|
The Official OC (OverClocking) Thread!
|
|
|
NO Fanboy comments needed
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
19. December 2008 @ 18:19 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
10-20% does not stop it from being a good card though, to say you can only play older games at medium detail is unfair. See my post in the graphics card thread for more details.
I don't need to see your post in the graphics card section to know that the 9600GT is going to choke on a lot of games, because I've asked myself. It will play some with lower detail settings but it's not card that one would consider gaming with. I wouldn't even consider gaming with the 8800GS that I have because there will be more than a few games beyond its reach. I've tested all of my cards and I think that I have a pretty good grasp of what they can do. My advice to anyone looking for a low range Nvidia card would be to not buy one with less than 112 stream processors such as a 9800GT if they want to be able to play most games.
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. |
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
19. December 2008 @ 18:50 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Sophocles:
Quote:
I assume you meant 8800GT vs 9600GT. The 8600 and 9800 are miles apart!
Completely different cards but neither of them is going to play a lot of games. The 8600GT has only 32 stream processors and is fine for surfing the net and word processing. The 9600GT has 64 stream processors and will play some low demanding games probably mostly older ones. To get anything that will play a variety of games with Nvidia you really should be looking at cards with 96 to 112 stream processors as the bare minimum. For that kind of money you would do much better with an ATI solution unless you're folding.:D
Currently I am running a 6800GT, yea old technology. I'm still able to run games at low settings except for GTA4. When I was comparing the 8600 and 9800, I didn't mean 8800. Those are still considerably more expensive than the 9800. Is the 9800 or 8800 better?
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
19. December 2008 @ 18:59 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Is the 9800 or 8800 better?
That depends on which 8800 and 9800. I picked up a couple of 8800GTS (G92) cards for $124 each. They are really just slightly underclocked 9800GTX cards. So in this case one would get the one with the best price since they both will overclock to the same speed. The 9800GT would make a really decent budget gaming card for about $120 US.
I tried a copy of FarCry2 I got for free on the 8800GS card and I was unhappy with the result. I don't know what you want to spend on a card but you can get a 9600GSO (96 stream processors) for between $70 and $80 and it is faster than a 9600GT as well. The issue will however be that in a year the newer games are going to become an issue.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150320
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. December 2008 @ 19:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
The 9600GT, 8800GS and 9600GSO are all almost identical in practice, there's less than 10% between them. More powerful cards like the HD4830 are far better.
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
19. December 2008 @ 19:28 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
The 9600GT, 8800GS and 9600GSO are all almost identical in practice, there's less than 10% between them. More powerful cards like the HD4830 are far better.
True. For gaining I agree choose the HD 4830 and for an HTPC definitely the HD4830, but for folding for now, Nvidia.
While we've had this discussion I've ordered two motherboards and a 750watt Corsair power supply. I don't game a lot but I do use them as measures of power because I keep getting them for free video cards. I just got a free full copy of FarCry2 with the GTX260 card I just purchased. Of course it won't pay for the two power supplies the card just put in their graves. LOL
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. |
AfterDawn Addict
|
19. December 2008 @ 19:29 |
Link to this message
|
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
 |
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
19. December 2008 @ 19:37 |
Link to this message
|
Russ
Great choice but we've already been trying to move him from $70 to $100. This is kind of like the AMD and Intel debate. There are some folks that will go with Nvidia regardless of the cards standing when compared to an ATI card, and others ATI even when Nvidia is ahead, and I think its GTX295 comeback is going to achieve that. Yes it's just the old GTX2000 GPU reduced to a smaller die size but sometimes that's enough.
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. |
|
spamual
Suspended permanently
|
19. December 2008 @ 20:39 |
Link to this message
|
the 9600GT is on par with the 3870, beating it with AA/AF....
the 9600GSO/8800GS (same card diffrernt name, ala 8800GT/9800GT) are a little less, esp with only 384BM memory and a 192bit bus.
for folding, the 9800GX2 gives nearly 10,000ppd, stick 3 of those in an x58/680i/750i/780i/790i, and your laughing :D
if the GTX295 is priced at or under the 4870x2, that would be nice, i dont see it happening, but it would be a nice surprise :)
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. December 2008 @ 21:09 |
Link to this message
|
The GTX295 drivers seem pretty near final state, and the card performs exactly as I expected. It's MSRP is $500, but the exchange between US and UK for nvidia is less favourable than for ATI, strangely, so I would expect HD4870X2 £350, GTX295 £400-£450. Overall, the GTX295 works out a mere 6% faster than the 4870X2, and only 4% faster than two 4870 1GB cards in traditional crossfire. Add to this that at the moment, the GTX295 has issues with high levels of Anti-Aliasing. Hopefully they'll be fixed by final release.
