im wondering what can other graphics card can match the 8800GTS or beat it...but at the same or lower price or a little bit higher price? im newbie btw lol
Which 8800GTS? The 512MB version is MUCH faster than a 640 or 320MB version. Anyway an ATI HD4850(about 160 after rebates on newegg.com) will easily outperform the 8800GTS.
No problem. Just a comparison, the 4850 soundly beats out the 9800GTX, so it definitely kills the 8800GTS.
It IS that good. That's my point. It can max almost any game, bar Crysis, at 19 x 12 res. The 4850 beats it, yes. But it doesn't spank it to Mars and back like you guys might believe. We're talking like the jump from an 8800GS to an 8800GTX, not 4850 to 4870. Even at it's price and age, I still consider the 8800GTS G92 quite high end. It certainly performs well in high res. ...random clicking, lol.
Not quite. The 9800GTX is a bit faster than the 8800GTS, the 9800GTX+ is faster still, and the HD4850 can even beat that in a fair few tests.
My point is, the 8800GTS is LAST gen, but it still performs like a current gen card. Yes, the 4850 is faster. But for someone who already owns an 8800GTS, it's not really a worthy upgrade. Thus my need for the 4870. The 8800s are still extremely popular and for good reason. The average person with an average sized monitor(1280 res/1680 res) will find that an 8800 will last far into the next gen. The only game to challenge it so far has been Crysis. Even Assassin's Creed was silky smooth for me completely maxed at 1920 4xAA 8xAF. I dare say that puts it very comfortably in the high end...
You're quite right, there's no point going from any 8800 to a 4850, the 4870 is the first card I'd consider an upgrade.
I'd consider it if maybe upgrading from an 8800GS or HD3850. But 9600GT/HD3870 and up really need a 4870 to feel the jump in performance.
I'll second that. When I went from a 8800GT to a 4850 I didn't see that big of a difference. The 4850 took less of a hit with full HDR lighting in STALKER though. That game sucks.
Seen how demanding the new Prequel Clear Sky is? GTX280s are seeing as low as 14fps in not particularly amazing scenes, at only 1920x1200...
Depends on if you like it or not. It's either you love it or you hate it. I didn't like it either, though I can certainly see where the appeal is. The graphics are bland, the shooting sucks, guns are impossible to aim and do piss-poor damage, no voice-over for individual characters... I mean, come on guys, at least give me some generic thing they all say. It was like being back in Morrowind... in a bad way. The only thing I can say is, nice lighting. That's about it. I had an extremely hard time trying to get into this game, and believe me, I really wanted to like it. It's just too shoddily made.
The graphics are typical of Q1 '07 shooters (can't speak for Clear Sky), the gameplay is different, but many took a liking to it. However, many didn't, myself included, primarily because of the rather sharp difficulty level... It doesn't support AA by any reasonable means, but apart from that I don't really see the problem with the game, I don't remember people commenting on there being very many bugs, and on an HD4870 at least, it runs maxed out at 2560 res, no problem at all.
