8800 Gs?

[ace777]

the other card was a 9600 gso, it had 384 and if he going for a little more expensive its a good deal.

 

[wol-va-rine]

the other card was a 9600 gso, it had 384 and if he going for a little more expensive its a good deal.

the Zotac 8800GTS 512MB was the deal I was thinking about getting myself, $125 shipped after rebate...

 

[worshipme]

DX10.1 is considered a "minor improvement" to DX10 by MS (Much like DX9 - DX9.0c. It will have some visual improvements and still be compatible with DX10.

the .1...? do you mean the direct x 10 vs 10.1...? I wouldn't even sweat that

I wouldn't consider it a small improvement. Remember Assassin's Creed pre-patched? The HD 3800 series was on a rampage because of the performance improvements 10.1 brought with AA enabled.
Of course, Nvidia quicky had to slip Ubisoft something to get them to remove 10.1 support.

Here are the cards in order of performance: 9600GT/9600GSO/HD 3870 < 8800GT < 8800GTS < 9800GTX < HD 4850. The biggest jump in performance is going from the 9600/3870 to the 8800GT. After that, it's all fairly incremental. But there is definitely a noticable increase going from the 8800GT to the HD 4850. And you can get the 4850 for $165 after MIR, I would go for that.

 

[Atomic Rooster]

I didn't say that, that's quoted from a MS rep:

Microsoft's Sam Glassenberg told Next-Gen in a phone interview, "DX10.1 fully supports DX10 hardware. No hardware support is being removed....It's strictly a superset. It's basically an update to DX10 that extends the hardware functionality slightly."

But Glassenberg stated, "It's a minor update, so we don't expect any developers to say, 'oh, this game is DX10.1 only.'

"All off the games that are coming out in the next few years will take better and better advantage of current DX10 hardware."

 

[wol-va-rine]

I wouldn't consider it a small improvement. Remember Assassin's Creed pre-patched? The HD 3800 series was on a rampage because of the performance improvements 10.1 brought with AA enabled.
Of course, Nvidia quicky had to slip Ubisoft something to get them to remove 10.1 support.

Here are the cards in order of performance: 9600GT/9600GSO/HD 3870 < 8800GT < 8800GTS < 9800GTX < HD 4850. The biggest jump in performance is going from the 9600/3870 to the 8800GT. After that, it's all fairly incremental. But there is definitely a noticable increase going from the 8800GT to the HD 4850. And you can get the 4850 for $165 after MIR, I would go for that.

I'm seriously considering a 4850 in the near future, how would it affect high def video playback compared to a 1GB XFX 8600GT...?

 

[ace777]

linky:

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/07/09/nvidia-g84-g86-bad

go with a 9600 gso( since 8400 gs is out of the question here)

 

[Atomic Rooster]

That article has nothing to do with the video cards in question in this thread. The 8800GS and 8800GT 512MB are G92 based as are the 9600's I believe.

 

[ace777]

1GB XFX 8600GT


last page of 3 hes asking about the best hi def card, id say a 8400 gs, in video does better than 8600 but with the article he will ne a cheap g92 the 8800/9600

 

[Teny]

are these benches real?
or are they outdated now?
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3140&p=7
it seems that the 8800 GT can beat the 8800 GTS
but then this one it says that the GTS beats the GT
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3175&p=4

 

[worshipme]

In the first link, they test with a G80 640MB GTS, in the second, with a G92 8800GTS 512MB.

If you want something mainly for Hi-Def, get a HD 3650.