Originally Posted by HourBeforeDawn hmm not much of a difference between the 512 and 1gb to justify the cost, I wonder if the real difference is seen when when in Crossfire?
The price difference is ~8 percent and the performance improvement is anywhere between 0 and 15 percent. Typically with 4xAA the performance difference is around 7-15 percent, which is pretty reasonable when you think about how much you get taken for a ride when you buy a flagship product. This still maintains its value pretty well despite being a purported high-end product.
Originally Posted by murtoz Would love to see these benchmarks with an 880GTX stuck in so I can make my mind up about upgrading...
8800 GTX performs about the same as a 9800 GTX+ in round terms.
The 9800 GTX+ only has a 512MB Frame Buffer whereas the 8800 GTX has a 768MB, I would love to see the old 8800 GTX as well, because I have two in SLi, and boy they still run everything so well.
I personally would not go to the current generation cards if you have a 8800 GTX, I would wait for the first DX11 cards to appear.
Look at these charts from Guru3D, they give a good indication how a 8800 GTX and 8800 Ultra performs against the newer cards.
It confirms my statement above that if you have a 8800 GTX or Ultra (SLi) there is really no need to upgrade now as it will be able to handle most newer games.
Originally Posted by Nictron Look at these charts from Guru3D, they give a good indication how a 8800 GTX and 8800 Ultra performs against the newer cards.
It confirms my statement above that if you have a 8800 GTX or Ultra (SLi) there is really no need to upgrade now as it will be able to handle most newer games.
I for instance have my 8800 GTX's overclocked to 630/1500/1996 24/7
I dunno, I upgraded from an 8800 GTX to a 4870 and I noticed some big performance improvements in the games I'm playing. I can now enable at least 4xAA and sometimes 8xAA at 1680 x 1050, whereas before I found that I couldn't enable more than 2xAA in most of the newer games coming out.
The Crysis numbers are a little misleading in the VGA charts because they're run at "medium" quality not "high" or "very high". I think you'll see a much larger difference with higher in-game quality. Also, Crysis and COD4 are really the only two 'new' games in that list. I think what Hilbert has done is great, but it really needs to be looking at performance with higher details in Crysis. We're finding some CPU limitations on a 4870 with a 3GHz dual-core in Crysis at medium for example.
As for your previous post about the 9800 GTX vs 8800 GTX - the frame buffer has very little to do with it. There are occasions when the memory bus will make a difference, but rarely the frame buffer... at resolutions below 2560 x 1600, or in SLI with high levels of AA. The 8800 GTX will be faster at 2560 x 1600, but it's unlikely to be playable (like the 9800 GTX).
Comments 26 to 32 of 32
ReplyThe price difference is ~8 percent and the performance improvement is anywhere between 0 and 15 percent. Typically with 4xAA the performance difference is around 7-15 percent, which is pretty reasonable when you think about how much you get taken for a ride when you buy a flagship product. This still maintains its value pretty well despite being a purported high-end product.
The 9800 GTX+ only has a 512MB Frame Buffer whereas the 8800 GTX has a 768MB, I would love to see the old 8800 GTX as well, because I have two in SLi, and boy they still run everything so well.
I personally would not go to the current generation cards if you have a 8800 GTX, I would wait for the first DX11 cards to appear.
It confirms my statement above that if you have a 8800 GTX or Ultra (SLi) there is really no need to upgrade now as it will be able to handle most newer games.
http://www.guru3d.com/category/vga_charts/
I for instance have my 8800 GTX's overclocked to 630/1500/1996 24/7
I dunno, I upgraded from an 8800 GTX to a 4870 and I noticed some big performance improvements in the games I'm playing. I can now enable at least 4xAA and sometimes 8xAA at 1680 x 1050, whereas before I found that I couldn't enable more than 2xAA in most of the newer games coming out.
The Crysis numbers are a little misleading in the VGA charts because they're run at "medium" quality not "high" or "very high". I think you'll see a much larger difference with higher in-game quality. Also, Crysis and COD4 are really the only two 'new' games in that list. I think what Hilbert has done is great, but it really needs to be looking at performance with higher details in Crysis. We're finding some CPU limitations on a 4870 with a 3GHz dual-core in Crysis at medium for example.
As for your previous post about the 9800 GTX vs 8800 GTX - the frame buffer has very little to do with it. There are occasions when the memory bus will make a difference, but rarely the frame buffer... at resolutions below 2560 x 1600, or in SLI with high levels of AA. The 8800 GTX will be faster at 2560 x 1600, but it's unlikely to be playable (like the 9800 GTX).
GTX260:
places in game bench:
Crysis: 6
COD4: 10
GRID: 12
WIC: 5
DMC4: 12
HL2: 8
Total: 53
devided by 6 games:
Score: 8.8
Lowest price euro: 232.-
GTX280:
places in game bench:
Crysis: 2
COD4: 4
GRID: 7
WIC: 1
DMC4: 4
HL2: 2
Total: 20
devided by 6 games:
Score: 3.3
Lowest price euro: 357.-
HD4870 1GB:
places in game bench:
Crysis: 7
COD4: 2
GRID: 1
WIC: 6
DMC4: 2
HL2: 6
Total: 24
devided by 6 games:
Score: 4
Lowest price euro: 229.-
Score Ranking:
1) GTX280
2) HD4870 1Gb
3) GTX260
Price Ranking:
1) HD4870 1Gb
2) GTX260
3) GTX280
BBFB ranking:
1) HD4870 1Gb
2) GTX260
3) GTX280
-
« Previous
-
1
-
2
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums