You can spend a tad more and get this?
Computer hardware and software at amazing prices, available online from Scan Computers UK
GTX much faster then both a gs and Gt right?
Printable View
You can spend a tad more and get this?
Computer hardware and software at amazing prices, available online from Scan Computers UK
GTX much faster then both a gs and Gt right?
yeah deffo - GTX is nvidia's flagship
ahh i see ok then what about this new ATI X2 card they have out now? is that faster then a GTX? similar price
That difference is not exactly a tad! Even from a new GT its £60 or there abouts!
and the 3870 X2 isn't "roughly" the same price as the 8800GTX, cheapest I've seen it is £267 - a good £30 more.
The GTX is certainly the cheapest i've seen, but it's by no means a 'cheap' graphics card! In terms of bang-per-buck i'm trying to picture if it would be literally double the performance of an 8800 GS? Anyone seen any graphs / reviews?
Yes but the GTX in question is an OEM, limited warranty etc.. if that means anything to you when spending that much on a card.
Standard retail GTX are the same price as the X2 if not more.
I think I would take the X2 in preference now.
The problem with this question is that you shouldn't just look at raw frame rates / fill rates / etc. and scale them directly against cost to achieve 'bang for buck'
If you want to play game X at resolution Y, and one card can give you 30fps and the other can't, then you'll need to discount the second card, whatever its price. Conversely, if you ONLY need to play game X at resolution Y, and both can give you 30fps, then there is no value in spending any more money on the more expensive card.
Horses for courses...
which is better in performance? X2 or the GTX? seeing as tehre both around the same price if the X2 is better then thats better value for money then a gtx right?
As 'schmunk' said, it depends on what you're playing and at what resolution. Check some reviews for relevant benchmarks.
As a bit generalisation the X2 is better in both raw power and also in media. But it also draws more power and the drivers still have a few kinks to iron out (you'll notice a lot of variation in reviews depending on what driver they used). Having said that though i personally can't see any reason to buy the GTX instead...
The question is do you really need a card that powerful?
Ah, but as ATI has brought out this new x2 card, will nVidia bring out their 9800gtx soonish?? :)
The GT is about 10-15% slower than the GTX. Even with £60 price gap (which is taking the cheapest GTX versus the average GT - if you pick the cheapest of each, the gap widens) you are still talking about a 25% price gap.
In my opinion, what is more pointless is a £230 GTX when the Rev. 2 GTS is at £200 (or as low as £185 as previously posted in the bargain forum). Those two cards trade hits, and there are no clear winner. You can't even say that one is better at higher resolution and the other at lower resolution, the various reviews you'll find won't support that assumption (despite the bus width video ram difference).
I'd probably also go 3870 X2 if I was to spend that much on a graphic card (not part of my plan), assuming there are not much complaints drivers wise say 2 months after release (I think that card has more room for optimisation - but I'll won't buy on card based on it's potential) than the G80/G92.
Hardly worth considering though until it has a price, release date and some benchmarks. You could wait ages on the thing to find that it's £500 and only as good as SLi 8800GTS
Theres always something around the corner in the world of computers, if you wait for stuff thats due out "soon-ish" then you'll never make a purchase ;)