Two XFX 8800GT 256MB@newegg

[ricanflow]

I don't know, the 512MB GT is up to 25% faster in Crysis than the 256MB GT at the low resolution of 1280x1024 in DX9, no AA, on high... I'm not really impressed with these. I was hoping for equal performance on lower resolutions, which it's not really delivering on. Keep in mind that the 512MB version has a memory clocked clocked 200MHz faster (400MHz effective): http://www.techist.com/forums/f76/256mb-gt-slightly-slower-160952/

1440x900 is a fairly low resolution actually.....

I dont think so, i mean 1280x720 is already a 720p hd signal. Anything from 1440x900 and up is high res, thing is many people are now going from 19" to 22" monitors but it is by no mean low res.

256mb is a little bit low....should be alright in most games for resolutions 1280x1024 and under though providing you don't heap on the AA+AF.[/QUOTE]

Crysis is an exception, all cards have trouble with it. Add another one in sli and itll play the higher res just fine.

It actually beats the 3870 in bioshock at 1680x1050 in dx10, getting 71fps.

 

[Durftard]

am i reading that chart wrong? the 256 also outperforms the 512 in that benchmark

 

[maroon1]

8800GTS 320MB outperforms 8800GT 512MB in BioShock ?!


256MB version was almost twice as fast as 512MB

That benchmark is fake without any doubts

EDIT: 8800GT 512MB performs very close to 8800GTX in BioShock according to AnandTech, so it should smoke GTS 320MB
AnandTech: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT: The Only Card That Matters

 

[ricanflow]

8800GTS 320MB outperforms 8800GT 512MB in BioShock ?!


256MB version was almost twice as fast as 512MB

That benchmark is fake without any doubts

EDIT: 8800GT 512MB performs very close to 8800GTX in BioShock according to AnandTech, so it should smoke GTS 320MB
AnandTech: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT: The Only Card That Matters

Well it is the alpha dog edition, which is the higher clocked 1600mhz and 650 core version, heres the full review, and it looks like a reliable source. XFX Alpha Dog XXX 8800GT 256MB Review :: Introduction :: Motherboards.org

 

[maroon1]

But it contradicts with the benchmarks form Anandtech 8800GT

Anandtech is more reliable than the source you posted

Well it is the alpha dog edition, which is the higher clocked 1600mhz and 650 core version

50MHz increase in clock speed doesn't give 65% increase in performance. Thats not logical

I think there is something wrong with benches of 8800GT 512MB because at Anandtech it got much more FPS than 47 at 1600x1200

 

[ricanflow]

50mhz in clock and 200mhz memory, but yeah i see what you mean, it all comes down to the actual benchmark system both sites used. We do know that it beats the gts 320mb for a fact.

 

[nhlrocker]

sweet, yeah thats pretty **** cheap. but sadly i cant buy off newegg.com
i have to order from ncix.com or tigerdirect.com

 

[gurusan]

I dont think so, i mean 1280x720 is already a 720p hd signal. Anything from 1440x900 and up is high res, thing is many people are now going from 19" to 22" monitors but it is by no mean low res. [/IMG]

You realize 1440x900 is lower than 1280x1024....

 

[ricanflow]

You realize 1440x900 is lower than 1280x1024....

What??? how you figure that? It goes 1280x1024, 1440x900, 1680x1050.

 

[gurusan]

What??? how you figure that? It goes 1280x1024, 1440x900, 1680x1050.

1440x900 = 1,296,000 pixels rendered
1280x1024 = 1,310,720 pixels rendered

About 11.4% more screen resolution.

It goes 1024x768, 1440x900, 1280x1024....etc

Also in those benchmarks no AA/AF was used....