thats a tough one but my guess is no. the GTS does have a 320bit memory interface compared to the GT's 256bit. If you have the 640mb GTS itll have more memory then the GT. You can overclock the memory, core, and shader clocks to perform even faster then an Ultra but in the end itll still only have 96 stream processors. That 96 compared to the 112 (i think) on the GT is were you get the big jump in performance but I dont think you can reach overclocks high enough to compare in performance with a GT.
So in short, No. Im sure you could get pretty damn close though. My 8800GTS from eVGA is overclocked to: 650Core/2080mem/1505shaders
the 8800gt outperforms the gts line because of a better architecture, not just more stream porcessors, i believe its shader clock is at 1500, which is really fast g92 FTW
the gts 320 with an aftermarket cooler could be overclocked to reach gt level performance, but dont count on it
the 8800gt outperforms the gts line because of a better architecture, not just more stream porcessors, i believe its shader clock is at 1500, which is really fast g92 FTW
the gts 320 with an aftermarket cooler could be overclocked to reach gt level performance, but dont count on it
Yes definately. I have a 8800 gts 640mb overclocked to 702 core clock, 1623 shader clock and 1100 memory clock and it seems to run games as well as a gtx.
Yes definately. I have a 8800 gts 640mb overclocked to 702 core clock, 1623 shader clock and 1100 memory clock and it seems to run games as well as a gtx.dom2000
now thats just BS.. your talking about increase speeds up to the point where your get around 30FPS more increase...
[QUOTE="dom2000"]Yes definately. I have a 8800 gts 640mb overclocked to 702 core clock, 1623 shader clock and 1100 memory clock and it seems to run games as well as a gtx.yoyo462001
now thats just BS.. your talking about increase speeds up to the point where your get around 30FPS more increase...
Lol its not. In fear with no overclock i get an average framerate of 68 then when i overclock it i get a average frame rate of 96, almost 30 fps increase. This is at 1680x1050 with 4aa and x16af by the way.
[QUOTE="dom2000"]Yes definately. I have a 8800 gts 640mb overclocked to 702 core clock, 1623 shader clock and 1100 memory clock and it seems to run games as well as a gtx.yoyo462001
now thats just BS.. your talking about increase speeds up to the point where your get around 30FPS more increase... The GTX is not 30 fps more than a GTS.:|
According to that site ^^ a gtx can play fear with an avg framerate of 85 at 1600x1200 with x4 aa and x16 af which is just about the same resolution as i play.
[QUOTE="yoyo462001"][QUOTE="dom2000"]Yes definately. I have a 8800 gts 640mb overclocked to 702 core clock, 1623 shader clock and 1100 memory clock and it seems to run games as well as a gtx.Thinker_145
now thats just BS.. your talking about increase speeds up to the point where your get around 30FPS more increase... The GTX is not 30 fps more than a GTS.:| http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/geforce8-roundup_9.html#sect1
[QUOTE="Thinker_145"][QUOTE="yoyo462001"][QUOTE="dom2000"]Yes definately. I have a 8800 gts 640mb overclocked to 702 core clock, 1623 shader clock and 1100 memory clock and it seems to run games as well as a gtx.yoyo462001
now thats just BS.. your talking about increase speeds up to the point where your get around 30FPS more increase... The GTX is not 30 fps more than a GTS.:| http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/geforce8-roundup_9.html#sect1 Oh well ya nevermind the GTX is significantly more powerful than the GTS.No denying that.
However it must be noted that the site was using high quality filtering and transperant AA which can destroy your performance and i atleast dont use those settings normally especially in demanding games thus i never get as low FPS in 12x10 as the GTS was seeing in those tests.
Log in to comment