Alientank Posted July 22, 2004 Ah I can't help myself, I had to get it. $750 CANADIAN total including shipping, not that bad, and should be a nice boost over the 9800 pro. Doom 3 looks like it's going to run really sweet on the 6800 GT cards, and I can sell my 9800 pro to make back $200-250 of the cost. So I'm only coughing up $500 or so for it or so. Anyone else bought one for D3? 0 Share this post Link to post
Endureth Posted July 22, 2004 Alientank said:Ah I can't help myself, I had to get it. $750 CANADIAN total including shipping, not that bad, and should be a nice boost over the 9800 pro. Doom 3 looks like it's going to run really sweet on the 6800 GT cards, and I can sell my 9800 pro to make back $200-250 of the cost. So I'm only coughing up $500 or so for it or so. Anyone else bought one for D3? Soon (tm) -E 0 Share this post Link to post
Amaster Posted July 22, 2004 I bought a 9600xt in January. So although I can afford a new video card, I cant justify spending that much money on another one in such a short period of time. 0 Share this post Link to post
Alientank Posted July 22, 2004 Use3D said:I didn't buy the GT, but I do have a 6800. That only has an 8x2 interface right? Whereas the GT and Ultra are 16x2. Still a damn nice card. 0 Share this post Link to post
Use Posted July 22, 2004 Alientank said:That only has an 8x2 interface right? Whereas the GT and Ultra are 16x2. Still a damn nice card. Yeah I think that's it, it's the best I could afford. ;) 0 Share this post Link to post
Kaiser Posted July 22, 2004 If my 9800 pro can do its chore, then I should have no reason to replace it. 0 Share this post Link to post
Kaiser Posted July 22, 2004 The video card isn't the only hardware that will effect the fps rate, its just a matter of good cpu/video card combinations. 0 Share this post Link to post
Mogul Posted July 22, 2004 True, but by far (seriously) the most important factor in DOOM 3 is the video card. 0 Share this post Link to post
Shaviro Posted July 22, 2004 I'd like a 6800GT. It seems that nvidia has the edge over ATI this time. 0 Share this post Link to post
SyntherAugustus Posted July 22, 2004 Yeah for Doom3 it's kinda funny that nvidia won. I just don't want to loose fps when I go AA. I think I'll buy a GT for my birthday, which is about 3-4 months from now. 0 Share this post Link to post
Sephiroth Posted July 22, 2004 the whole ATI vs Nvidia is funny. what people dont think about is the game, how it is programed and what it uses, Direct3D or OpenGL. while the 2 look similar they are different. so cards handle them differently. far cry i think is a direct3D game, i dont own it or fallow it. doom3 is openGL. so just because farcry runs exreamly well or bad on one card does not mean doom3 will fallow. also how well is the engine coded. a shit job could mean a game could eat preformance. i dont think doom3 will suffer from a badly made engine so comparing doom 3 the far cry is a bad idea. 2 totaly different games and engines, and maybe for 2 totaly different API's. I do belive there is an OpenGL part of directX. however there are external drivers you can get 0 Share this post Link to post
The Flange Peddler Posted July 22, 2004 I can't believe people are willing to shell out $700 odd bucks just to play a video game. Not that I haven't thought about upgrading my computer soon though... 0 Share this post Link to post
deathbringer Posted July 22, 2004 Hm, ive seen a 9800 128MB in PC World for £99.99, i'm wondering, is it a big enough improvement over the Geforce 4 MX420 (64MB) to bother paying that amount for? i need more RAM mainly anyway, i only have 256 0 Share this post Link to post
Mogul Posted July 22, 2004 pritch said:my 9600 will just have to do. It will be fine! My ti4200 will perform more than good enough at default, I'm pretty sure. The 9600 is significantly better than my card. 0 Share this post Link to post
DoomUK Posted July 22, 2004 Damnmit, why have you Americans already got the 6800 GT when us here in the UK are still pretty much waiting for the bloody thing to be released in 'proper' quantities *grumble, grumble*. I'm gonna have to wait at least another week for mine... 0 Share this post Link to post
Alientank Posted July 22, 2004 Cancelled my order, found another site that had it for $600 canadian and that includes overnight shipping! $150 cheaper then the other site. I'm ordering the card tomorrow, the card should be here monday/tuesday next week! I'll let you guys know how it is. 0 Share this post Link to post
Mogul Posted July 22, 2004 DoomUK said:Damnmit, why have you Americans already got the 6800 GT when us here in the UK are still pretty much waiting for the bloody thing to be released in 'proper' quantities *grumble, grumble*. I'm gonna have to wait at least another week for mine... At least you've got the money! :D There's no way at this moment in time that I could afford a $300+ card. 0 Share this post Link to post
Shadowfox Posted July 22, 2004 Alientank said:That only has an 8x2 interface right? Whereas the GT and Ultra are 16x2. Still a damn nice card. Actually it is 16x1. 16x2 doesn't exist as far as I know. 0 Share this post Link to post
chilvence Posted July 22, 2004 deathbringer said:Hm, ive seen a 9800 128MB in PC World for £99.99, i'm wondering, is it a big enough improvement over the Geforce 4 MX420 (64MB) to bother paying that amount for? Youre joking right? 0 Share this post Link to post
Alientank Posted July 22, 2004 Shadowfox said:Actually it is 16x1. 16x2 doesn't exist as far as I know. No you're wrong. The 6800 non ultra is 8x2 and the GT and ultra are 16x2. The 5900 series cards were 4x2. 0 Share this post Link to post
Shadowfox Posted July 23, 2004 There are 50% more vertex shader units bringing the total to 6, and there are 4 times as many pixel pipelines (16 units) in NV40. The chip was already large, so its not surprising that NVIDIA only doubled the number of texture units from 8 to 16 making this architecture 16x1 (whereas NV3x was 4x2). The architecture can handle 8x2 rendering for multitexture situations by using all 16 pixel shader units. In effect, the pixel shader throughput for multitextured situations is doubled, while single textured pixel throughput is quadrupled. Of course, this doesn't mean performance is always doubled or quadrupled, just that that's the upper bound on the theoretical maximum pixels per clock. http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2023&p=5 0 Share this post Link to post
spank Posted July 25, 2004 My FX5200/Duron combination will have to do. Hopefully my new (yet to be bought) Asus M6N laptop will handle D3 well. 0 Share this post Link to post
Graf Zahl Posted July 25, 2004 spank said:My FX5200/Duron combination will have to do. For Doom 3? I recently bought a new system (P4, 3.2Ghz) with a FX5200 and that thing wasn't any faster than my old Athlon XP2000 with an ancient GF 3Ti) I immediately sold the card and upgraded to a FX5900XT. As much as I'd like tzo have a 6800 I simply can't afford it... :( 0 Share this post Link to post
spank Posted July 25, 2004 Oh, that's just because I still consider 12 FPS at 320x240x8 to be an enjoyable experience :) Anyway, the leaked alpha runs acceptably on it... I'm guessing the retail version will be reasonably faster. 0 Share this post Link to post