1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

8800GT 256MB or 9600GT or HD 3870 for 1280x1024 gameplay?

Discussion in 'Graphics Cards' started by Anusha, May 18, 2008.

  1. niko084

    niko084

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    7,636 (2.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    729
    I would honestly get a 9600GT 512mb or a HD3850 512mb, save the money over the hd3870, I could play Crysis @ 1280x1024 in Dx10 on all very high settings smooth through the entire game on my 256mb HD3850, the 512mb would make it all the better and save you a good amount of money.

    Or go to bestbuy before they are gone and get a HD3870 for $129 :)
     
  2. Scrizz

    Scrizz

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,888 (1.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    388
    Location:
    Florida, US
    that's how i got mine :D :toast: :rockout:
     
  3. Franklinwallbrown

    Franklinwallbrown New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,228 (0.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12
    I thought the 3850 was just an underclocked 3870?
     
  4. Rebo&Zooty

    Rebo&Zooty New Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2008
    Messages:
    490 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    30
    yup they are, if they have 512mb ram that is, the ddr3 vs ddr4 dosnt make a diffrance in perf, so if u overclock ur 3850 u can get same perf as a 3870 in most cases :)
     
  5. Franklinwallbrown

    Franklinwallbrown New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,228 (0.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12
    That's why I'm getting the 3850!
     
  6. Rebo&Zooty

    Rebo&Zooty New Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2008
    Messages:
    490 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    30
    didnt say it was botched, what i said was that if you want future proofed, go 3870 if you want fast for todays games with no support for dx10.1 go for nvidias current cards.

    And yes nvidia's current cards are primarly for dx9 gaming, hence they didnt add 10.1 support when they went from g80 to g92, they could have, they fixed purevideo support so its FAR better then it was.

    Im not attacking nvidia, I am just very sure about what nvidia has done in the past and what they have done today, they dont jump to support new tech unless somehow it can be done by simply modifying something they already have around.

    this is what i have found with the 8800gt i had(being rma'd should have replacement sometime this week, i hate ups...slow bastages) the card is effectivly a massivly boosted 7 seirse card, effectivly they put the card on roids, sure they added so called unified shaders, and shader 4.0, but it is not a native dx10 design, because i think nvidia desided that if they went with the current 8800 design, till dx10/10.1 games where dominant that they would beable to force people to buy yet another card to get fetures that dx10.x offers vs basic 10.0 support.

    its a smart buisness move in a way, but it also pisses off costmers who payed alot for their cards and expected them to last a couple/few years.

    from what i have seen over the years i have seen nvidia beat dead horses till they are glue, the fx line, they kept selling them and putting out new versions even after it was shown that they SUCKED for dx9 gaming, same was true for the 6 and 7 seirse, they just tweaked the design and added more bruit force, where as the r300 and up where not bruit force, the x1900xt for example, was kicking the 7950 around till the gx2 came out, and even then it wasnt that far behind, yet by nvidiot specs it should have been loosing, because the 7950 had more pipes/rops and such.....but games where moving to being shader based, so 16rops with 3 shaders per was better then more rops with less shader units each.

    blah, basickly the 2 companys work diffrently, ati tends to think along diffrent lines, they dont try and purely bruit force everything, where nvidia is all about the bruit force, hell look at how they presured ubi into patched dx10.1 out of assassins creed after it showed ati cards doing better because they could do the AA in 1 pass vs doing a 2nd rendering pass to apply the AA, again bruit force bullys....... i know alot of ppl who bought that game who didnt/wont patch it because THERE IS NO NEED, the patch dosnt fix buggs, it just makes it so that nvidia stoped bitching because their cards CANT do 10.1 where as ati's can.

    also take not of Tessellation, the cat 8.5's enable it on ati cards, allowing the same thing on pc's as is avalable on the xbox360, higher res without a much if any performance impact, more detail without the perf impact at least i see that as total winnage.

    just look it up, or darknova and others can explain it better then i can at the moment.
     
