it. Great performance improvements in FPS. I used to run at 4/4 with an Asus 8600GTS, and now at 5/5, game play is much more often hitting the 62 FPS cap at 1400x1050. I can highly recommend this card. I can't imagine the 512MB offering any significant difference. Save your money and get this if you are on a budget unless you have an obscenely high resolution monitor.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Removed the 8800GT and Installed the 8800GTS (G92). I had to manually set the fan to 85% though. Stock was 28% just like the GT.

    The rear fan brought the ambient case temps down over the GT. Speed wise (Crysis Benchmark) 4 FPS Avg faster @ 1280x1024. Nothing huge but the card did what I wanted it to do and that was get the heat out of the case.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I bought a Asus 8800gt 512meg card two weeks ago, all photos it was shown with a 'company of heros' sticker on it's cover with would looked like same fan as seen on other cards I was pricing.

    But when I received the card it now has no cover at all on it, no graphic stickers either, instead now it has a 'huge heatsink & a huge fan' I think they have changed the design of the card do to heating issues. And man what a great card it is.....have no problems at all with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Rivatuner does a better job than nTune. My inno 3D also tuns at 29% untweaked. Tweaked I can add 20% to all it's clockspeeds. Id does use 300MB in some maps though. The best way to run the fans is with custom low level settings, that increase fan speed according to core temps.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    ^^ Thanks. I just read that under load with a high OC if you turn the fans up 100% the temps stay around 50c ... I don't care about fan noise so that would be cool with me. And it really doesn't cost that much to upgrade.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by AnubanUT2 View Post
    When you get that card please let us know how the cooling system for them is ... I am thinking about upgrading my 8800GTs if they really improved the cooling for the card. That way I can OC without worries since there is no official cooling solution yet for GT cards.
    Will do - Its actually replacing an EVGA 8800GT. The GTs have gone with the low profile fan that blows heat back into the case. GTS (G92) models have the fan that blows out the back of the case which is a key reason why I picked it up. I want to keep case temps for my Q6600 down.

    * Also of important note, some GTs (at least EVGA) were released with fans that run at 25%. Needed to get nTune to manually increase for load.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by richcz3 View Post
    Memory is the key detail. Even though the GPU rates the same, high rez textures load and high screen resolution come with more memory. 256 is Ok for the here and now, but the savings will not last long from a gaming investment perspective.

    I just sprung for the EVGA GeForce 8800GTS (G92) 512MB yesterday (should arrive today). Built on the same G92 as the GT is with 128 Stream Processors. Has an 8-15% on the GT now.

    Unfortunately nVidia is causing quite a bit of market confusion with their naming conventions, model variants, and speed differences. Really - how could there be two GTS variants. One that is slower than that GT and one that is faster.

    Being that there is a fair amount of price gouging going on, it depends on how much you're willing to get stung. Any way one looks at it, I would suggest a 512MB variant over a 256MB

    Just to throw something into the mix.
    I have a 7900GTO 512MB running on an C2D@ 3.4Ghz.
    The FPS performance differential between it and an 8800GT 512MB on a Quad 3.2GHz rig are minimal.
    There is high CPU utilization in UT3 and GPUs seem more to eek out performance gains at the highest resolutions.
    When you get that card please let us know how the cooling system for them is ... I am thinking about upgrading my 8800GTs if they really improved the cooling for the card. That way I can OC without worries since there is no official cooling solution yet for GT cards.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Memory is the key detail. Even though the GPU rates the same, high rez textures load and high screen resolution come with more memory. 256 is Ok for the here and now, but the savings will not last long from a gaming investment perspective.

    I just sprung for the EVGA GeForce 8800GTS (G92) 512MB yesterday (should arrive today). Built on the same G92 as the GT is with 128 Stream Processors. Has an 8-15% on the GT now.

    Unfortunately nVidia is causing quite a bit of market confusion with their naming conventions, model variants, and speed differences. Really - how could there be two GTS variants. One that is slower than that GT and one that is faster.

    Being that there is a fair amount of price gouging going on, it depends on how much you're willing to get stung. Any way one looks at it, I would suggest a 512MB variant over a 256MB

    Just to throw something into the mix.
    I have a 7900GTO 512MB running on an C2D@ 3.4Ghz.
    The FPS performance differential between it and an 8800GT 512MB on a Quad 3.2GHz rig are minimal.
    There is high CPU utilization in UT3 and GPUs seem more to eek out performance gains at the highest resolutions.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    The 8800GT is hard to get at these days. Bought mine a month ago n still waiting for it, 8800GT Extreme it is though, but a regular GT still isnt very available from NVidia yet

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    If you're looking for something less expensive than the 8800GT 512MB, I think the Radeon 3870 512MB will be a better bet.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I'd go with the 512MB, it will come in handy for future games (including Crysis). Also, you can overclock the 512MB version so that it will easily beat the 256MB, giving you some more performance at higher resolutions.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    The PS3 has 256MB of GPU memory so the game was probably optimized with that in mind.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    tomhardware rates the 8800 GT as the best buy as its not far off perfomance wise from the higher cards but is much cheaper
    http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/12/...ard/page4.html

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    8800GTS 512MB that just come out is just £10 more and 2fps of the ultra in some cases

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X