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
19. December 2008 @ 21:21 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
the 9600GT is on par with the 3870, beating it with AA/AF....
Nope!
Quote:
for folding, the 9800GX2 gives nearly 10,000ppd, stick 3 of those in an x58/680i/750i/780i/790i, and your laughing :D
Initially that was true with the 480 Point units but with the 511 point WU's the 9800GX2's are experiencing serious issues and are crashing.
The expected price for the GTX295 is $499.
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. December 2008 @ 21:35 |
Link to this message
|
I don't claim to know anything about GPU folding, but I've yet to see ANY benchmark out of several (at least half a dozen) that puts the HD3870 in a favourable light compared to the 9600GT. Seriously, I didn't just make that comparison table for future reference and due to boredom, it has bettered my understanding of how different GPUs compare. I was surprised to see that there was very little real world difference between the 3870 and 8800GT. However, I knew all along the 9600GT, 8800GS and 9600GSO were rough equals to the 3870, and this confirmed it. The HD4670 is also along the same lines, and is a card I have often recommended to budget gamers. None of these are too far behind the 8800GT (in a lot cases hardly any noticeable real world difference), and there is no disputing the 8800GT is a credible gaming card. Granted, it won't run Crysis on High at any considerable resolution, but all other games it will. Bear in mind the chart I produced is always for absolute maximum detail unless otherwise stated (solely for Crysis at present). The requirement to play modern games like GRiD, Half Life 2 Episode Two and Call of Duty 4 at 1680x1050, a reasonable and typical gaming resolution, and never dip below 30fps (which for at least the first two is absolutely playable conditions, for the latter, certainly liveable) is, only an 8800GS or 9600GSO. So you're saying maxing out A-list games produced in the last year or so at the resolution most gamers use isn't what you'd want to game with?
This guy has a 6800GT, it's miles behind even an 8600GT, let alone a 9600GT. I have no problem with you buying stacks of graphics cards, as you are in the financial position to play around with different stuff, I'd love to be able to do that, but right now you're forcing people to spend 100+ bucks on graphics cards when it really isn't necessary. The only thing I do agree with you on here is that the HD4830 is an excellent value product.
Oh, and spamual? 680/750/780i? Yuck.
and lastly, this:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2008/02...raphics_card/10
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. December 2008 @ 21:55
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
19. December 2008 @ 21:52 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by spamual:
the 9600GT is on par with the 3870, beating it with AA/AF....
the 9600GSO/8800GS (same card diffrernt name, ala 8800GT/9800GT) are a little less, esp with only 384BM memory and a 192bit bus.
for folding, the 9800GX2 gives nearly 10,000ppd, stick 3 of those in an x58/680i/750i/780i/790i, and your laughing :D
if the GTX295 is priced at or under the 4870x2, that would be nice, i dont see it happening, but it would be a nice surprise :)
Shaff,
If Sophocles is right about the $499 pricetag for the GTX295, then it will be slightly cheaper than the 4870x2! Certainly in the ballpark!
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. December 2008 @ 21:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
As far as I'm aware, the MSRP for the 4870X2 is $499 as well.
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
19. December 2008 @ 21:59 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Sophocles:
Russ
Great choice but we've already been trying to move him from $70 to $100. This is kind of like the AMD and Intel debate. There are some folks that will go with Nvidia regardless of the cards standing when compared to an ATI card, and others ATI even when Nvidia is ahead, and I think its GTX295 comeback is going to achieve that. Yes it's just the old GTX2000 GPU reduced to a smaller die size but sometimes that's enough.
About AMD/ATI, here is my story:
I had a GeForce 5500GT in a 2.93 Celeron. Card sucked. I got a ATI 9800 Pro from a friend for free and all I could say was holy shit, that blew the 5500 out of the water. It performed as well as the 6800GT. I ran Guitar Hero 3 on that Celeron without lag, way under the system requirements! So I switched over to ATI then loving their cards. Later for my new built quad I bought a ATI x1650 512MB. Some users here on AD said that it would outperform my 6800GT. I got it, installed it and was very disappointed by the results. The 9800 Pro performed better in NFSU2. Thats when I switched cards with my dad and took the x1650. Right now I can probably say that it is running a little better than the 9800 Pro but the 6800GT still beats it.
Because of this, I'd prefer Nvidia but if ATI gets me quality like the 9800 pro, which I know it will, I don't mind going for a ATI.