    Solaris17 says thanks.
  7. Franklinwallbrown

    Franklinwallbrown New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,228 (0.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12
    Gg
     
  8. Solaris17

    Solaris17 Creator Solaris Utility DVD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    17,200 (5.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,558
    Location:
    Florida
    thnx very informative i dodnt mean to imply that you were bashing nvidia i just wanted to imply that though they dont support DX 10.1 it isnt as big of a deal as most people think like assassins creed and some of the other DX10.1 games though it does make them look better like you said with the brute force nvidia uses and the smooth way ATI does it including the relatively low requirments of those games imo opinion it doesnt matter much as wih todays cards from both sides those games dont bog down much at all. and im not necissarily backing up nvidia when i got my 9600GT early i was like ooooooo then i saw that it didnt support DX 10.1 or 4.1 i wa a little put down but in the end as i said above with how powerfull the cards are these days and the system requirments it didnt matter much to me as they play smoothly any way i was just trying to stress that though they dont support DX 10.1 or shader 4.1 it isnt as bad as the early FX cards that were half ass and kinda sorta supported DX9.0 and kinda sorta supported 2.0 these cards support DX 10 and 4.0 fully and though that isnt technically the newest it does it just fine.
     
  9. Joe Public

    Joe Public

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    134 (0.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    Yeah, get the 8800GT 256MB and it works well -today- What about half a year from now? I wouldn't take the chance. You may find yourself looking for a new card pretty soon. So I'll chip in and say +1 for a 512MB card.

    edit: whoops... missed the two last pages, lol.
     
  10. niko084

    niko084

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    7,636 (2.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    729
    Wrong they are Not... They use different cores all together..
    But the performance is pretty close.
     
  11. Anusha

    Anusha

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    752 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    67
    Really? I thought they were the same core, just different clocks :/
     
  12. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,684 (6.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    i play crysis @ 1280x1024 on a pair of 3850 256mbs and it never drops under 30FPS @ 1280x1024 all high settings

    from what i could tell at best with xfire i'm getting an extra 5FPS and its quite playable i have yet to find a game i can't max out on my monitor
     
  13. Franklinwallbrown

    Franklinwallbrown New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,228 (0.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    12
    Sounds like a good idea to me.
     
  14. Anusha

    Anusha

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    752 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    67
    Crossfire is out of the question...
     
  15. niko084

    niko084

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    7,636 (2.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    729
    You should be just fine with a hd3850 especially if its a 512mb... Like I said I'm a solid 30fps with my 3850 256mb 1280x1024 all very high in vista for dx10. I get about 32fps solid in high dx9 xp pro.
     
  16. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,684 (6.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    i wasn't suggesting it i was suggesting one HD3850 256mb or 512mb
     
  17. Anusha

    Anusha

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    752 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    67
    Anyway it is too late now. My 9600GT is already enroute. Cost me around USD157 which is alright. Make is Glaaxy (I didn't really care about that) and I'm not sure which model yet because a friend of a friend is sending it over. I couldn't get the full model number. (I'm fine with any model because all of them are either at reference specs or better, thought I hope it is a the OC version, which runs at 675/1325(?)/2000)
     
  18. niko084

    niko084

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    7,636 (2.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    729
    The 9600GT will treat you well. Any which way you went there you will be happy thats for sure.
     
  19. Anusha

    Anusha

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    752 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    67
    I hope so. :D
     
  20. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,684 (6.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    thats a great card you will be happy with it :toast:
     
  21. Anusha

    Anusha

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    752 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    67
    I wonder how lucky I would be with overclocking :D
    You can get it close to the 8800GT performance with some good overclocking right? That'll give very good bang for the buck :D

    I still don't understand how it is possible. 112 SP x 600MHz vs. 64SP x 650MHz which is like 35-40% less performance, but in reality it is only about 15-20% slow. Is that because the memory is same?
     
  22. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,684 (6.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    its because of the tweaked core design
     
  23. Anusha

    Anusha

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    752 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    67
    you mean, G94 @ 112SP x 600MHz is faster than G92 @ 112SP x 600MHz?
     
  24. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,684 (6.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    kind of but its the reason the 9800GTX clocks higher and has better performance than the 8800GT/GTS
     
  25. Anusha

    Anusha

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    752 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    67
    Don't they both have the same G92 core? Maybe a newer revision on the 9800GTX which might give more overclocks, but other than that they are basically identical, right?
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page