Originally posted by: Denithor
See their review here.
Close to matching 8800GTS in most benchmarks, slips a bit in some (notably Crysis demo, looks like it just doesn't have enough RAM even at 1280x1024).
Low power draw and quiet cooler!
Originally posted by: DarthV
My question is why would they use over clocked 320/640mb GTS cards in their benchmarks and not label it that was in their graphs? They do have a blurb about it on the testing methods page, but not having it labeled on the graphs is misleading at best.
Originally posted by: thilan29
Something disturbing I noticed (from other reviews as well) was that once you go to 1920 res and add some AA, the GT tanks and loses to the GTS 640mb....in some games anyway.
Damn, and I just sold my GTS. I would have SLIed but GTSs still cost a lot. Oh well, hopefully the RV670 will do a bit better...at least the XT version.
Originally posted by: CP5670
The biggest difference seems to be that huge minimum framerate drop in Crysis, which is surprising as the memory differences aren't that large. It could be that the GTS just manages to get over the line at that resolution (which isn't exactly high) while the GT runs short.
Originally posted by: DarthV
3 FPS difference isn't that big of a deal. Even the 24 FPS from the 640 OC'd GTS isn't really high enough to be considered playable anyways. On the other review sites, was the GTS playable @ 1920x1200 with AA? If not, it's a moot point. You'll probably need to go with a GTX or Ultra to be able to have high enough oomph to make it feasible to add AA past 1600x1200.