Graphics Card Question and Motherboard question

[BlackSi10]

Hey everybody I am trying to get a new graphics card for christmas...i really want a dx10 graphics card. As of now I have a XFX Geforce 7600 GS with a Gigabyte GA-M55SLI-S4 Motherboard. I really want to upgrade to either the XFX Geforce 8800 GTS or the XFX Geforce 8800 GT. Can anyone tell me which one would be better for gaming and if these would work with the motherboard i have right now. Any help is greatly appreciated.

[monto]

Have no clue...just make sure you got good processor and ram with that.

[BlackSi10]

I got a AMD Athlon x2 4200+ 2.2Ghz and 2 GB ram

[Fixer]

I'm a big computer gamer and run 2 8800 GTXs in my rig. A good video card does make a big difference but your processor is going to hold you back a bit relative to the new games on the market. And I assume you're running Vista since you mention you want to run DX10. I run XP and am perfectly happy running DX9. I can't see much of a difference in all the comparisons that I've seen. Plus I don't want to make the system upgrade to Vista. Even Microsoft has admitted that they screwed up with Vista but that's a different story. Seems the GTs have slightly higher core clock speeds but less RAM. The GTSs have lower clock speeds, not by much, but up to 640 MB video RAM. If you're only buying a single card, the GT would probably work best for you because of the faster core speed. If buying 2 cards for SLI, and I'm not sure if your mainboard is capable, the GTS would be best because of the additional RAM. Or get what you can afford of course. That's always a consideration. Newegg.com has some good choices and good prices. It's where I purchase all my computer parts. They have great customer service too. Good luck with your purchase and happy gaming!

[monto]

Originally Posted by BlackSi10

I got a AMD Athlon x2 4200+ 2.2Ghz and 2 GB ram

These are not the best out there, so honestly I don't think it's worth spending the money on a new graphics card. I am talking from experience...but unfortunately I'm not very up to date with the new technologies. I used to be a hell of a gamer and went trough all this. So I would say either get the whole package or better without any.

[jrotax101]

that processor will hinder the performance quite a bit, i have the x2 6000+ and im getting rid of it. it simply can't keep up with intel's. btw im running an xfx 8800gtx 4gb ram, when benchmarking, the cpu is what is slowing everything else down

[drnknmnky]

out of the 2 video cards you listed, the 8800gt is the better of the 2. it's been posting phenomenal benchmarks and getting pretty good reviews and you can find them for less than $300.

[e60.deluxe]

there is no point buying a GTS whatsoever. SLI or not.
also your processor is fine. people think that processors matter alot because they look at useless benchmarks, the thing is that they really dont matter a whole lot.

get 1 8800GT.

[jrotax101]

Originally Posted by e60.deluxe

there is no point buying a GTS whatsoever. SLI or not.
also your processor is fine. people think that processors matter alot because they look at useless benchmarks, the thing is that they really dont matter a whole lot.

get 1 8800GT.

i was just using the benchmarks as proof.. i use both amd and intel, and i have better performance with the same components with the intel cpu. AMD rated at 3ghz will be slower than a similar Intel.


back to the OP , the 8800GT is the better choice of the two.
Robert

[monto]

Originally Posted by e60.deluxe

there is no point buying a GTS whatsoever. SLI or not.
also your processor is fine. people think that processors matter alot because they look at useless benchmarks, the thing is that they really dont matter a whole lot.

get 1 8800GT.

Are you getting experience from talking? Or are you talking from experience?

[e60.deluxe]

Originally Posted by jrotax101

i was just using the benchmarks as proof.. i use both amd and intel, and i have better performance with the same components with the intel cpu. AMD rated at 3ghz will be slower than a similar Intel.


back to the OP , the 8800GT is the better choice of the two.
Robert

the problem is the settings in which the benchmarks are performed. if you ever notice CPU benchmarks generally take an incredibly fast graphics card, possibly 2 incredibly fast graphics cards, then they take a game and play it at like 1280x1024 woth AA and AF Off or something like that, when the system is really capable of 1920x1200 or posbly even 2560x1600.

what they are trying to do is eliminate the possibility of that a slow graphics card is influencing the benchmarks, and while thats true, what happens is that you get a skewed perpective of how important a CPU is.

example: lets say they are comparing an $200 CPU to a $500 CPU. they run a benchmark and the $200 CPU gets 80FPS in the game. now, the $500 CPU gets 150FPS. now imagine that the

Graphics card being used was capable of 200FPS but it was the CPUs that were slowing it down to 80 and 150. now lets say you increase the resolution, and turn on AA and AF (these options only effect graphics card performace) and now the graphics card is only capable of 60FPS due to the extra burden.

see now both the low end and high end CPUs will be limited to 60FPS because of the graphics card.

but, the person thinks that if they buy the $500 CPU their framerates will increase over 2 fold. thats not how it works.

and FYI an LCD monitor is only capable of displaying 60FPS, and a CRT monitor 75-85.

Originally Posted by monto

Are you getting experience from talking? Or are you talking from experience?

ive been playing PC games since i was 6-7 years old, ive been building my own custom gaming PCs since i was probably 12-13 years old. i have always bought a CPU on the "low end" of the high model. (ie the lowet pentium, no celeron, or i would buy the lowest Intel Core 2 Duo today, or the lowest Quad Core) and i have always enjoyed the best graphics at high resolutions.

[e60.deluxe]

proof right here:
Quake 4 CPU Shootout: Intel vs. AMD

see the top benchmark. it has a slew of AMD CPUs and you can see the FPS is all over, from 87 -127 FPS.

now look at the bottom benchmark. the graphics card is using its full potential to run at 1600x1200 and with all the AF/AA. now look its like 65-67FPS across the board, from the (at the time this was tested) $150 AMD64 3000+ to the $800 X2 4800+.

now the question is what if i had a graphics card that was only capable of 1024x768 at its upper limit? then you would see the same thing on the top benchmark. when a graphics card is being used to its limit, CPUs are almost meaningless.

[monto]

Depends on the game you are playing also... It's a long debate though.

"ive been playing PC games since i was 6-7 years old, ive been building my own custom gaming PCs since i was probably 12-13 years old. i have always bought a CPU on the "low end" of the high model. (ie the lowet pentium, no celeron, or i would buy the lowest Intel Core 2 Duo today, or the lowest Quad Core) and i have always enjoyed the best graphics at high resolutions."

^^Same with me :)

Respect for bringing evidence, so it means it's the second choice.

[e60.deluxe]

Originally Posted by monto

Depends on the game you are playing also... It's a long debate though.

yes its true it depends on the game, but the thing is that its extremly few games that do. and even when there is a game that does you generally cant see it untill your using extremly expensive graphics cards.

but the principle that always applies is this: AF, AA and resolution cause no extra strain on the CPU. if you see a benchmark for a CPU and its getting a good FPS with the AF AA and Resolution low, it will get the same FPS with those things high given it has a Graphics card and RAM capable.

as for the future, CPU prices drop so fast is better to buy a $150 CPU and replace it with a $150 CPU in a year than buy a $300 one. for example i bought the cheapest Dual Core CPU 2 years ago for $240. coupled with my 8800GT i can play any game on 1680x1050 with minimal slowdown if any. even now if i wanted to buy a new CPU i could buy one that murders my CPU for $100. and guess what, my CPU is still good enough for games today.