I'm willing to admit I shouldn't have got the 8600GT, what I thought was a bargain buy didn't quite live up to what I hoped it could do. I been window shopping (no cash to buy a replacement) from the 8800GT through to the 9800GTX.
(Please note pricing is a rough approximation from the pricing I found online and not reflective of RRP, but inclusive of VAT)
So starting at the 8800GT, I found that for around £100 up to £200 (which really surprised me).
Next is the 8800 GTS (the G92 version) which again I can find for around £150.
8800 GTX is £180 and the 9800 GTX is around the £200.
There is such a massive overlap, in my eyes, from a factory overclocked 8800GT (with 1GB video ram) being the same price as an 9800 GTX!
I can sit here and read review after review of the performance of each card on it's own and in SLi mode but what's the point?
I know I am covering two generations of GFX card here but if we take the 8800 GTX and 9800 GTX versions, is it worth the extra £20 for an approximate 7% increase in performance? Probably. So then if you were to spend £200, a stock 9800 GTX for £200 or some third party overclocked 8800 GT (that has less 'features')?
This is before we add into the mix the AMD/ATi offerings!!!
Does the pricing make any sense? Not to me it doesn't, not to me. If I was willing to burn around £200 for a GFX card, I'd probably go for the 9800 GTX. Perhaps HEXUS (or maybe they already have done and I have been blind to see it) could do a bang for buck chart of the range of popular video gaming cards (8800GT -> 9800 GX2 + AMD/ATi offerings)?