Go SLI or get the 7800GTX 512

when it comes to benchmarking, theres a big difference in performance between 7800GTX SLI and 7800GTX 512MB, but in a games benchmark, there is only a slight difference between SLI and 512MB GTX. So until there's a game in the market that really needs a SLI to work, i will choose the 7800GTX 512 MB.

 

MY SYSTEM:

AMD Athlon64 X2 4400+
Asus A8N-SLI Premium [S939]
2048 DDR[400] Dual RAM
2 W.D 74Gb S-ATA [10K] Raptor
LG DVD+/RW[4165]*OEM
Dual leadtek(2)PX7800GTX 256Mb(extreme edition) SLI
Antec SLK3800B[400W]
ANTEC 550W power supply

I run 2 7800 GTX 256(core 490) and get almost the same benchmarks as 2 7800 GTX 512

BENCHMARKS:3DMark05

My system:12550

Reported benchmark for similar system with 7800 512:11930


You have to be careful,because your CPU will bottleneck whatever card you get (especially in SLI).......
So if you want to spent the CRAZY amount their asking for the 7800 GTX 512 and get almost the same results as the 7800 GTX 256 in SLI....go ahead but I'd rather go on a trip to the Carribean............

 

WHY???

U already have a 7800GTX 256mb!!!

 

flip a frickin coin

 

ya flip a frickin coin... even a single 7800GTX in a games benchmark only have a slight disadvantage than a SLI...

 

not all games are as cpu bottlenecked as 3dmark05 ...theres a decent benefit in fear/cod2 and most recent titles for a 512mb GTX in SLI.

i do agree you have to be crazy to spend this much on 2 video cards that will be so so in 12mths time however.

price v performance 256 GTX in SLI is a winner in my eyes.

 

Looking at the tests around the net, i went for 256 SLI instead of GTX512
When you realy need 512mb (unreal 2007) were at the GF9 serie

 

As far as COD2 is concerned I play at 1280x1024 everthing maxed out,4x AA in DX9 and I get a min FPS of 91.I don't think I need to get more than that to get smoother frame rates.All my textures are at extra also......Seems it would be a waste of money only to get a few more framerates when in reality you don't need them........

These are my actual settings for COD2:
1280x1024 res.
All three textures on EXTRA
Smoke:Everything
Body count:medium
Filtering:4AA 8 Anis
Vsync:disabled

FPS: MIN:91
MAX:345

I can't justify paying what they are asking for a 7800 GTX 512 to get a few more framerates.

BTW:I am using the latest Nvidia drivers.

 

at your res you have all the power you need

even at 1600x1200 the 256 GTX in SLI is plenty and is probably what i will go for as i game in 1680x1050.

512 GTX SLI is for res above 1600 who want high level filtering......at a price

 

we dont even know if this DX9 cards are compatible with the new WINDOWS VISTA that to be release this 2006... is there any reviews on this? compatibility with WINDOWS VISTA's DIRECTX?

waste of money spending on GPU that dont have any assurance to be compatible for the next generation of DIRECTX.

please correct me if im wrong...

 

you mean if it gets released in 2006, if Vista doesnt support DX9 cards then everyone will have to upgrade, i cant see Microsoft needing that headache, But of course it will support it so dont you worry your pretty little head over it. lmao

 

its like what happened between the geforce 4 cards and fx. GeForce 4 dont support DX9, thats why even the GeForce 4ti version outperform the low end card of FX in performance, it becomes a crap when it comes to DX9 games...

Maybe the same will happen, when DX10 will be release...

 

Go 512MB then in the future when we have better CPU's go sli.