8800GTS 320MB released today !! - Page 3 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 02-13-2007, 12:04 AM   #21 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,992
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Blitersety
I'm sure it would work really well. The GeForce 8 series has a revolutionary new architecture in the GPU that allows it to render a lot of pizels a lot more efficiently and quickly... in tandem with a good CPU and RAM it would give u fine fps on recent 3D games... at the very least a lot higher than the 24 fps our human eyes can percieve.
Dude it's higher then 24.
__________________

__________________



May the wind always be at your back and the sun upon your face, and may the winds of destiny carry you aloft to dance with the stars
Lord AnthraX is offline  
Old 02-13-2007, 12:29 AM   #22 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Evergreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 207
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Lord AnthraX
Dude it's higher then 24.
Yeah, definitely higher than 24..
__________________

__________________
DOLLA DOLLA DOLLA BILL YALL
Evergreen is offline  
Old 02-13-2007, 12:32 AM   #23 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 154
Default

200 give or take 5 actually.
cementshoes is offline  
Old 02-13-2007, 12:40 AM   #24 (permalink)
Hard Gay Nahalem! Fooo!
 
NosBoost300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Bellflower, CA
Posts: 10,154
Send a message via AIM to NosBoost300
Default

and you people need to stop creaming your pants over this "revolutionary" card stuff... ya its a great card... but right now, its hardly better than a 7950gx2 and x1950xtx... don't cream your pants until we could see weather it'll flop or fly in dx10

and as for the ram question... only 256 mb is for what your seeing on the screen, the rest is for physics.. which we can't really use as of now, because games arent really programmed to use it that way..., but i may be wrong, so don't quote me...

and, furthermore, if your going to be playing with 1680x1050, i dunno if i'd want a 320mb edition of this card, because games are gonna want more of you.. and if you want full quality, i'm sure at that resolution, it'll fall to its knees in the near future
__________________
Current Build:
Intel 3770k @ 4.4 GHZ | Galaxy GTX 770 SLi | 16 GB G.Skill Sniper | ASrock z77 Extreme4
2xSamung 840pro 128GB in Raid | 2x1TB Seagate | Antec 750 Watt GamerSeries
Media Build:
Intel Core i3 3220 | Galaxy GTX 650 | 8 GB Corsair Vengeance | ASrock B75M | Samsung 840 120GB
NosBoost300 is offline  
Old 02-13-2007, 12:49 AM   #25 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
BennyV04988's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,835
Default

http://guru3d.com/article/Videocards/416/

Wow no one found this yet?

The 320 RIPS! MY goodness. Crysis here we come!

I'll probably run it on the GTS in DX9 when it comes out, and then probably build a core2duo vista build in 08 and snag another GTS maybe?
__________________
3DMARK VANTAGE: 11,500
GPU: MSI GTX 260 @ 650MHz/1175MHz
CPU: Intel E6750 @ 3.4GHz/1.33v/60c
HSF: Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro
MOBO: MSI P6N SLI-FI 650i
RAM: G.SKILL 3x1GB DDR2 800
SND: Creative Audigy 4
SPK:Logtech X-540s
MOS: Logitech MX600 Wireless Laser
LCD: HANNS-G 28" Widescreen
BennyV04988 is offline  
Old 02-13-2007, 12:55 AM   #26 (permalink)
Hard Gay Nahalem! Fooo!
 
NosBoost300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Bellflower, CA
Posts: 10,154
Send a message via AIM to NosBoost300
Default

i'd go for a 640 mb edition.. better safe than sorry....

hasnt anyone noticed games gobbling more memory... so wouldnt you rather stick on the safe side??!?!?!?!
__________________
Current Build:
Intel 3770k @ 4.4 GHZ | Galaxy GTX 770 SLi | 16 GB G.Skill Sniper | ASrock z77 Extreme4
2xSamung 840pro 128GB in Raid | 2x1TB Seagate | Antec 750 Watt GamerSeries
Media Build:
Intel Core i3 3220 | Galaxy GTX 650 | 8 GB Corsair Vengeance | ASrock B75M | Samsung 840 120GB
NosBoost300 is offline  
Old 02-13-2007, 02:13 PM   #27 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
BennyV04988's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,835
Default

Well, either way. for a 12x10 screen, that card is a no brainer, dx9 or not.

I'd definitely wait until a DX10 game is out and we can see just exactly what we each need to run it on a specific monitor.
__________________
3DMARK VANTAGE: 11,500
GPU: MSI GTX 260 @ 650MHz/1175MHz
CPU: Intel E6750 @ 3.4GHz/1.33v/60c
HSF: Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro
MOBO: MSI P6N SLI-FI 650i
RAM: G.SKILL 3x1GB DDR2 800
SND: Creative Audigy 4
SPK:Logtech X-540s
MOS: Logitech MX600 Wireless Laser
LCD: HANNS-G 28" Widescreen
BennyV04988 is offline  
Old 02-13-2007, 03:05 PM   #28 (permalink)
Renowned Budgeting Master
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Uniontown, PA
Posts: 4,153
Send a message via AIM to Sora
Default

Yea I'd say only 22 inch and above might even consider the 640 version, even then it probably would work great.
__________________
E6300 w/ Arctic Freezer Pro 7 @ 3.6ghz 1.4Vcore
Antec 900 Case
EVGA 750i FTW Mobo
4x1GB of G.skill DDR2-800
2 8800GT in SLI
22" Samsung Syncmaster
1 250GB WD and 1 Seagate 7200.10 in RAID 0
Corsair 520HX 3DMark06 Score: 13900
Sora is offline  
Old 02-13-2007, 05:57 PM   #29 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Blitersety's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Finleyville, PA
Posts: 682
Send a message via AIM to Blitersety
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Evergreen
Yeah, definitely higher than 24..

No, our eyes can't really detect anything higher than 24 fps, why do you think they shoot movies and tv shows at 24 fps? Becvause anything higher would be a waste of film
__________________
Technology articles, reviews, and more! http://www.suite101.com/profile.cfm/philipdavis
-Asus P5Q Deluxe
- Intel G0 Q6600
-EVGA GeForce 8800 GTX
-Corsair TX750
-Antec 900 case
-Seagate Barracuda 320 GB HDD - main
-WD 320GB HDD - secondary
-Seagate Barracuda 500 GB HDD - tertiary
-Crucial Ballistix Tracer 3GB DDR2
-Lite-On 20x DVD burner
-Wireless MX-Revolution mouse
-Logitech G11 keyboard
Blitersety is offline  
Old 02-13-2007, 11:49 PM   #30 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,164
Send a message via AIM to ThirdLeft152
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Blitersety
No, our eyes can't really detect anything higher than 24 fps, why do you think they shoot movies and tv shows at 24 fps? Becvause anything higher would be a waste of film
actually the human eye is capable of way more than 24 fps, sometimes in excess of 200 fps. the reason films are shown at 24fps is because of the blurring done to the film, this blurring simulates smoothness. try taking a look at a snapshot from a film during a fast paced movement, you'll notice that you can barely make out the edges to the figure.

__________________

__________________

My gaming rig:
ASUS P6T | i7-920 D0 @ 4.0GHZ - 1.25v w/ H50
GTX 460/768MB (750/1500/2000) | 12GB Corsair DDR3-1600 @ (8-8-8-24)
2 x PS-100 32GB SSD Raid 0 | 4 x WD 750GB Raid 5 | Corsair 620HX
Asus 21.6" LCD (1080p) | LG 32" TV (1080p)
Logitech G15 | Logitech MX518 | Logitech MX1100 | Razer Mamba
Heatware | http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=59417
ThirdLeft152 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.