8800GT 256mb vs 3870 512mb vs 3850 512mb

[Aiden]

Originally posted by: aldamon

Originally posted by: Aiden
Between the 8800GT 256 and the 3850 256 i would say the GT is the better choice. You are better off though going with the 3870 as your best bet,if you can afford it, it will allow you to enable aa/af at the resolution you stated.

Huh? At 1280x1024, which is the resolution thedonutman is interested in running, the 256MB GT can run plenty of AA/AF.

The review shows them using the overclocked xfx 256 mb card, but does not say stock speeds, other then the overclocking area. the xxx version is listed at 650mhz core factory overclocked vs what appears to be other cards at stock speeds, for the benchmarks. this is a pretty common issue with all reviews, they generally review a card which is overclocked vs other cards which are not. id be curious to see the benchmark results if all the cards were overclocked at the same 8-10% rate.

the OP stated he had 160 to spend, which gives him the 3870 as his best option for futureproofing his video card,within his budget. it gives him options at gaming at higher resolutions, and also for games which are going to require more GPU power in the next 18-24 months.

 

[Alaa]

Originally posted by: Aiden
The review shows them using the overclocked xfx 256 mb card, but does not say stock speeds, other then the overclocking area. the xxx version is listed at 650mhz core factory overclocked vs what appears to be other cards at stock speeds, for the benchmarks. this is a pretty common issue with all reviews, they generally review a card which is overclocked vs other cards which are not. id be curious to see the benchmark results if all the cards were overclocked at the same 8-10% rate.

the OP stated he had 160 to spend, which gives him the 3870 as his best option for futureproofing his video card,within his budget. it gives him options at gaming at higher resolutions, and also for games which are going to require more GPU power in the next 18-24 months.

Good Morning,

Fear 1920x1200x32 4xAA 16xAF
XFX OC 8800GT 512 : 60
3870 512 : 54
XFX OC 8800GT 256MB : 52
8800GT 256MB : 46
3850 256MB : 45

 

[heyheybooboo]

Anybody else think the HD 3850 512mb and 8800gt 256mb at the same price point ($210USD) is a pretty dang good deal that will only get better price wise??

Let the GPU wars rage!

 

[Griswold]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: taltamir
is that 1.3 FPS on some of those benchmarks? way to go finding some unrealistic benchmarks to skew results... who cares... And those results are heavily and artificially skewed in AMD's favor.

http://www.computerbase.de/art..._radeon_hd_3850_rv670/
Computer base is a highly respectable website :!

You mean for those of us who have even heard of it? Nah Tut. Use the bench sites we all commonly put at least some stock in. FS, AT, Xbit.

All of a sudden, computerbase is "da bomb".

Ah I knew it. If you dont know it, it sucks/has no credibility/whatever. Go get a clue. :roll:

While I'm not a CB fan to begin with, they're still a respected site in the german speaking parts of the world and certainly not known for faking or skewing anything. I definitely rate it higher than xbit, though.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: Griswold

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: taltamir
is that 1.3 FPS on some of those benchmarks? way to go finding some unrealistic benchmarks to skew results... who cares... And those results are heavily and artificially skewed in AMD's favor.

http://www.computerbase.de/art..._radeon_hd_3850_rv670/
Computer base is a highly respectable website :!

You mean for those of us who have even heard of it? Nah Tut. Use the bench sites we all commonly put at least some stock in. FS, AT, Xbit.

All of a sudden, computerbase is "da bomb".

Ah I knew it. If you dont know it, it sucks/has no credibility/whatever. Go get a clue. :roll:

While I'm not a CB fan to begin with, they're still a respected site in the german speaking parts of the world and certainly not known for faking or skewing anything. I definitely rate it higher than xbit, though.

I LOVE X-bit Labs. My fav review site... AT used to be #1 in my book, but that was a few years ago... Their graphs are horrible. I miss the old AT :-( I abhore HardOCP. Reading their video reviews are about as good as good as a forum opinion on what card dominates.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Griswold

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: taltamir
is that 1.3 FPS on some of those benchmarks? way to go finding some unrealistic benchmarks to skew results... who cares... And those results are heavily and artificially skewed in AMD's favor.

http://www.computerbase.de/art..._radeon_hd_3850_rv670/
Computer base is a highly respectable website :!

You mean for those of us who have even heard of it? Nah Tut. Use the bench sites we all commonly put at least some stock in. FS, AT, Xbit.

All of a sudden, computerbase is "da bomb".

Ah I knew it. If you dont know it, it sucks/has no credibility/whatever. Go get a clue. :roll:

While I'm not a CB fan to begin with, they're still a respected site in the german speaking parts of the world and certainly not known for faking or skewing anything. I definitely rate it higher than xbit, though.

Can you show me where I said it "sucks"? I said I barely heard of them. Only in the last few weeks have people been increasingly linking to their benches. So, instead of being an "extremest, take a look again at my post at what it actually says. Not what you "think" it means.

 

[Quiksilver]

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: zeroburrito
the 8800gt 256 completely humiliates the other 2 cards in any resolution.

