Madshrimps Forum Madness

Madshrimps Forum Madness (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/)
-   WebNews (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f22/)
-   -   The NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra is an utter waste of money (https://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f22/nvidia-geforce-8800-ultra-utter-waste-money-32990/)

jmke 3rd May 2007 01:43

The NVIDIA GeForce 8800 Ultra is an utter waste of money
 
Let's review the facts. First, our performance data shows the 8800 Ultra to perform on par with our EVGA e-GeForce 8800 GTX KO ACS3. Certainly the 8800 Ultra nudges the EVGA part out of the lead, but the performance difference is minimal at best. The price difference, however, is huge. We can easily find the EVGA card for its retail price of $650, while NVIDIA expects us to pay $180 more for what amounts to a repositioned cooling fan and updated silicon. Foxconn also offers an overclocked GTX for $550 that has essentially the same clocks as the EVGA KO ACS3 (Foxconn is 630/2000 versus 626/2000 for EVGA), making $830 even more unreasonable.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2979&p=1

Wrigleyvillain 3rd May 2007 15:19

Haha
 
jmke-


Yay! :-p

jmke 3rd May 2007 15:29

I think the title sums it up nicely :D

Wrigleyvillain 3rd May 2007 16:05

Indeed. I suggested you use that line as your summary paragraph but much better as title! :drink:

That Foxconn 8800GTX is not a bad deal at all it seems. I'll definitely take a look at 8800 pricing once Radeon X2900 is widely available.

And my 3 month old, $250 X1950 XT is now only $180 at Newegg, no rebate even. :rolleyes: Helluva deal for this powerful card.

jmke 3rd May 2007 16:08

I would hold on to your X1950XT for another year or two, unless you're looking to run games at 1600x1200 + AA/AF with the latest DX10 games..

Rutar 3rd May 2007 16:18

interesting, the trend of reviewers telling the truth continues

Wrigleyvillain 3rd May 2007 16:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rutar (Post 144171)
interesting, the trend of reviewers telling the truth continues

Haha!

Wrigleyvillain 3rd May 2007 16:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmke (Post 144166)
I would hold on to your X1950XT for another year or two, unless you're looking to run games at 1600x1200 + AA/AF with the latest DX10 games..

Good point if I hadn't scored a Apple 23" Cinema Display HD from work with a native 1920x1200 native resolution. Going back and playing Far Cry, HL2 and Doom 3 is a whole new experience at that res in widescreen! Oblivion looks freakin' phenomonal but I can only look around (~10 FPS). I play at 1280x800, 2X/8X (30-40 FPS)

jmke 3rd May 2007 16:46

1920x1200 ... even GTX will be stressing for AA/AF action:)

Wrigleyvillain 3rd May 2007 16:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmke (Post 144178)
1920x1200 ... even GTX will be stressing for AA/AF action:)


Yeah. Though our favorite $830 dollar video card got 35.5 at 1920x1200 4x/8x Ultra in this very review...

Still though, I am impressed with what this X1950 XT can do so far. Maybe I will hold off longer and I can add a cpu upgrade to the mix. Wouldn't mind the extra cache of the e6420. I'll let Crysis performance on my current setup be the final judge perhaps.

jmke 3rd May 2007 16:54

for $830 you can almost got GTX SLI :)
very possible if you look into used models, then you should be able to get GTX for $410-450

The Senile Doctor 3rd May 2007 19:25

7900 gtx's in sli suffer at 1920*1200...

jmke 3rd May 2007 19:34

since one 8800 GTX > 2x7900GTX, I would think so yes;)

geoffrey 4th May 2007 12:43

GTS in SLI? :)

jmke 4th May 2007 13:11

GTS in SLI =~ single GTX...

Rutar 4th May 2007 13:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoffrey (Post 144243)
GTS in SLI? :)

I thought it was common knowledge that sli is only worth it with the highest end cards for people who have too much money.

jmke 4th May 2007 13:38

he's asking because he's got GTS in SLI in for test;)


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 17:55.

Powered by vBulletin® - Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO