I think the very brisk sales of the 8800GT shows that people know their stuff, no matter WTF people want to call their card. People that actually believe a bunch of "noobs" are going to pick up the 8800GTS over the 8800GT are way off. Yeah, it's entirely dumb on Nvidia's part to name it the 8800GT, but people do their research and know what they're doing. If you're smart enough to actually buy a video card and install it yourself, then you're likely to smart enough to do research to understand what you're buying. I don't know anyone who throws down $200+ for something they don't know about. Sorry for the random rant, but I'm finding it increasingly insulting to the common consumer for those that think people aren't smart enough to buy a 8800GT over an 8800GTS. PC gamers are WAY smarter than that; we're probably the most informed consumer group out there. The amount of true "noobs" in the PC gaming community is slim to none, and no one should believe that Nvidia is going to make any cash out of people who don't know the differences between a GTS and a GT.
I'm salivating for a new card, and I'm doing my best right now to wait just 2 more weeks so I can make a complete decision. Plus, I'm in the market for a card in the $400 price-range, and rumors are is that Nvidia will be releasing a new GTS on Nov 19. We don't really know who's going to be faster, but I have to say right now that the 8800GT looks like a very hard card to beat. The sources vary as well in saying will be faster. All we can do is wait 2 weeks. This will be probably the hardest 2 weeks ever. :P
That helps a lot. But I'm mostly interested in the type of coolers people offer. While I'd still like to buy cards from reliable companies, I don't like paying the extra cash for OC'd cards that I can OC myself. The real thing I'm wondering about is if I would be better off buying a standard card on stock and OC it myself, or do these OC'd versions actually offer better heatsinks and coolers that I can take advantage of?
Oh, and I also wondering about "SPOC", one of Nvidia's features. This feature offers the ability to overclock your shader processors right? And all of the 8800GT cards are have the "SPOC" feature right?
I was wondering what are the differences between cards from different distributors. For example, what's the difference if I get an 8800GT from PNY vs EVGA? OK, I know that different companies will offer different clock speeds, but is there any physical difference between the cards? Do they use different coolers and heatsinks or anything like that? Cause it certainly doesn't look like it; it looks like the only difference is the damn sticker and label on the card. If they did use different coolers and heatsinks, I would expect thhem to at least look a little different, but they all have the same, black, standard shape.
I'm going to play the "wait and see" game and decide around the middle of Nov. ATI's cards are coming, and a lof of buzz is going around that Nvidia is releasing another card in Nov (the new GTS). Not sure if the buzz is true (I actually don't think it is), but I'd like to wait and see. For price/performance, I believe the 8800GT will be the cream of the crop. But I'm also in the market for a $400-$500 card that kicks butt if one gets released this Nov.
I know the Expreview.com site OCs the GPU core to 729. It won't beat it but it will be close, and you probably won't be able to tell the difference in real world gaming. The gap between these cards really aren't that much when you take real world gaming into account... Assuming initial reviews are true of course. Either way, I'm a bit sad that it looks like ATI is going get pwned once again. Never did I think this card would reach close to GTX levels. I think ATI is in trouble...
I'd actually go with the cheaper E6750. I have it and it's super-fast for everything I would want to use it for (I'm running Vista too). Plus, it OC's incredibly well. Much rather pocket the extra $85 and use it on something else, but that's just me. I don't find that an extra $100 on a processor offers you that much in real-world use. An extra $100 on a video card on the other hand... Hehe.
Plus. by the time applications and games actually really start taking advantage of quad cores, something much better is going to come out. I like to keep my parts within the same generation and not overspend on something that's "futureproof" when it really isn't. It's like buying a 8600GT for DX10 games. That card just isn't powerful enough for DX 10 games despite being a DX 10 card. So when the games actually come out, you'll be stuck wanting something better.
I was thinking of either of getting the e6750 or e6850 aswell. Which one should i go with?
Is it hard to overclock aswell?
Thanks!
MetallicA53
I'd go with the cheaper e6750; that's what I did and I don't regret it. :) Both CPUs are very overclockable though. And I'd rather spend that extra $100 on a better video card. Real-World wise, my E6750 is plenty fast enough for anything I throw at it, so I'd rather not spend the extra money on the e6850.
Well, even with the 112SP, it isn't very impressive as a whole, though you're going to get a good price/performance ratio. I'm much more interest in the rumors about a new GTS based on the G92 architecture. Now that's a card I could salivate over, and it would look good competing with the R670. The GT on the other hand looks too underpowered for me.
Log in to comment