THATS BS


Computerbase

HD3870 512
8800GT 512
HD3850 256

<snipped wall of text>

You are aware of the fact that you mis-read their benchmarks reviews right?

If you bother looking at the review again you will notice this because on all their graphs they highlight the 3870, 3850, and 8600GTS. Not the 8800GT. If you look at what they didn't highlight they have it listed though and it far out benchmarks all 3 cards.

In short, you mislabeled the 8600GTS and put down 8800GT.

Please review the site and your post again.

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: zeroburrito
the 8800gt 256 completely humiliates the other 2 cards in any resolution.

uh oh, I'm so humiliated...

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: taltamir
is that 1.3 FPS on some of those benchmarks? way to go finding some unrealistic benchmarks to skew results... who cares... And those results are heavily and artificially skewed in AMD's favor.

um, taltamir, cumputerbase is one of the best sites out there. just because all the sites don't agree when using diff resolutions/op systems etc doesn't mean that they will all get identical results.

 

[SniperDaws]

Originally posted by: QuiksilverX1

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: zeroburrito
the 8800gt 256 completely humiliates the other 2 cards in any resolution.

THATS BS


Computerbase

HD3870 512
8800GT 512
HD3850 256

<snipped wall of text>

You are aware of the fact that you mis-read their benchmarks reviews right?

If you bother looking at the review again you will notice this because on all their graphs they highlight the 3870, 3850, and 8600GTS. Not the 8800GT. If you look at what they didn't highlight they have it listed though and it far out benchmarks all 3 cards.

In short, you mislabeled the 8600GTS and put down 8800GT.

Please review the site and your post again.

Thats why i said his link to the benchmarks dont tally up with the ones he posted, i thought it was me im glad somone else noticed.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: zeroburrito
the 8800gt 256 completely humiliates the other 2 cards in any resolution.

You should be banned for a month for making noob statements like this. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Let's start posting complete garbage with 0 facts to back up our claims......

Benchmarks

 

[taltamir]

Ok I understand you all really want AMD to win... and keep posting comparisons at 1920x1200 resolution to show the 3870 having a slight advantage over the 256MB 8800GT...

But you are forgetting one thing... the OP clearly stated the following (I'll be running at a max of 1280x1024 probably)

At that resolution no more then 256MB is needed and the 8800GT will annihilate the 3870 and 3850 in every single test every single time.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: taltamir
Ok I understand you all really want AMD to win... and keep posting comparisons at 1920x1200 resolution to show the 3870 having a slight advantage over the 256MB 8800GT...

But you are forgetting one thing... the OP clearly stated the following (I'll be running at a max of 1280x1024 probably)

At that resolution no more then 256MB is needed and the 8800GT will annihilate the 3870 and 3850 in every single test every single time.

Remember games will only get more intensive. What happens in 1 year? ...$200 3850 512mb is a good card for the $. Some even come factory overclocked to 720mhz for only $10 more and aftermarket cooling. That card is certainly a better buy than the 256mb 8800GT if you intend to keep your videocard for longer than 1 year.

 

[guezz]

8800 GT 256/512MB (600/1500/1800) (9.6/57.6) (PCIe) 256-bit DL-HDCP D-DLDVI
- 112 unified processors ? 56 TMUs ? 16 ROPs
8800 GTX is roughly 15% faster or put in another way - 15% faster than the 8800 GTS. The 256MB version (600/1500/1400) is about 10% faster than HD 3850 256MB, or 10% slower than HD 3870 512MB.

The Buyer's Guide: 6600GT - 8800GTX / HD2900XT - Performance and Technology

thedonutman, also read some reviews.

 

[Quiksilver]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws

Originally posted by: QuiksilverX1

Originally posted by: tuteja1986

Originally posted by: zeroburrito
the 8800gt 256 completely humiliates the other 2 cards in any resolution.

THATS BS


Computerbase

HD3870 512
8800GT 512
HD3850 256

<snipped wall of text>

You are aware of the fact that you mis-read their benchmarks reviews right?

If you bother looking at the review again you will notice this because on all their graphs they highlight the 3870, 3850, and 8600GTS. Not the 8800GT. If you look at what they didn't highlight they have it listed though and it far out benchmarks all 3 cards.

In short, you mislabeled the 8600GTS and put down 8800GT.

Please review the site and your post again.

Thats why i said his link to the benchmarks dont tally up with the ones he posted, i thought it was me im glad somone else noticed.

LOL, I must of been too caught up in a WTF! moment to even notice your post but I see it now.

 

[Cookie Monster]

At the resolution of 1920x1200, its obvious the 8800GT will get slaughtered especially with AA/AF enabled due to its measly 256mb.

But the fact is that when the resolution is 1280x1024, IMHO the 8800GT is a much better value compared to lets say the HD3870 or even the HD3850 because of its raw shader power as seen by certain benchmarks. (Crysis for one, shows just how close the GT can get to the GTX til the bandwidth/framebuffer limitation kicks in due to high res + AA/AF).

OT - One has to wonder why nVIDIA hasn't launched a full fledged 8800GT with the fastest GDDR4 til the GF9 is released to replace the 8800GTX/ultra. *sigh

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: taltamir
Ok I understand you all really want AMD to win... and keep posting comparisons at 1920x1200 resolution to show the 3870 having a slight advantage over the 256MB 8800GT...

But you are forgetting one thing... the OP clearly stated the following (I'll be running at a max of 1280x1024 probably)

At that resolution no more then 256MB is needed and the 8800GT will annihilate the 3870 and 3850 in every single test every single time.

Remember games will only get more intensive. What happens in 1 year? ...$200 3850 512mb is a good card for the $. Some even come factory overclocked to 720mhz for only $10 more and aftermarket cooling. That card is certainly a better buy than the 256mb 8800GT if you intend to keep your videocard for longer than 1 year.

In a year or longer he will need a next gen card to play next gen games... and new games with grapgics similar to what we have now will still run better on a GT then a 3870 as long as they are still at 1280x1024...
v-ram requirements don't baloon THAT fast.

 

[BFG10K]

RE: VRAM sizes.

I was just reading this article I found it quite interesting in the sitautions where the 320 MB GTS absolutely tanks due to not having enough memory.

 

[ArchAngel777]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
RE: VRAM sizes.

I was just reading this article I found it quite interesting in the sitautions where the 320 MB GTS absolutely tanks due to not having enough memory.

That was a good article. For others that read it, be sure to notice that the 3850 they use is the 512mb version. I wish ATI's performance wasn't so flaky... I really had high hopes for ATI and they really let everyone down with R600 IMO... The lack of hardware AA is terrible.. :-/

I hope R700 is more than hype.

 

[secretanchitman]

8800GT 256MB or 512MB.

no questions asked.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: ArchAngel777

Originally posted by: BFG10K
RE: VRAM sizes.

I was just reading this article I found it quite interesting in the sitautions where the 320 MB GTS absolutely tanks due to not having enough memory.

That was a good article. For others that read it, be sure to notice that the 3850 they use is the 512mb version. I wish ATI's performance wasn't so flaky... I really had high hopes for ATI and they really let everyone down with R600 IMO... The lack of hardware AA is terrible.. :-/

I hope R700 is more than hype.

Thats because ATI has different stream processor strategy then nvidia.. nvidia gives you 96 or so SP that are exactly the same and fully functional... but ATI gives you 320 SP with only one in 8 or so being capable of floating point (decimal), all the others are simplified.

That means that depending on the function it might have more or all...

Nvidia also runs their SP in a different speed then the rest of the chip... 3x the mhz specificallyl...

So its really all give and take.

 

[evolucion8]

Originally posted by: zeroburrito
the 8800gt 256 completely humiliates the other 2 cards in any resolution.

May be in your world, but legitreviews says the opposite.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/607/1/

The GeForce 8800 GT 256MB video card was never designed to compete with higher end graphics card as it only has 256MB of memory. When NVIDIA briefed the media they showed performance charts with resolutions of 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 when it came to the performance numbers. That right there, goes to show you that this video card is aimed at those with 20"or less monitors running 1600x1200 and lower resolutions. Even at smaller resolutions the GeForce 8800 GT 256MB had a hard time keeping up with the Radeon 3850 and Radeon 3870, which are both priced at or under what the GeForce 8800 GT 256MB is available at. The GeForce 8800 GT 256MB faces tough competition thanks to the Radeon 3800 series and it only clearly beat the Radeon 3800's in Bioshock. Be sure to consider what games you play the most and the performance of the cards on them when you make your next purchase.

True that the 8800GT 512MB is between 5% and 15% faster than the Radeon HD 3870, but not the 256MB version which trails behind in most scenarios.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: zeroburrito
the 8800gt 256 completely humiliates the other 2 cards in any resolution.

Are you saying it performs better even if the game uses over 256mb for textures, and it has to use your system memory? If that is the case, why put any RAM on the video card in the first place? :roll:

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: taltamir

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: taltamir
Ok I understand you all really want AMD to win... and keep posting comparisons at 1920x1200 resolution to show the 3870 having a slight advantage over the 256MB 8800GT...

But you are forgetting one thing... the OP clearly stated the following (I'll be running at a max of 1280x1024 probably)

At that resolution no more then 256MB is needed and the 8800GT will annihilate the 3870 and 3850 in every single test every single time.

Remember games will only get more intensive. What happens in 1 year? ...$200 3850 512mb is a good card for the $. Some even come factory overclocked to 720mhz for only $10 more and aftermarket cooling. That card is certainly a better buy than the 256mb 8800GT if you intend to keep your videocard for longer than 1 year.

In a year or longer he will need a next gen card to play next gen games... and new games with grapgics similar to what we have now will still run better on a GT then a 3870 as long as they are still at 1280x1024...
v-ram requirements don't baloon THAT fast.

Use Rivatuner to see how much video memory your games are using. I don't remember the last time I saw a game use less than 256. Even Battlefield 2 uses most of my 512mb.