Now for the hard part. Can I get anything good, ATI or Nvidia, for $50-75? If you need you can go $100 max and then lower. I don't care about rebates and shipping costs don't apply to the price range.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. December 2008 @ 22:03 |
Link to this message
|
You bought a very cheap Radeon card. The X1650 series was never intended to beat the 6800 or X800. By far the best card you can buy for that price is a Radeon HD4670.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
19. December 2008 @ 22:04 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
As far as I'm aware, the MSRP for the 4870X2 is $499 as well.
Yeah, I checked on Newegg and they range in price from $500 to $560 with the on sale low of $470 (Diamond). I was also going by the price you quoted in Pounds which was about 15 Pounds less for the GTX295 at 335 Pounds.
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
23 product reviews
|
19. December 2008 @ 22:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
I'll look into it. Christmas is coming and I'm debating against money towards a modded 360 or a video card for my computer. What do you guys think?
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. December 2008 @ 22:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
Russ, you can't take the raw exchange rate. We have a 15% VAT here applied to all PC parts. $500 literally is £385.
core2kid, I have added the HD4670 to my chart at the graphics card thread. The X1650XT scores 1093.2, the HD4670 scores 2948.0, so the HD4670 is a little under triple the performance of the X1650XT, if that's the version you had, it would be even better compared to the X1650 Pro.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. December 2008 @ 22:11
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
19. December 2008 @ 22:10 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I don't claim to know anything about GPU folding, but I've yet to see ANY benchmark out of several (at least half a dozen) that puts the HD3870 in a favourable light compared to the 9600GT.
Sam, I've already said that ATI cards suck at folding and I don't have high praises for the HD 3870 it's history. Mine is in my parts collection and not even installed.
Quote:
was surprised to see that there was very little real world difference between the 3870 and 8800GT.
The 8800GT has 112 stream processors and will also surpass the 9600GT because it has almost twice as many stream processors.
Quote:
I knew all along the 9600GT, 8800GS and 9600GSO were rough equals to the 3870,
The 9600GSO and 8800GS are because they are both faster cards than the 9600GT which is not equal.
Quote:
So you're saying maxing out A-list games produced in the last year or so at the resolution most gamers use isn't what you'd want to game with?
I will admit to playing at a higher resolution that most players use but when I recommend I am also thinking about a year from now.
Quote:
This guy has a 6800GT, it's miles behind even an 8600GT, let alone a 9600GT.
I recently went to the house of an individual who was playing oblivion on an 8800GSO and he thought that it looked great and played great. The game was playing at less than 30 fps and the graphics settings were really low. To him it looked great and I suppose if one is used to consoles then it probably did, but he didn't even notice the jerkiness in the game play.
Quote:
So you're saying maxing out A-list games produced in the last year or so at the resolution most gamers use isn't what you'd want to game with?
Games that were hard to play such as Oblivion and The Witcher (I play both) didn't do well with the lower level cards at all in fact they just barely got by on the HD 3870. I didn't buy the HD 3870 to game I bought it for HD acceleration which ATI does better than Nvidia cards hands down. BTW, Donald purchased an HD 4830 for his HTPC which I think is an excellent choice.Quote:
I have no problem with you buying stacks of graphics cards, as you are in the financial position to play around with different stuff, I'd love to be able to do that, but right now you're forcing people to spend 100+ bucks on graphics cards when it really isn't necessary.
Quote:
I have no problem with you buying stacks of graphics cards, as you are in the financial position to play around with different stuff, I'd love to be able to do that, but right now you're forcing people to spend 100+ bucks on graphics cards when it really isn't necessary.
I'm not forcing anyone to do anything. I am making a recommendation that is perhaps $30 more than they were looking at in the beginning for a much greater gain, and longer life. It was Russ that recommended a $100 more at $159 after a $20 rebate.
All that I'm advocating is if you play games and use Nvidia cards then the easiest way to judge their service is by counting the number of stream processors and memory size. The more of either the better because all of the 9600 cards are based on the G92 processor and can therefore be almost equally matched in clock speed.
If they look around a bit the can often get an even better price. I paid $59.99 for my 8800GS with 96 stream processors which is less than the price of the 9600GT with only 64 stream processors. I paid only $24 more each for my 8800GTS (G92) cards which we know are really just first release of the 9800GTX cards than the 9600GT is going for. So who's wasting the OP's money?
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. |
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. December 2008 @ 22:15 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sophocles:
The 9600GSO and 8800GS are because they are both faster cards than the 9600GT which is not equal.
- wrong way round actually, the 9600GSO and 8800GS are the slower cards. The 9600GT is the closest performer to the 8800GT. As for the 9600 being surpassed by the 8800, yes it is, but not by much - look at the graphs I posted above.
Judging by the real world results observed versus how you recall them performing, counting the stream processors doesn't seem to work, you say the 8800GT has nearly twice as many stream processors, I haven't looked it up as I ignore most physical specifications of graphics cards outside memory size, but if you're right, then the sub 10% performance differece between the two cards is at odds with your hypothesis.
As I'm pretty sure he stated earlier, the OP is on a budget well below $100, and right now the HD4670 is his best buy. Sure, the HD4830 may last him a bit longer in the end, but at 50% extra cost, that's no small upgrade. The Geforce discussion now is irrelevant as the 8800GS, 9600GT and 9600GSO cards are rendered pretty much obsolete by cards like the HD4670.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
19. December 2008 @ 22:46 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Russ, you can't take the raw exchange rate. We have a 15% VAT here applied to all PC parts. $500 literally is £385.
It's doesn't really matter. I know you pay more because of VAT, but it works the same for all Computer Parts, unless you've already added the VAT! Also almost every State here has a Sales Tax on everything but most consumables and necessity items, only the rate varies from state to state, but average about half of your VAT. 5 States have no Sales Tax, but in 2 of them Local Municipalities have their own Sales Tax. That "Itchy" feeling on your butt is the Government picking your pocket, same as ours! LOL!!
Here, the work force used to get 11 paid Holidays a year. The Government Legislated it down to 6. Care to guess who still gets all the Holidays? Why the Government does, of course. They are closed on all of them! I think that comes under the heading of the screwing you get! ROFLMAO!!
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. December 2008 @ 22:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yes, but the exchange between the US and UK is different for nvidia than for ATI. In the past, a $250 nvidia card cost £230, when a $270 ATI card cost £190.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
19. December 2008 @ 23:13 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by sammorris:
Yes, but the exchange between the US and UK is different for nvidia than for ATI. In the past, a $250 nvidia card cost £230, when a $270 ATI card cost £190.
Which should not be! In effect, your Government is Favoring Ati at the expense of nVidia! Your Crooks must have been talking to our Crooks, swapping tips!
Russ
GigaByte 990FXA-UD5 - AMD FX-8320 @4.0GHz @1.312v - Corsair H-60 liquid CPU Cooler - 4x4 GB GSkill RipJaws DDR3/1866 Cas8, 8-9-9-24 - Corsair 400-R Case - OCZ FATAL1TY 550 watt Modular PSU - Intel 330 120GB SATA III SSD - WD Black 500GB SATA III - WD black 1 TB Sata III - WD Black 500GB SATA II - 2 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD-Burner - Sony 420W 5.1 PL-II Suround Sound - GigaByte GTX550/1GB 970 Mhz Video - Asus VE247H 23.6" HDMI 1080p Monitor
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
19. December 2008 @ 23:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
I don't think it's that, I think it's nvidia setting a different MSRP for different markets. Why it's done, I'm not sure.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
19. December 2008 @ 23:15 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
wrong way round actually, the 9600GSO and 8800GS are the slower cards. The 9600GT is the closest performer to the 8800GT.
The 9600GSO and the 9600GT have the same processing unit's but the 9600GSO (although 192 bit) has 96 Stream processors versus the 9600GT's 64 stream processors (256 bit), and the GSO is also intentionally underclocked (550 Mhz vs 650 MHz for the GT), but it has the same clock speed limit. Which means that one overclocks to the same maximum as the other. So no big deal get one and clock it to the same speed as the GT and the GT is dead in the water. The problem is that the best way to get more power out of the Nvidia cards is to overclock them and they overclock well, but the points don't come from just the GPU. Overclocking the stream processors (shaders) nets more gain than over clocking the GPU or memory of which both can also be overclocked. The 9600GSO and the 8800GS are the exact same card and both are purposely underclocked.
The 8800GT is faster than both of them because it not only has 112 stream processors but it is also 256bit, and can also be overclocked to the same limit. The GT designation doesn't mean much with Nvidia. The 9600GSO is a better buy than the 9600GT and it is also a popular card for softmoding. Some say that it can be easily softemoded to a 8800GTS 512 but I haven't done much research on it but I do know that the 8800GS and the 9600GSO folds circles around the 9600GT better than a 25% gain.
" Please Read!!! Post your questions only in This Thread or they will go unanswered:
Help with development of BD RB: Donations at: http://www.jdobbs.com/. |
